Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS News & Rumors Other Rumors and Predictions
Thread started 07 Jul 2011 (Thursday) 10:17
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Bringing a digital camera on a plane kills pixels? Read more on PhotoRumors.com: htt

 
AeroSmith
Goldmember
AeroSmith's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
Saint Petersburg, Florida
Jul 07, 2011 10:17 |  #1

Um, I don't like to hear this.

http://photorumors.com ...-on-a-plane-kills-pixels/external link


Josh Smith
http://aerosmith.smugm​ug.com/external link
Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
AeroSmith
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
AeroSmith's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
Saint Petersburg, Florida
Jul 07, 2011 10:22 |  #2

Beyond the headline, this is actually an interesting discussion on digital sensors.


Josh Smith
http://aerosmith.smugm​ug.com/external link
Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
alt4852
Goldmember
alt4852's Avatar
3,416 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Alexandria, VA
Jul 07, 2011 10:38 |  #3

AeroSmith wrote in post #12718878external link
Um, I don't like to hear this.

i'd recommend just getting over it. for all intents and purposes, this is just another psychological fear than a real concern in my opinion.

you purchase and transport your equipment to be used. if you wanted to prevent damage to a camera, you wouldn't use it as it's normal functions deteriorate it's condition over time. honestly, are you going to take less flights, stop bringing your camera with you on trips, or opt to ship your equipment to destinations weeks in advance?

there's no practical solution for this, and hundreds of thousands of cameras are no worse for wear from radiation after flights to vacations in hawaii and europe. stop worrying so much.


5D3 | Z21 | 35L | 50L | 85L | 135L

LOG IN TO REPLY
AeroSmith
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
AeroSmith's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
Saint Petersburg, Florida
Jul 07, 2011 10:42 as a reply to alt4852's post |  #4

LOL. No worries, just because I don't like to hear it doesn't mean I'm going to stop traveling with my cameras.

Probably more interesting from the clip is the discussion of CA in digital sensors.


Josh Smith
http://aerosmith.smugm​ug.com/external link
Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
pyrojim
Goldmember
1,882 posts
Joined Jan 2010
San Jose, CA
Jul 07, 2011 10:52 as a reply to AeroSmith's post |  #5

could you edit the link so it actaully goes to the article...


right now, 97% of your post is a hyperlink...


PhaseOne H25
Camera agnostic

LOG IN TO REPLY
AeroSmith
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
AeroSmith's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
Saint Petersburg, Florida
Jul 07, 2011 11:43 |  #6

pyrojim wrote in post #12719069external link
could you edit the link so it actaully goes to the article...


right now, 97% of your post is a hyperlink...

Sorry about that.


Josh Smith
http://aerosmith.smugm​ug.com/external link
Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
FlyingPhotog's Avatar
57,560 posts
Joined May 2007
Probably Chasing Aircraft
Jul 07, 2011 14:15 |  #7

This link may be the best 14 minutes I've spent in front of my computer in a very long time.

Worth watching folks!


Jay
Crosswind Imagesexternal link
Facebook Fan Pageexternal link

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

LOG IN TO REPLY
thedge
Senior Member
417 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Vancouver, BC
Jul 09, 2011 15:44 |  #8

My camera has flown at least 100,000 miles in the last year and no issues so far...


7D - 100-400 L, Sigma 28, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4

LOG IN TO REPLY
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,628 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Jul 10, 2011 08:42 |  #9

The only thing I've found flying damages is my desire to fly. Poor service on board combined with those semi-functional morons in TSA really take away my desire to fly.




LOG IN TO REPLY
esmoglo
Member
esmoglo's Avatar
32 posts
Joined Mar 2011
FL
Jul 10, 2011 12:17 |  #10

rick_reno wrote in post #12733390external link
The only thing I've found flying damages is my desire to fly. Poor service on board combined with those semi-functional morons in TSA really take away my desire to fly.

Thats soo true.:lol:




LOG IN TO REPLY
Stone ­ 13
Goldmember
Stone 13's Avatar
1,690 posts
Joined Aug 2009
Huntersville, NC
Jul 10, 2011 15:04 |  #11

thedge wrote in post #12730777external link
My camera has flown at least 100,000 miles in the last year and no issues so far...

+1

My camera has NEVER missed a flight and I've averaged well over 100K miles/yr for the last 3 years. Never had an issue either, maybe replace "kills pixels" with "can possibly kill pixels"...


Ken
Fujifilm X100T | 5D III gripped |35L | 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 85 1.8 | 430 EX II | Yongnuo YN-568EX | Billingham 445 | Think Tank UD 60 |

LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
woos's Avatar
2,221 posts
Joined Dec 2008
a giant bucket
Jul 10, 2011 18:34 |  #12

Complete bunk. If this was true, then having them on the ground would also occasionally get dead pixels from gamma rays. It's not like there is no radiation on the ground, just less. If a random gamma ray hitting pixel caused problems often enough to be noticed, we'd have issues with this from cameras on the ground, too...but we don't. I wouldn't worry about this at all. You'd probably have to stay airborne with your camera for years for it to have any effect. :P


amanathia.zenfolio.com

LOG IN TO REPLY
RichSoansPhotos
Cream of the Crop
5,981 posts
Joined Aug 2007
London, UK
Jul 11, 2011 01:35 |  #13
banned

There has been no real deterioration of pixel(s) since I have taken mine on board an airplane twice in March




LOG IN TO REPLY
magwai
Goldmember
1,094 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Guildford, UK
Jul 11, 2011 07:44 |  #14

Given that digital camera sensors were pretty designed to work in space i am sceptical.

Ok Hubble probably has some shielding not found in a rebel but still ...




LOG IN TO REPLY
magwai
Goldmember
1,094 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Guildford, UK
Jul 11, 2011 08:14 |  #15

and another thing, gamma rays are tiny. i would think alpha particles are more likely to damage electronics than gamma rays. it is certainly alpha particles that cam damage memory chips.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

17,471 views & 2 likes for this thread
Bringing a digital camera on a plane kills pixels? Read more on PhotoRumors.com: htt
FORUMS News & Rumors Other Rumors and Predictions


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00247 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is John Galt
915 guests, 475 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016