The Great 'Indium Tin Oxide Sensor' hoax

A year on from new, my 400D was showing unacceptable sensor dust and the Rocket Blower was not shifting it, so I bit the bullet, bought some swabs and a bottle of E2 and sat down to sort it out, but first I tried to boost my confidence a little by reading up (yet again) on the method and found myself on Michael Reichmans 'Luminous Landscape' web site (his credentials have to be seen to be believed) where I read the following quote:-''Contrary to the urban myths that propagate like viruses on computer discussion boards, no digital camera with interchangeable lenses has a exposed imaging sensor. All either have a glass anti-aliasing filter or an optical glass cover.''Since this was not what I had read here and in other places about the 400D/5D and the new 1D mk3, I very humbly sent him an e-mail as follows:-Hi Michael, First off let me say how much I appreciate guys like you who are prepared to share their knowledge with guys like me, I am an enthusiastic amateur of advanced years and I visited you site today for some guidance on cleaning the sensor on my Canon 400D which, 12 months from new has reached the 'Uugh' stage and needs a good clean. As I say I am an amateur and would not try to tell my grandmother how to suck eggs, so please don't take this as in any way confrontational, I just wondered if, in the light of the Tin Oxide Coated Sensor of the 400D whether you would consider it appropriate to modify slighty the following quote from you web page. 'Contrary to the urban myths that propagate like viruses on computer discussion boards, no digital camera with interchangeable lenses has a exposed imaging sensor. All either have a glass anti-aliasing filter or an optical glass cover.' I really would like it if your statement was correct, I feel a lot more confident about cleaning a piece of glass than I do about messing with the sensors itself, coupled with which I really cannot get my head around the idea of coating anything with a tin oxide that is required to let light pass through it! If you have the time I would appreciate any comments that you might make. Kindest regards,He replied somewhat curtly:-'What makes you think that the 40D's sensor doesn't have glass in front of it?It uses an AA filter, just like all DSLRs, and that filter is made of glass'.MichaelI replied as followsDear Michael Thanks for your reply to my recent e-mail, I appreciate your time, but you have misread my e-mail, the camera in question is not a 40D, but a 400D and what motivates me to even ask you the original question is the concern being voiced on line, although admittedly in 'forums', and the fact that companies who supply camera cleaning gear, such a 'Photographic Solutions' USA think it such a potential problem area that they take the trouble to modify a product that they have supplied to DSLR owners for years (Ecllipse fluid) and have come up with Eclipse Fluid E2 which has supposedly been designed specifically for the new 'Tin Oxide Sensors', I can't find anything in print from Canon about whether the sensor has a glass cover or not, but the popular opinion seems to be that it has not and this idea (seems) to be confirmed in the reply from 'Photographic Solutions' below in reply to an e-mail from a 'Photography on the Net' forum subscriber, in which they positively indicate that the 400D does indeed have an 'Indium Tin Oxide Coated Sensor' whatever that may be! Regards. 'Further to the recent concerns over using swabbing with eclipse solution on the EOS400D with its Indium Tin Oxide coated sensor, I contacted photographic solutions to ask them about their new E2 solution and also compatibility of the original solution with the Canon EOS400D.EOS400D users may want to consider using the new solution instead of the original liquid, I will continue using my original eclipse solution only for my lenses and order the E2 should I ever need to swab my sensor again!'Response from Photo solutions.....'The E2 is a different formula the the Eclipse and is recommended by the makers of cameras with TI coated sensors. We have not found a problem using the Eclipse, but we do not know the long tern effects. Your camera does have a TI coated sensor. You may want to get a bottle of E2 to be safe.Hope this helps,JoelPSI'He seemed completely unfazed by my reply and fired off his last piece of advice with what seems to be his usual good grace:-'Believe who you will. All sensors have a cover glass that either serves as an antialiasing filter or simply as protection. There is no such thing as a sensor without a cover plate of some sort regardless of what coating it may have'Irrespective of his manner of communicating, this guy knows his stuff photography wise and it would be a braver man than me who took him on, apart from the fact that my philosophy is never to open my mouth on a subject if there is somebody in the room who knows more about it than I do. SoooooWho is right? why doesn't Canon put anything sensible in print about the subject? if Reichman is correct, has Photographic solutions invented the problem for which they have the solution? How can a Tin Oxide Coating allow light to pass through it, and, finally, is the whole thing as Reichman suggests the result of the colllective paranoia of the forum mentality?You may be pleased to know that I did successfully wet clean my sensor (if you'll pardon the expression) but was all my fretting about it completely unnecessary!

