How dangerous is sunlight on sensor?

02/19/2007 12:44:33 AM · #1

I've taken shots with the sun off center, closer to sunset. Or using the sun behind an object to create a halo or silhouette. But when do i risk sensor damage? Does the sunlight have to be directed dead centre? What are the do's and dont's? I just want to know what line not to cross.

Sigma 35mm f1.4 dg hsm for Canon

02/19/2007 12:48:20 AM · #2

Good question. I can imagine with a 300mm Focal Length for a long period of time say the longest exposure known to man. It could do some damage.

But remember your running real high shutter speeds The sensor itself on an SLR is only exposed for less then a second.

MUCH LESS!

Dont confuse u looking through the viewfinder with the actual sensor exposure time.

Message edited by author 2007-02-19 00:51:19.

Ubersteiny

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/19/2007 12:50:59 AM · #3

doesnt a sensor have a UV protector slapped on there though?

jan_vdw

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

02/19/2007 12:51:12 AM · #4

Asked the same question yesterday, was told that unless you zoom in on the sun and leave the shutter open in bulb mode on iso 1600 you should not get any damage to the sensor.

Still to scared to try it though...

02/19/2007 01:00:44 AM · #5

So based on what u'r all saying, would shooting a subject with the sun falling dead center in the background shoud be safe to do?

02/19/2007 01:06:11 AM · #6

Originally posted by dmadden:

So based on what u'r all saying, would shooting a subject with the sun falling dead center in the background shoud be safe to do?

Yeah on any shutter speed quicker then 1/1 lol

02/19/2007 01:12:37 AM · #7

Think i'll take the coward's way out and avoid it all together :)

jan_vdw

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

02/19/2007 01:16:51 AM · #8

I'm also too chicken to try it. Though you can get some excellent results doing it.

I think

jblaylockrayner might be the best guy to ask about this. Seem to recall him taking a few shots with the sun in the photo, not directly in the middle, but close enough for me.

Edit to correct user

Message edited by author 2007-02-19 01:23:01.

02/19/2007 01:25:01 AM · #9

Originally posted by dmadden:

Think i'll take the coward's way out and avoid it all together :)

Heh well coutning thousands of photos of sunsets taken with digital camera's i think ur cowards approach is unwarranted. Then again we did set fire using a magnifying glass once!

02/19/2007 01:30:35 AM · #10

Originally posted by jan_vdw:

ISO has no relevance to potential damage; it's just a software algorithm, not a physical change in the state of the sensor.

I've shot plenty of pictures with the sun in the frame. Never had a problem, never occurred to me I might have a problem. Perhaps ignorance is bliss, but I really don't see it as being an issue at all.

R.

02/19/2007 01:32:52 AM · #11

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by jan_vdw:
Asked the same question yesterday, was told that unless you zoom in on the sun and leave the shutter open in bulb mode on iso 1600 you should not get any damage to the sensor.

Still to scared to try it though...

ISO has no relevance to potential damage; it's just a software algorithm, not a physical change in the state of the sensor.

I've shot plenty of pictures with the sun in the frame. Never had a problem, never occurred to me I might have a problem. Perhaps ignorance is bliss, but I really don't see it as being an issue at all.

R.

Bear i slightly beg to disagree. ISO Boost is a software algorithim. WHile actual ISO changes atleast real ISO changes are made by increasing the voltage. Now weather this would have any other effects i wouldnt know.

02/19/2007 01:33:11 AM · #12

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Originally posted by dmadden:
Think i'll take the coward's way out and avoid it all together :)

Heh well coutning thousands of photos of sunsets taken with digital camera's i think ur cowards approach is unwarranted. Then again we did set fire using a magnifying glass once!

I don't think sunset pictures is the issue: the sun's not that bright at sunset. If you can look at it with your naked eyes and a pair of binoculars, it's certainly not gonna hurt your camera. But you can do your eyes serious damage if you use binoculars on the midday sun... I assume that's what he's worrying about.

R.

02/19/2007 01:33:56 AM · #13

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

I didn't realize that :-) Live and learn... So my camera uses more power at 1600 than at 100?

R.

Message edited by author 2007-02-19 01:34:27.

02/19/2007 01:36:35 AM · #14

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
Bear i slightly beg to disagree. ISO Boost is a software algorithim. WHile actual ISO changes atleast real ISO changes are made by increasing the voltage. Now weather this would have any other effects i wouldnt know.

I didn't realize that :-) Live and learn... So my camera uses more power at 1600 than at 100?

R.

Im digging for the techincal explanation... cant find it so far this is what ive found lol and it doesnt really fight for myside... but not ur side entirley either lol.

