Showing posts with label Camera. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Camera. Show all posts

Saturday, March 26, 2011

How to Capture Motion with Flash!

0 comments


MS-9038
MS-9038
© Jim Zuckerman
All Rights Reserved
Photographing fast-moving subjects is never easy. Too many things are changing so fast that it’s impossible to slow them down in your mind enough to think about what you’re doing. Just keeping them in focus in a serious challenge even with autofocus tracking. The moment the shutter is pressed and the camera fires a millisecond later, you’re lucky if the subject is still in focus. Exposure is an issue if the lighting is changing, and if you use flash the distance from the flash to the subject is constantly changing as well. Another problem is the graphic shape of the subject - how will their body language appear the moment the shutter is pushed? - and, if you are photographing people, their expressions are critical.
I recently photographed at a ballroom dance competition, and I had to deal with all of these issues. The energy among the dancers was incredible, and they moved so fast all over the floor that it was amazing I was able to capture any of them in focus. I was using a flash but I also used a slow shutter – 1/20th of a second. My lens choice was a 70-200mm f/2.8 telephoto zoom. I needed the large aperture because it helped gather the relatively low ambient light and, at the same time, it made it easier to see when the autofocus was on target. I turned the image stabilization feature off because it wasn't relevant in this situation.



The accompanying photo was taken on a 95mm setting, and you can see the combination of the blur of movement due to the 1/20th second exposure and the frozen image of the couple. In essence, this is a double exposure – one sharp (when the flash went off) and one blurred (because of the long exposure) – where the two aspects of motion were superimposed over each other at the same instant.
In my Taking the Mystery Out of Flash Photography course here at Betterphoto.com, I discuss how to do this. It’s one of my favorite techniques, and it can be used for many subjects, from horses to wildlife to kids on a bike. You need relatively low light, and you need to shoot a lot of images because things happen very fast.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Correctly Expose Your Photographs







Exposure Basics: Correctly Expose Your Photographs

Every picture taking opportunity allows you to record no less than six correct exposures!
Perhaps you have already figured it out after reading the above, but if not, you will soon know that most picture taking situations have at least six possible combinations of f/stops and shutters speeds that will all result in a correct exposure; not a creatively correct exposure but a correct exposure. But only one, sometimes two, of these combinations of f/stops and shutter speeds is the creatively correct motion-filled exposure.
Again, let’s review, that every ‘correct’ exposure is nothing more then the quantitative value of an aperture and shutter speed working together within the ‘confines’ of a predetermined ‘ISO’. For the sake of argument we are both out photographing a city skyline at dusk, using a film speed of 100 ISO and an aperture opening of f/5.6 and whether we are shooting in manual mode or aperture priority mode the light meter indicates a correct exposure at 1 second. What other combinations of aperture openings (f/stops) and shutter speeds can we use and still record a ‘correct’ exposure? If I suggest we use an aperture of f/8 what would the shutter speed now be? Since we have cut the lens opening in half (f/5.6 to f/8) I will now need to double my shutter speed time to two seconds to record a correct exposure, (1 sec + 1 sec= 2 seconds.) On the other hand, If I suggested that we use an aperture of f/4 what would the shutter speed now be? Since we have just doubled the size of the lens opening (f/5.6 to f/4) I will now need to cut my shutter speed in half (1/2 second) to record the same ‘quantitative value exposure’.
Easy yet hard, right?
For a refresher on these terms, take a look at Bryan’s intro article on Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO

The Equations

The following are equivalent:
  • f/4 at 1/2 second
  • f/5.6 at 1 second
  • f/8 at 2 seconds
  • f/11 at 4 seconds
  • f/16 at 8 seconds
  • f/22 at 16 seconds
Add them up and what have you got? Six possible combinations of aperture and shutter speeds that will all result in exactly the same exposure. I want to stress the word ‘same’; it is meant to mean the ‘same’ in terms of quantitative value only!
Likewise, if we find ourselves taking an outdoor portrait at the park with our telephoto zoom, we find that with our aperture set to f/16 and with an ISO of 100, a correct exposure is indicated at a shutter speed of a 1/125 second (s). If I suggest we use an aperture of f/8, what would the shutter speed now indicate as a correct exposure? If you said 1/500s, you are correct, which also means that you know at f/22 the correct exposure would be a 1/60s and at f/11 1/250s and at f/5.6 your shutter speed would now be 1/1000s. Again, why all the ‘fuss’; what difference does it really make which combinations of apertures and shutter speeds we use as long as the meter indicates a correct exposure?
Knowing that every picture taking opportunity offers you no less than six possible aperture/shutter speed combinations in and of itself may seem immaterial, but when you consider the impact of the creative possibilities influenced by the shutter speed (freezing actions, implying motion or panning) and aperture (a great depth of field, or a background of muted tones and/or out of focus foregrounds) you will have a much greater appreciation for why you are choosing that particular shutter speed and aperture combination. The reason willnot be simply because you want to record a correct exposure, but rather because you wanteach and every time to record the CREATIVELY CORRECT EXPOSURE! The difference between a “correct exposure” and a “creatively correct exposure” is often huge! Let’s take a look!
Let’s pretend we’ve invited ten other photographers to join us in capturing this scene and we break into three groups:
  • One third of the group shot this scene at f/11 for four seconds
  • Another third shot the scene at a f/8 for a two seconds
  • The remaining third shot the scene at f/5.6 for 1 second.
You know what? All of us just shot the exact same correct exposure! Even though each group’s f/stops and shutter speeds were different, the end result was the same; the quantitative value of each group’s exposures are the same. It doesn’t matter if you are photographing with a film-based camera or a digital camera, you must learn and embrace a simple fact; every picture taking opportunity offers you no less then six possible aperture/shutter speed combinations. Why must you know this? Even though each group has the ‘same’ exposure, the motion-filled opportunity that each group captured may look radically different. Knowing that each motion-filled exposure opportunity offers up six possible combinations is a start but knowing which one of two exposures best conveys or capture the motion before is the key. Once you are armed with this knowledge you can begin to fully explore the truly endless road of creatively correct motion-filled exposures!
Now let’s imagine that we all awoke the following morning, once again splitting into three groups and we all head into a flower garden. All of us are armed with our telephoto zooms and we are going to record correct exposures of a single flower bloom.
  • One third of the group shoots that lone flower at a correct exposure of f/4 at 1/1000s.
  • Another third of the group at f/8 at 1/250s.
  • The last third of the group shot that same flower at f/16 at 1/60s.
Fifteen minutes later we all get together and compare results and guess what? Every one of us has recorded the ‘same’ and correct exposure in terms of its quantitative value, but, each group also recorded a visually different yet correct exposure. The visual difference is the keyto understanding the difference between a correct exposure and a creatively correct exposure. Although the quantitative value of each exposure was the same, the aperture choices were different and therein lies the visual difference. Depth of field increases each and every time we stop the lens down and in the case of the flower composition, the smaller apertures recorded a greater depth of field than did the aperture of f/4. Again, the exposures taken by all three groups were the same quantitative value but visually they were quite different solely due to the aperture choice.
So to recap: there are six possible aperture and shutter speed combinations that will result in the correct exposure, yet only one, maybe two, is in fact the “creatively correct” exposure. It is that one creatively correct exposure that gives you the precise depth of field you were hoping to achieve or that one creatively correct exposure that gives the the precise action stopping shutter speed or the precise shutter speed that guarantees a motion-filled image, e.g. the cotton candy effect often seen in waterfall compositions.
Let’s take a real world look at just how different a correct exposure is versus that of a “creatively” correct exposure.