Uhhhh sorry but you may want to break your post up into something more readable.

That has to be the longest paragraph I've ever seen!

Positively headache-inducing

---- Gavin

yep, sorry but I didn't type it like that and I have respaced it twice without success.

Ukuleleman wrote in post #4024506
yep, sorry but I didn't type it like that and I have respaced it twice without success.

You can edit the post right in the forum. Just click on "edit" and use your "enter" key twice at the beginning of what should start another paragraph. It would be a VERY good thing to do on your monster "paragraph".

I believe Michael Reichman is correct. Pretty much all DSLR sensors have some sort of cover glass - usually some filter. For convenience, a lot of people refer to the whole cover glass + sensor as just 'the sensor'. The Indium tin oxide coating would be on the cover glass, not directly on the sensor. That's the way I understand it anyway. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyone know how to contact Chuck Westfall to ask about this? He would have to be the ultimate "go-to-guy" for technical matters, surely.
As for "how can a tin oxide coating pass light?", well, why shouldn't it? Silicon dioxide transmits light wonderfully (it's quartz), and if it's thin enough, even gold will transmit light, albeit green!

Edit:
I think I have an email address for Chuck Westfall: cwestfall (at) cusa.canon.com
Anyone brave enough to ask the guru himself?

Skip

I punctuated it all again, but nothing happens when I save the modified version, sorry, it beats me!
Xarqi,To me as a layman 'Tin Oxide' sounds rather like a galvanising process, please excuse my confusion

I'll have a go at punctuating it and reposting it - stay tuned.

For flips sake! I am not even going to bother reading it. Load of non-sense!

"Indium tin oxide...is transparent and colorless in thin layers...is mainly used to make transparent conductive coatings for liquid crystal displays, flat panel displays, plasma displays, touch panels, electronic ink applications, organic light-emitting diodes, and solar cells, and antistatic coatings and EMI shieldings.

I think the ITO coating is on the glass covering the sensor, something like this

Here is the OP with some paragraphs:

A year on from new, my 400D was showing unacceptable sensor dust and the Rocket Blower was not shifting it, so I bit the bullet, bought some swabs and a bottle of E2 and sat down to sort it out, but first I tried to boost my confidence a little by reading up (yet again) on the method and found myself on Michael Reichmans 'Luminous Landscape' web site (his credentials have to be seen to be believed) where I read the following quote:

-''Contrary to the urban myths that propagate like viruses on computer discussion boards, no digital camera with interchangeable lenses has a exposed imaging sensor. All either have a glass anti-aliasing filter or an optical glass cover.''

Since this was not what I had read here and in other places about the 400D/5D and the new 1D mk3, I very humbly sent him an e-mail as follows:

-Hi Michael, First off let me say how much I appreciate guys like you who are prepared to share their knowledge with guys like me, I am an enthusiastic amateur of advanced years and I visited you site today for some guidance on cleaning the sensor on my Canon 400D which, 12 months from new has reached the 'Uugh' stage and needs a good clean. As I say I am an amateur and would not try to tell my grandmother how to suck eggs, so please don't take this as in any way confrontational, I just wondered if, in the light of the Tin Oxide Coated Sensor of the 400D whether you would consider it appropriate to modify slighty the following quote from you web page.

'Contrary to the urban myths that propagate like viruses on computer discussion boards, no digital camera with interchangeable lenses has a exposed imaging sensor. All either have a glass anti-aliasing filter or an optical glass cover.'

I really would like it if your statement was correct, I feel a lot more confident about cleaning a piece of glass than I do about messing with the sensors itself, coupled with which I really cannot get my head around the idea of coating anything with a tin oxide that is required to let light pass through it! If you have the time I would appreciate any comments that you might make. Kindest regards,

He replied somewhat curtly:-

'What makes you think that the 40D's sensor doesn't have glass in front of it?It uses an AA filter, just like all DSLRs, and that filter is made of glass'.