"As ISO is increased in a digital camera, less electrons are converted into a single ADU. Increasing ISO maps a smaller amount of dynamic range into the same bit depth and decreases the dynamic range. At ISO 1600, only about 1/16th of the full-well capacity of the sensor can be used. This can be useful for astronomical images of dim subjects which are not going to fill the well anyway. The camera only converts a small number of electrons from these scarce photons, and by mapping this limited dynamic range into the full bit depth, greater differentiation between steps is possible. This also gives more steps to work with when this faint data is stretched later in processing to increase the contrast and visibility."

That explains a bit into the algorithmic method i guess.

02/19/2007 01:37:47 AM · #15

HERE YOU GO BEAR

//www.lexar.com/dp/tips_lessons/nottaken.html

"To increase ISO, digital cameras amplify the voltage from the sensor, thereby "picking up" background noise (a little like the noise on audio cassettes). With higher ISO sensitivity comes higher noise (the equivalent of film grain). Noise is also affected by any density or color parameter modification. However, managed with appropriate capture techniques and with the proper tools and settings, noise can be drastically reduced during the Processing phase. Noise reduction is definitely an art that requires a lot of practice to obtain optimum results."

Thats more of an explanation into Noise but its touching on what im talking about.

ALSO FOUND THIS BY ANOTHER USER

"Bob Atkins Photo.net Hero Photo.net Patron, aug 21, 2003; 12:21 p.m.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I though CCDs generated current, not ran on it! You increase gain in a photomultipler by increasing the voltage on it, but I've never heard of increasing the gain of a CCD by forcing current through it!"

AND ONE MORE

"Now, when you change the ISO on a digital camera to higher values the sensitivity (quantum efficiency) of a CCD pixel does NOT change! What you do is changing the gain of the CCD. The gain determines how many of the collected electrons (photons "produce" electrons, or small currents, as they hit a CCD pixel) should corrspond to data number in that pixel and is hence the amplification of the signal from each pixel. By choosing a higher amplification you will pick up smaller changes in low light! The problem is that you will also start to pick up all sorts of noise, like the thermal noise (or dark current) discussed above!"

Last i rememebr increasing the gain is achieved by increase in voltage by means of amplification just as you do with radio waves.

Message edited by author 2007-02-19 01:41:21.

Greetmir

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Nikon

02/19/2007 02:53:49 AM · #16

This thread reminds me of the first time I was looking at the sun. I had a super quality welders glass taped to the front of a 600mm reflecting telescope and was enjoying the view and photos immensely.

I forgot that my 6X finder scope was unprotected, though, and melted the crosshairs right out of it!

02/19/2007 03:32:22 AM · #17

Originally posted by Greetmir:

Yeah and u had about 1000X the heat exposure that any single capture faster then 1/1 in a dSLR would have!

Greetmir

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Nikon

02/19/2007 03:51:15 AM · #18

Oh yeah ... more than that ... my finder scope was naked to the sun for like half an hour!

I was not suggesting that a camera would be in jeopardy with normal exposure ranges just because it was in the shot ... just remembering a really stupid move on my behalf.

Ubersteiny

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Sigma 35mm f1.4 dg hsm for Canon

02/19/2007 01:15:44 PM · #19

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

what about with CMOS sensors?

Mr_Pants

SiPix Blink

02/19/2007 01:44:25 PM · #20

I would have thought that there would have been more risk (if any, in real terms) at low ISO, as the sensor would have been exposed to the bright source for longer.

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

02/19/2007 01:49:50 PM · #21

Originally posted by Mr_Pants:

I would have thought that there would have been more risk (if any, in real terms) at low ISO, as the sensor would have been exposed to the bright source for longer.

We're discussing an arbitrary (read ridiculous) time of "exposure"; I think there's general agreement (so far) that no damage will occur at actual, real-world exposure times for sun images.

R.

Strikeslip

Canon EOS-5D

02/19/2007 02:09:40 PM · #22

I spent too long composing a high-sunset shot. Everything in my right eye was tinted red for fifteen minutes afterwards. I was a bit worried, but couldn't complain, as I brought it on myself through my own stupidity. My sensor is OK, and so is my eye, luckily. Well, except for the floaters, but that's another story. :-)

02/19/2007 02:43:35 PM · #23

I'll continue to compose with it in the back ground and tread carefully. But what about HDR. I think this is where i could run into a real rut.

Message edited by author 2007-02-19 14:45:50.

Mr_Pants

SiPix Blink

02/19/2007 02:50:18 PM · #24

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Mr_Pants:
I would have thought that there would have been more risk (if any, in real terms) at low ISO, as the sensor would have been exposed to the bright source for longer.

We're discussing an arbitrary (read ridiculous) time of "exposure"; I think there's general agreement (so far) that no damage will occur at actual, real-world exposure times for sun images.

R.

...and I agree (see my poor-quality Free Study shot for that)