Exercise 1: Flower Composition

Head outside with your camera set to 200 ISO and a telephoto lens, say a 200mm, and frame up a flower. Once you focus on the flower, shoot six correct exposures, each one using a different aperture and shutter speed. For example, with the aperture set to f/4, you get a correct exposure indication at 1/1000s. Shoot this one exposure and than move on to f/5.6 and then shoot another at 1/500s, f/8 at 1/250s and another at f/11 at 1/125 second, f/16 at 1/60s and finally another at f/22 at 1/30s. You will soon see that all six exposures are correct in their quantitative value, but radically different in their “visual weight”. Note in just these two examples where the first image was shot at f/5.6 at 1/500 second and the second image shot at f/22 at 1/30s. They are the “same” exposure in their quantitative value, but oh my, look at how much busier the background is in the correct exposure taken at f/22 versus the much cleaner and more isolated flower composition of the correct exposure taken at f/5.6 at 1/500s.
All three of these images are exactly the same exposure (Images 3, 4, and 5). Their quantitative volume of aperture, (light) and shutter speed (duration of time) is exactly the same, yet you can clearly see that visually they are each different. All three photographs were taken with my tripod mounted Nikon D2X and 200mm Micro-Nikkor lens.
Image 3 was taken at f/5.6 at a 1/500 second, Image 4 was taken at f/11 at 1/125s and Image 5 was taken at f/22 at 1/30s. Again, their quantitative values are identical, which is to say that the volume of light that passed through the lens and the amount of time that light was allowed to render an image on the CCD or film was the same. When I composed all three of these images, they looked exactly the same inside my cameras viewfinder. Yet when I reviewed these same three exposures on the camera’s digital monitor, they were clearly different and that difference in this case was with their backgrounds.
In Image 3, the background is limited to subtle out-of-focus tones, color and very few shapes. In Image 4, the background begins to offer up a bit more information in both shapes and sharper tones and by Image 5, it’s ‘clear’ that the background, consists of other nearby flowers due to the much greater defined shapes and tones that are presented. All three are the same exposure, but as is often the case, only one, and sometimes two, are the “creatively” correct exposure.

Use of Motion

When capturing this simple composition of an S-curve on Interstate 5 approaching downtown Seattle, I was presented with six possible options of recording a correct exposure, three of which you see here (Images 6, 7, and 8). In terms of their ‘quantitative value’, all three of these images are exactly the same exposure, BUT one can clearly see that they are vastly different in their creative exposure, with the creative emphasis on the use of motion. It has and will always be my goal to present motion-filled opportunities in the most motion-filled way and more often than not when there is a motion filled scene, the longer the exposure time, the greater the motion is conveyed. In our first example, Image 6 was captured at f/4 for 1/2s, Image 7 was shot at f/8 for 2s and Image 8 was shot at f/16 for 8s. All three of these exposures were made with my Nikon D2X and Nikkor 200-400mm zoom at the focal length of 400mm, mounted on tripod with my ISO set to 100 and my WB set to Cloudy.

An exercise such as this is truly eye-opening. The next time you head out the door to shoot city lights at dusk, there won’t be a lot of hesitation on your part about using the slower shutter speeds, since by this example, the slowest shutter speed exposure had the best effect. (I am assuming that you prefer the third image, the image taken at f/22 for 8s and just so there is no confusion, this is not ‘bracketing’ since they are all the same exposure in terms of their quantitative value. I will cover bracketing and other issues related to “where should I take my meter reading” in a future article).

Going to Extremes with Shutter Speed

As you begin to digest more and more this simple rule of exposure, it will soon become clear that the need to pay attention to what aperture choice or shutter speed choice will in fact lead you to conclude that there is but one truly creatively correct exposure most of the time and this is particularly true as you begin to notice that the world offers up an unlimited supply of motion-filled opportunities. When capturing these motion filled opportunities you will find yourself, more often than not, on either end of the shutter speed spectrum; using fast shutter speeds to freeze the action in crisp sharp detail or using slow shutter speeds and the resulting blur to suggest or imply the motion present. There is rarely a ‘middle ground’ when it comes to the motion-filled world and with that in mind, it won’t be long before you discover that most of your time is being spent on action-filled scenes between 1/500s and 1/1000s OR between 1/4s to 8s.
With my camera and 80-400mm Nikkor zoom mounted on tripod and the lens set to 300mm, I captured Image 9 at f/4 and 1/500s. Image 10 was shot at f/22 and 1/15s. Both exposures are exactly the same in terms of quantitative value, BUT quite different in the arena of ‘creative exposure’. Note how at the wide open aperture of f/4 (Image 9) the splash is frozen in crisp sharp detail but at f/22 (Image 10) that same splash is much more ethereal.
Recording a correct exposure will always be your responsibility, so why not make it a point to make the most deliberately and visually compelling ‘creative’ exposure possible!?

