P&S’s, The Sony RX100, And Sensor Dust… Something Not Often Discussed!

[bradmacmt]

I'm posting this as a point of discussion… feel free to chime-in with your own thoughts please.

P&S cameras are a uniquely suited technology for backpackers as they can be made so small and light. I've had my share, but I think my days with them are over, despite the weight/size advantage they have.

In the last 10 years every P&S I've had eventually developed dust spots on the sensor. The expense of sending them in to be cleaned is more than they are worth in used condition. Obviously I could go to a "waterproof/dustproof" camera with a fully sealed body like Nikon Coolpix AW130, but the image quality I want just isn't there.

I know it's important to keep dust buildup around the retractable lens of a P&S to a minimum. The sensor dust build-up happens because the lens essentially acts like a miniature bellows, pushing out and pulling in air (and dust!) when it's opened and closed. For a backpacker, trying to avoid this is about impossible over the long haul.

There is a lot of buzz on this forum about the Sony RX100's, and rightfully so! The images the little beauty is capable of are impressive. However, tempted as I am (I actually bought one but returned it), I will no longer be buying camera's that cannot be field cleaned, easily and inexpensively. As far as I'm concerned, dust on the sensor renders these $450-$950 cameras worthless.

OTOH, a DSLR or Mirrorless camera can be easily field clean. And actually, a mirrorless even more easily than a DSLR. If this isn't a good thing for a backpacker, I don't know what is! As a result, I think I'm currently leaning towards a Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1, even though the Sony RX 100's generally seem to produce slightly better images.

If it seems like I'm picking on the Sony RX's, it's because I am! These are not inexpensive cameras and sensor dust is not only a real possibility, but will be a reality sooner or later if the camera is used enough.

Here's an interesting blog post about the RX100 and Sensor dust:

http://steven-pam.tumblr.com/post/63141455133/rx100-mk-ii-impressions

Here's a quote lifted from the blog:

"Most of the above dislikes are really only quibbles. Unfortunately this last one is, for me, a total deal-breaker (and why I won’t be keeping the camera).
A few days in, I started to see SENSOR DUST on my images, especially at smaller apertures. Yes, I had been on a beach walk, but I had clean hands and never put the camera down, sat down, kicked up sand, or anything that would even remotely constitute abusive or careless handling of the camera. If it’s that susceptible to sensor dust, it’s totally not going to work as a take-everywhere camera. At least with a DSLR you can clean your sensor. Sending the camera away for cleaning every time I go for a beach walk is not going to work!"

For more on the WWW about sensor dust and the RX100 just google "Sony RX100 Sensor Dust"… you'll be amazed how much you turn up.

Just some rambling thoughts on a beautiful Montana morning…

[[ Drew ]]

Brad – good points. I personally went with a Sony a6000 (mirrorless) for the much larger sensor over the RX100 series.

However, this is the gear forum and there seems to be a duplicate thread in the photography forum..?

[Ken Thompson]

Duplicate Thread

[bradmacmt]

Yeah, it's a duplicate… I tried to delete that one after I posted here as I thought "a camera is gear" and there's more traffic here than on the photo forum… but this software doesn't allow the deleting of threads apparently.

Oops.

[bradmacmt]

Drew, I've also contemplated the Sony a5000 as an alternative to the Panasonic… just a bit heavier, and better battery life.

[Roger Caffin]

Duplicate deleted, and this thread moved to photography.

Cheers
Roger Caffin

[Cayenne Redmonk]

you probably want to use a fixed lense system that doesn't bellow air in and out, and allows cleaning of the sensor.

[Stuart .]

On pentaxforums there was a thread about the Ricoh GR and sensor dust. A solution suggested was to hold an ultrasonic toothbrush to the camera body to shake loose any dust specs. I haven't tried it, but it seemed plausible.

[Stephen Parks]

I had a lot of dust in my Panasonic P&S. I thought of and tried an ultrasonic toothbrush on the body – no effect. I took the camera apart and cleaned the dust off manually. There is a light filter over the sensor where the dust had actually settled, so I didn't have to touch the sensor itself. There is still a lot of dust in the lens, but at least it never gets focused.

[Stuart R]

The average user of a P&S does not know how to check for sensor dust (that included me until recently) and the average P&S does not allow you to set the aperture small enough to check even if you know how.
But now I have upgraded to mirrorless (Panasonic GM1) I know all about sensor dust. Ignorance was bliss!

[bradmacmt]

"But now I have upgraded to mirrorless (Panasonic GM1)"

Just ordered one this morning… Adorama, $449.

[Stuart .]

Thread drift alert…

Does anyone know whether the Pany GM5 can be ordered body only? I don't see that as an option at any US retailers. I already have the 14/2.5, 20/1.7 and Olympus 45/1.8, so I don't really want to pay the extra for the 12-32 zoom. If not, any suggestions in the Olympus range? The Pany GX7 would have been my other choice, but it was quietly discontinued to my dismay.

[Jeff Jeff]

I know a lot of people with the RX100 (various marks) and I have heard zero complaints. I think the internet allows for a disproportionaly high amount of complaints.

[bradmacmt]

"I know a lot of people with the RX100 (various marks) and I have heard zero complaints. I think the internet allows for a disproportionaly high amount of complaints."

My experience is that all P&S's collect dust on the sensor, but that the average user isn't aware/isn't a critical viewer. The online reviews of dust on sensors are generally by people that actually know what they're looking at… IMO.

[Ian]

I wasn't aware of this issue. All of the P&Ss I've owned up to this point have been essentially lower end disposable cameras that are phased out or otherwise destroyed/submerged within three years. While researching telephoto lenses in the 300-400mm category for wildlife photography, I've run across some seeming sound advice to stick with primes vs zooms as they tend to be more bomb proof when it comes to keeping dust out. It all makes sense.

[Author]

Posts