Michael

I replied as follows

Dear Michael

Thanks for your reply to my recent e-mail, I appreciate your time, but you have misread my e-mail, the camera in question is not a 40D, but a 400D and what motivates me to even ask you the original question is the concern being voiced on line, although admittedly in 'forums', and the fact that companies who supply camera cleaning gear, such a 'Photographic Solutions' USA think it such a potential problem area that they take the trouble to modify a product that they have supplied to DSLR owners for years (Ecllipse fluid) and have come up with Eclipse Fluid E2 which has supposedly been designed specifically for the new 'Tin Oxide Sensors',

I can't find anything in print from Canon about whether the sensor has a glass cover or not, but the popular opinion seems to be that it has not and this idea (seems) to be confirmed in the reply from 'Photographic Solutions' below in reply to an e-mail from a 'Photography on the Net' forum subscriber, in which they positively indicate that the 400D does indeed have an 'Indium Tin Oxide Coated Sensor' whatever that may be! Regards.

'Further to the recent concerns over using swabbing with eclipse solution on the EOS400D with its Indium Tin Oxide coated sensor, I contacted photographic solutions to ask them about their new E2 solution and also compatibility of the original solution with the Canon EOS400D.EOS400D users may want to consider using the new solution instead of the original liquid, I will continue using my original eclipse solution only for my lenses and order the E2 should I ever need to swab my sensor again!'Response from Photo solutions.....

'The E2 is a different formula the the Eclipse and is recommended by the makers of cameras with TI coated sensors. We have not found a problem using the Eclipse, but we do not know the long tern effects. Your camera does have a TI coated sensor. You may want to get a bottle of E2 to be safe.Hope this helps,JoelPSI'

He seemed completely unfazed by my reply and fired off his last piece of advice with what seems to be his usual good grace:-

'Believe who you will. All sensors have a cover glass that either serves as an antialiasing filter or simply as protection. There is no such thing as a sensor without a cover plate of some sort regardless of what coating it may have'

Irrespective of his manner of communicating, this guy knows his stuff photography wise and it would be a braver man than me who took him on, apart from the fact that my philosophy is never to open my mouth on a subject if there is somebody in the room who knows more about it than I do.

Sooooo

Who is right? why doesn't Canon put anything sensible in print about the subject? if Reichman is correct, has Photographic solutions invented the problem for which they have the solution? How can a Tin Oxide Coating allow light to pass through it, and, finally, is the whole thing as Reichman suggests the result of the colllective paranoia of the forum mentality?You may be pleased to know that I did successfully wet clean my sensor (if you'll pardon the expression) but was all my fretting about it completely unnecessary!

Firstly, please edit your post to make it easier on these old eyes.

Secondly, as mentioned above the "term" sensor has become synonymous with the whole sensor unit/assembly and as such all of them have an AA filter (and other parts, maybe) in front of the actual CMOS sensor (CCD sensors in other makes) therefore it has become unnecessary to state that there is such a physical barrier in front of the delicate 'sensor component of the assembly'.

Note here - there ares some (brave) folk that had adapted their dSLRs for astro photography by removing the AA filter because one wavelength it stops or reduces is IR (Infra Red) andthe astro guys like their IR spectrum and even more so the IR photography fans must get rid of it.

As for the use of coatings - well it is best to go with the advice of the suppliers as which grade of fluid to use. Ref: Coatings themselves - metallic oxide and other such coatings are used in many everyday devices and products many of which require the transmission of light through them. Not least of which is the semi silvered area of the primary mirror in all dSLR and many of the older 35mm film SLRs ~ this allows some light through to the metering and autofocus "sensors" but most of the light is reflected up into the pentaprism (or pentamirror depending on the make & model) to alow you to see the optical view of the scene.

Mike's punctuated version was tidier than mine, so I deleted the one I posted.
Cheers Mike.

Box Brownie. read the thread, the text errors are not my fault

Xarqi and msowsun thanks a lot guys I appreciate your help