Exercise 2: Motion-Filled Exposures

One of the best lessons I know of is one that I have offered up to countless students over the years in my on-location workshops and at my on-line photography school www.ppsop.net. It is a very revealing lesson and not surprisingly will lead you further into the world of creatively correct motion-filled exposures. Choose a moving subject, such as a waterfall or a child on a swing or shoot something as simple as someone pounding a nail into a piece of wood.
With your camera set to Aperture Priority Mode, your ISO set to 100, (or 200 ISO if that is the lowest your camera offers) and your aperture set to wide open, (f/2.8, f/3.5 or f/4) take an image of the action before you. You have just recorded an exposure at the fastest possible shutter speed based on the ISO in use, the light that is falling on your subject and of course your use of the largest lens opening. Now stop the lens down one full stop, (if you started at an aperture of f/2.8 then go to f/4 and if your lens starts with f/4 then go to f/5.6) and once again take another exposure of the action filled subject. Repeat this each time with the aperture set next to f/8, then f/11, then f/16 and finally f/22. Each time you change the aperture by what is called a ‘full stop’, your camera does a quick recalculation and offers up the ‘new’ shutter speed to maintain a correct exposure and since you are stopping the lens down with each full stop change in aperture, (making the hole in the lens half as big as it was before) your shutter speed has now doubled in time to compensate, or in other words, your shutter speed is becoming progressively slower. The slower your shutter speed the more likely it is that your action filled subject before you is showing signs of ‘blurring’, since the shutter speed is too slow to ‘freeze it’.

Conclusion

To re-cap, the fastest possible shutter speed with any given ISO will always be found when you use the largest lens opening and the slowest possible shutter speed (barring the use of any filters) will always be found when you use the smallest lens opening.
There is one thing I hope you will never forget after reading this article: correct exposures can be found just about anywhere, but why settle for just a correct exposure when you can in fact record a truly creatively correct exposure each and every time? You really can take charge of your own creative vision when it comes to exposure!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, January 9, 2011

Cleaning your DSLR Sensor


Cleaning your DSLR Sensor: Tips and Advice

Back in the days when dinosaurs roamed the earth and photographers used totally mechanical cameras, it was common to have a camera serviced every few years. The springs in the shutter assembly had to be adjusted to keep shutter speeds accurate and various parts of the camera and lens could need lubrication. A CLA (clean, lubricate and adjust) was something that kept a camera in top condition.
Current cameras (and indeed most cameras made in the last few decades) really don’t need a regular CLA. The shutters are electronically timed and in general no lubrication is required. Wiping off external dirt is about all the servicing that most film cameras ever needed. With digital SLRs the situation is slightly different since and dust or dirt on the sensor will be recorded in the same place on every image and despite automatic cleaning systems, you will eventually find dirt stuck to the sensor that shows up in your images.

When (and what) not to clean

If you see dark spots on your digital image which you suspect come from dust and dirt, remember the following. It’s 99% certain that they are due to particles sitting on the front of the filters which cover the digital sensor. Dust elsewhere in the camera or in the optical path generally won’t show up in the image as dark spots. Even though most current sensors have systems in place to minimize the amount of dust which is attracted to the sensor (by using an anti-static coating) and to displace it (by vibrating the sensor) if it does land there, these systems aren’t perfect and it’s very likely that sooner or later a physical cleaning of the sensor will be required.
So, for example, if you see dark dust spots when you look through the viewfinder, they will be on the viewfinder screen, not the sensor. Since the viewfinder screen isn’t in the optical path of the light when an image is recorded, dust on the screen doesn’t affect the image in any way. These dust spots may be annoying, but they won’t cause spots in your images.
If you remove the lens and look at the reflex mirror inside the camera, you may see some dust on the surface. Again, these won’t appear in the image. When an image is recorded, the reflex mirror is safely out of the optical path, so no amount of dirt on the mirror will show up in the image.
If you look though your lens and see dust spots on the elements (which you will), again they won’t record on the image. Though in this case they are in the optical path while an image is being recorded, they will be so far out of focus that they will not be visible in the image. About the only exception to this would be dust on the front element of a circular fisheye lens when shooting stopped down at minimum focus distance. In that case the DOF of the lens might just get the front element in focus!
The upshot of all this is that cleaning the viewfinder, mirror and lens surfaces won’t help in removing spots from your image, and in fact may actually cause harm if you aren’t careful. TheSLR mirror, for example, is fairly delicate. It’s a front surface mirror and can easily be scratched. The viewfinder screen has a fine, rough texture and if you try to clean it by rubbing it with any type of cloth of lens tissue, you’ll get fibers all over it.
If you must clean the mirror or viewfinder screen, the safest way to do it is with a blower bulb. With luck this will blow any dust particles off the surface. Pretty much the same applies to lens cleaning. You can only clean the front and rear elements anyway. A blower bulb and a brush should remove any surface particles. It’s also safe to use a lens cleaning cloth and lens cleaning fluid on lens (and filter) surfaces as long as you use items intended for cleaning photographic lenses. The tissue and fluids used for eyeglasses may contain unwanted ingredients such as anti-fogging agents.

