Leaderboard

Im selling all my lenses and switching to plastic Holga lens from now on...........

In certain areas in Finland you receive around 25-30 microsieverts a day from natural background radiation. People live there, 24/7 all year round. Touch a lens that gives 5-10 microsieverts an hour now and then... It's a piss in the sea.

I can see Junior's case for dangerous ingestion of thorium coating if the lens is smashed and dust ingested somehow, but in the case of just using or living around the lens your skin acts as a shield... the radiation doesn't go past it and the doses aren't enough to cause skin cancer so I honestly don't think there's much to worry about. Obviously the manufacturers (Canon, and plenty of other biggies) would have done a full recall in subsequent years if evidence came up that the lenses were dangerous. They have been around for 30-40 years and there's never been anything proved!   I'll remain open minded and see where the argument goes. I did once sell my radioactive FD 35mm F2.0 with concave front element and got the non-radioactive version. Might be a good subject for the A7 book to add in the specs an annual dosage ;)

So that's why you folks up there are so crazy :p

Rubbish thread. When my house is burning down I'll call for a fireman. I won't call upon one to carry out careful experimentation relating to things beyond their capabilities. I seriously doubt some bloke covered in soot, wearing a firemans hat and rubber boots with a radioshack geiger counter, chatting to you during a fire station open day can prove everyone else wrong.

what about the glow in the dark dials on my wrist watch ...shall I stop wearing that now? I'm going to build a Fariday Cage in my house to shield me from all the Wifi signals in my road .......COS THAT IS CONSTANT 24/7 unlike the old lenses that are all locked away in my lead lined cabinet. I've stopped using a cell phone too , oh and my tablet ...

Lol, read the first comment in your article ...

Just to quickly answer my own question, this one is really popular: http://www.amazon.com/Radiation-Detector-SOEKS-01M-Language/dp/B0055LL1LQ

Welcome to the forum junior!

from wikipedia, or course: Thorium dioxide was formerly added to glasses during manufacture to increase their refractive index, producing thoriated glass with up to 40% ThO2 content. These glasses were used in the construction of high-quality photographic lenses. However, the radioactivity of the thorium caused both a safety and pollution hazard and self-degradation of the glass (turning it yellow or brown over time). Lanthanum oxide has replaced thorium dioxide in almost all modern high-index glasses. and this: it was found to be a carcinogen, sometimes causing cholangiocarcinoma (that is with respect to another use for thorium dioxide in the past, as an x-ray contrast agent). I'm not really concerned about 90% of my lenses, but I was just working on an old rangefinder lens, including taking apart the elements and removing fungus, so this is good to know. My main concern wouldn't be beta rays but just doing something stupid like shattering a lens trying to re-glue it or something. Not likely, but I'm going to check if thorium dioxide was used in glass before I work on it now. Thanks for the post junior.

...yes but radiation acts accumulatively, so travel to japan+daily radition from all electronic devices+a few trips with an airplane and x-ray add a few radioactive lenses lying around the house..equals who knows what dont know about you but if you have small kids or any pregnant ladies around, i wouldnt be so keen on keeping them. and i think people should know which ones are radioactive...please add more in the list if you know any.

10 μSv is the dose everyone just got from background radiation in the last 24hrs.   So 1 hour of cuddling the rear element of your radioactive lens = 1 normal day living on earth.   Just after Fukushima I went to Japan.   People there over the entire year had a 1,052 μSv dose of radiation based on Tokyo's readings.   That is still only 2% of what the US allows workers to receive per year at work!   Source: http://www.blacksmithinstitute.org/blog/radiation-101-what-is-it-how-much-is-dangerous-and-how-does-fukushima-compare-to-chernobyl/   So say you spent 5 hours shooting with your radioactive lens per day, EVERY DAY of the year. That is still only 1825 Î¼Sv exposure and still under 5% of the total limit which is considered 'safe' by the US authorities.

if getting radioactive poisoning is what it takes to use interesting glass I'll take the risk thanks:) If someone told me to eat the lens you mention, I'd give it a go as long as it was medium rare and not overdone. a couple of button mushrooms, some chips and maybe a side garnish of horseradish sauce. - And if anything I'd end up more healthy. Boom.

Pilots and hostess have cancer increase. Radiologists are really protected and supervised). You Andy take plane maybe 5 times a year and go to the dentist (for x-rays) maybe once a couple of years, for 30 seconds. You can't compare! Aluminium won't help, just concrete or lead. Radioactive lenses is a very UNDERESTIMATED problem, espescially on photo forums. I know what told the geiger and the officers. I think we talk about health here, not bokeh.

you get more radiation on a long haul flight of 10 hours and more radiation to your face from a dental xray than you do from an old lens I would not worry about this too much , store your lens in a metal box or just wrap aluminium foil around it while you are not using it. just dont go licking the lens that would not be good!!!

Got mine today. Will be working on a review on the next days. It's pretty impressive! :P

Everyone on this forum should be buying this its a wealth of lens info !! get to it!! dont let the Sony tag put you off buying it , its a great lens guide that is relevant to any camera ....

I agree with Andy, this is well worth the money, and I don't even own a Sony A anything, although now I kinda wish I did. Even so, as I trawl the Internet looking for lenses for my GH3 I often wonder about what I'm looking at. I like Andrew's take on things, so this is a great resource. Highly recommended.

I have to agree that Nikon isn't caught up with Canon where video is concerned. I think they're killing Canon in stills, though.

On another note: curious about the 4K 4:2:2 10 bit files? On Vimeo you can download this clip in original size, 12GB...

And even the odd troll!

Had to return my test sample today... :( Already missing it. Going to get one ASAP :) I'm curious how long it will take before there is a real competitor (same price range, internal 4K recording, hybrid stills/video). I can't even see the A7S as a direct competitor because it will be at least twice the price with the required external recorder, that only will ship by the end of the year. Looks like Panasonic has a great year ahead.