That look you were given by the bird… you should have known, you should have known…
There’s no way of misinterpreting that even across species boundaries. That is not a friendly face!
That look you were given by the bird… you should have known, you should have known…
There’s no way of misinterpreting that even across species boundaries. That is not a friendly face!
Hmmm… Boundary issues, I think!
If that had happened to me, I wouldn’t have cared less about the filter (or even the lens, for that matter); my only regret would have not been getting any shots of it happening. I’d have likely taken the filter off and gone straight back in for round two — maybe a little closer the second time around, with burst mode on, and maybe I’d make fun of his feathers, just to sure.
Nice photo, by the way, and what a great story behind it!
Possibly. Modern lenses are tough when it comes to scatches, but glass still shatters when impacted. But this particular lens has a relatively small front element diameter, so maybe it would not have been impacted at all. In any case, I ain’t gonna experiment
The best photo would have framed the bird hitting and me trying to jump away and landing awkwardly on my posterior.
Love Crowned Cranes. I took my shot at Martinmere. Fortunately, there is a wall between you and the birds there
Egg white?
Maybe Collodion?
Just get 99% ISO alcohol if you want dilute it to no less than 70% with distillwed water other wise straight up 99%. Get s small spritzer/spray bottle from a dollar store and put it in to it to spray it on. Probably use a lens pens brush or air rocket to remove loose dust first.
Well spotted. Looks very interesting – I may put some on my late Christmas list, give it try, and report back. I can thing of several great usecases for something like this, even if it does (unlikely, by the sounds of it) turn out to be unsuitable for element cleaning.
And if it DOES turn out to be good, I’ll do a swap for some Rusco Pliobond® 20/25 - much like this stuff is hard to get in the US, Pliobond® is hard to get in the UK.
I’ve actually never used it but have heard of it for ages, particularly several years ago in amateur astronomy circles. It was supposedly good for cleaning telescope eyepiece lenses. Never used it though.
It might be a bit overkill for cleaning front elements as they’re continuously exposed to the ‘outside world,’ but it could be useful for cleaning inner elements during lens refurbs (as well as a few other things I have in mind). I’ve found a place that sells it in small quantities, so I’ll order some and do some tests — I have some old scrap lenses I use for stuff like this, so it won’t matter if the coatings feel off in my hands.
A minor correction on my last statement… Now that I think about it more, the discussions of collodion use was with aluminized / silvered (front surface coated) telescope mirrors, not lenses. Mirrors and their coatings are somewhat less robust than lenses and applying / stripping collodion was potentially attractive as being less risky than hand-cleaning mirrors.
Mmm… this stuff is harder to source (at least while here, in the UK) than I thought. It seems to be available in two forms: rigid (aka hard) and flexible (aka soft). The former is readily available in small quantities (seemingly, it’s popular in the professional makeup industry), but I believe it’s the flexible one that’s required here – and medical grade at that (so it doesn’t contain anything nasty that may do more harm than good).
I will, however, continue my search over a plate of brussel sprouts and turkey.
Whenever I now encounter the theme of lens cleaning, i get reminded of this hilarious and very elucidating article written by the lens specialists at Lensrentals many years ago:
In the years since I’ve been quite more relaxed about front lens cleaning unless I’m stopping lenses very low …
This other article of theirs also has some convincing information about the same theme:
besides also explaining why the cost/gain ratio normally speaks against inner cleaning of lenses.
The one thing I try to be meticulous about, though, is to keep the rear element of the lenses clean.
It was an ultra violent bird, so using an UV filter was justified.
Indeed these examples are quite extreme, but expecting an “image” of the scratch or the foreign object in the photo is misleading — that’s not how lenses work. The fact that one does not see an identical scratch (or a fly, or whatever) in the image captured by the sensor does not mean that there is no degradation, it just appears differently.
Don’t get me wrong, I also accept that some dust is inevitable, and it has no significant effect, but actual scratches can cause optical problems, even if they are subtle.
My lens cleaning routine consists of me wiping my (always-on) threaded filter with the t-shirt I’m currently wearing. Can’t say it feels modern, but it works. I have box of lens Zeiss wipes that I use if I buy a smudgey used lens.
Ah…
(in case you don’t know this Tintin story, (The Shooting Star) the spider is on the front element… )
I have seen insects in sharp silhouette against the moon as they crawled across the field lens (in, or nearly in, the focal plane) of a telescope’s eyepiece. It definitely is attention-getting!