How do you know if it’s dust on the sensor?

The defining characteristic of dust on the sensor is that the smaller the aperture you shoot at, the more visible it becomes. At large apertures dust spots blur out and often are very hard to see. At f/29 they will show up as definite and well defined dark spots. The way to see just how much junk there is on the sensor is to take an image of a uniform target with the lens defocused and set to its minimum aperture. You can use the blue sky or a sheet of white paper or a wall as your target. You don’t need to hold the camera still so long exposures don’t matter. You’re simply trying to uniformly illuminate the sensor.
To really see all the debris on the sensor you can enhance the image contrast by stretching the histogram. If you do this be prepared to see all sorts of junk on the sensor, as well as image vignetting and even possibly some sensor non-uniformity, so don’t worry if the image looks reallybad. The important thing to remember in this case is that if you don’t see it in an actual image, then it doesn’t really matter if it’s there. You don’t do extreme histogram stretches or contrast enhancements with actual images. This is just as well, since it’s virtually impossible to remove all detectable marks when cleaning a sensor, and even if you did, after a few days (or maybe even minutes) of use, you’d start to see a new set of minute dust spots.
When cleaning a sensor your goal is to get an image which doesn’t show anything objectionable when shooting your uniform target at the minimum aperture you actually use and with no more contrast enhancement than you would be likely to use on real world images. Attempts at repeated and excessive cleaning to remove every last speck of dust seen in a histogram stretched image are far more likely to do more harm than good.
There’s an alternative way to detect dust on the sensor and that’s to use a loupe (magnifying glass) to directly see the dust particles. Magnification from 5x to 10x is enough to visualize the dust. There are loupes with built in illumination which makes this process easier (e.g. the VisibleDust Sensor Loupes). Of course the ultimate test is to make sure the actual image has no dust spots on it, but using a loupe can certainly be faster than taking images during the cleaning process to see if that last stubborn dust spot is still there!
So if you have spots on your images that you have confirmed are due to dust on the sensor, how do you clean it?

DSLR Sensor Cleaning Mode

Pretty much every DSLR has a mode for sensor cleaning in which the mirror is flipped up and the shutter held open. This then allows direct physical access to the sensor (or rather the filter which is over the sensor). The only thing to remember here is that it’s wise to have a fully charged battery when you do this. The last thing you want is for the battery to drain, the mirror to return and the shutter to close while you have something stuck inside the camera!

Blowing dust off the sensor

The first thing to try is blowing the dust off the sensor with a blower bulb. Don’t use compressed air or any of the “canned air” products. Too much air pressure can cause damage and the various forms of “canned air” can sometimes spit out liquid. A small blower bulb which you squeeze to get a puff of air is sufficient. Most of the time you’ll find it really doesn’t do a lot of good, but since it’s cheap and has essentially zero possibility of doing harm, it’s a good first step to try. You can find Inexpensive blower bulbs (e.g. the Giottos “Rocket Air Blaster”) or you can pay more for a high-tech version with filters and antistatic properties (e.g. the VisibleDust “zeeion”).

Brushing dust off the sensor

When you find that you still have dust on the sensor after trying the blower bulb, the next step is to try one of the various commercial brush systems which are designed for use on digital camera sensors. A brush can dislodge particles resistant to be air and it can also trap the dust particles and remove them from the camera. Of course you need a very clean brush (or it will deposit more on the sensor than it removes) and, if you believe the advertising, it doesn’t hurt to have a super high-technology brush using special materials and specially shaped brush fibers.
Visible Dust (www.visibledust.com) specializes in such high-tech cleaning appliances. Most use static charge and ionization in the cleaning process since dust is most easily moved around using electrostatic charges. The Visible Dust brush spins under battery power and this is said to both remove dust from the brush by centrifugal force and create a small static charge on the brush to attract now dust from the sensor. You can read the technical details on their website if you are interested in the science behind the products. As a scientist, I’d say their explanations make some sense, though I’m somewhat sceptical about how much better the high-tech devices are then “low-tech” blowers and brushes. Personally I still use “low-tech” products because (a) I’m cheap and (b) I have quite a bit of experience in cleaning of delicate optical systems. The advantage of the “high-tech” route is that you’re buying products designed for delicate cleaning work and from a manufacturer who can give technical support and who guarantees their product. The dedicated products may cost more than “generic” versions, but they are less likely to cause damage and may do a better job.

Wiping dust off the sensor

If the specs on the sensor are still there after a high tech brush cleaning of the sensor, the final “nuclear option” is to clean the sensor with tissue and a solvent. Again there are companies who specialize in providing materials designed for this task. One such company is PhotoSol (www.photosol.com) who have a line of solvents and tissues (Sensor Swabs) marketed under the “Eclipse” name. Again the advantage of dealing with a company which produces products designated for digital sensor cleaning is that you can get technical support from them and their products are guaranteed to cause no harm when used as specified. Cleanliness is paramount when using swabs and cleaning fluids. Use the swabs only once and use the minimum amount of solvent required to dampen the swab. Pressure is generally not needed (and may be counterproductive), so a gentle wipe across the sensor is the way to go. After one wipe check the sensor and only repeat if necessary. As I said earlier, there’s no point in trying to remove every last minute speck of dust. If nothing shows up in real images, the sensor is clean enough.
Personally, I use conventional lens tissue and methanol to clean my sensors, but again I have experience and I’m willing to take the risk. So far I’ve had no problems, but I’d recommend going the commercial product route to anyone who is at all nervous about sensor damage.

What’s the worst that can happen

The worst that can happen is that you scratch the sensor while attempting to clean it. If you are careful and you use professional cleaning tools this is highly unlikely. Scratching can occur if you get a small piece of grit on the tissue you use to wipe the sensor. Commercial products for sensor cleaning are made in clean rooms and are very unlikely to be contaminated. A typical book of lens tissues is certainly more likely to be contaminated. They are cheaper, but the risk of damage is higher. The sensor covering filters isn’t especially delicate, in fact it’s similar to the coated filters you’d use on a lens, but even so it can be scratched.
If you do scratch the sensor (or more accurately the front of the filter stack that covers the sensor), you’ll get a black line on every image and the filter over the sensor (or in some cases the whole sensor assembly) will have to be replaced. This is a job for the factory service center and will cost several hundred dollars for most cameras. This is clearly not desirable and for older digital SLRs it may not even make economic sense.

The commercial solution

If you’re really worried about damaging the sensor you can find service centers that will do it for you. Some camera manufacturers will do it for free (at least for a new camera), though of course for most users that means shipping the camera off and waiting a week or more for it to be returned (plus you’ll pay shipping costs). A number of camera stores and independent repair centers will also clean sensors with a cost somewhere in the $30-$50 range being typical. Some may do a good job, others not so good. In general, I’d recommend doing it yourself because it’s much faster, more convenient and in most cases cheaper. However, if you decide not to then commercial cleaning is available.

The software solution

Quite a few cameras have a software based “dust deletion” feature. These generally work by first taking a blank frame which the camera uses to record the position of any dust particles on the sensor. This information can then be used (normally during RAW processing) to automatically clone out dust spots on the image. If you’re stuck in the field without the chance to do a sensor cleaning and you know you have a problem, then using this software solution can save you a lot of work later manually cloning out each dust spot on each image.

Minimizing the need for sensor cleaning

The best way to clean the sensor is, of course, not to get it dirty in the first place! While it’s not really possible to totally eliminate sensor dust, there are some things you can do to minimize it.
Dust gets into the camera when you change lenses, so it’s wise to be cautious when changing lenses, especially in dusty conditions. You can change lenses quickly, with the camera pointing downwards for example. If you must change lenses in very dusty conditions, you can do so in a protected environment, such as inside your car rather than outside, or even inside a protective plastic bag. Another alternative if you know the conditions are going to be bad is to choose a wide to telephoto zoom, which may minimize the number of lens changes that you need.

Conclusion

I’d give two pieces of advice about sensor cleaning. First, don’t do it unless you really need to and if you do, apply the minimum amount of cleaning that’s required to get the results you want on real world images. Second, use products designed for use on digital sensors, even if they are more expensive than “generic” cleaning products. Cleaning a digital sensor really isn’t difficult and it’s something pretty much anyone can do. Eventually all DSLR sensors will need cleaning and it’s much more convenient (and cheaper in the long run) to do it yourself than having your camera cleaned by a repair shop. You may even do a better job too!

Enhanced by Zemanta