| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sceptic
Joined: 01 Jun 2013
Posts: 255
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:32 am Post subject: Another case of fungus cleaned off with 70 % alcohol |
 |
|
sceptic wrote:
With this post, I just want to emphasize how easy cleaning fungus can be, without having to smear lenses with (abrasive) cold cream or using toxic chemicals. Just dissolve the fungus with some 70 % ethanol (commonly used for disinfecting, for which it does a better job than 99 % alcohol) and wipe clean.
I just purchased a C/Y Zeiss Planar 50/1.7 which looked like this (seller's photo, not mine):
All three rear elements were infected, with threads across more or less the entire surface. 1 hour of dismantling and cleaning and there is no sign of the fungus anymore. Unfortunately, the (glued-together) front elements also has a small spot of fungus in the corner, which can't be accessed.
Anyway, always try with a "mild" approach before breaking out the nasty chemicals.
_________________
Sony A7R and wildly varying flora of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
guardian
Joined: 18 Mar 2009
Posts: 1747
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
guardian wrote:
Very well done, indeed. Pity about the glue (I detest glue in lenses).
But why are you saying cold cream is abrasive? Which component of cold cream is abrasive? Surely not the mineral oil.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sceptic
Joined: 01 Jun 2013
Posts: 255
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sceptic wrote:
Borax is, as far as I know, a common ingredient in cold cream. Its main purpose is most likely as emulsifier (to make the oil and water mix), but it is also a gentle abrasive (probably mechanically, caused by tiny borax crystals). Perhaps cold cream only contains fully dissolved borax (without crystals), in that case it's probably not abrasive.
_________________
Sony A7R and wildly varying flora of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4749
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Well done sceptic. I think borax despite being abrasive would be harmless to lenses as the crystals would break down in contact with the glass. I also suspect that the borax in cold cream may well be the active ingredient.
Just my thoughts
#TTP
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guardian
Joined: 18 Mar 2009
Posts: 1747
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
guardian wrote:
| philslizzy wrote: |
Well done sceptic. I think borax despite being abrasive would be harmless to lenses as the crystals would break down in contact with the glass. I also suspect that the borax in cold cream may well be the active ingredient.
Just my thoughts
#TTP |
This is an eye-opening observation for me and not one with which I'm willing to take issue . . . since I don't really know. However:
Up until now I've (perhaps erroneously) been under the impression it was the mineral oil in cold cream that was helping us by penetrating and softening hard calculus residue formed as an outcome of the activity of the fungus.
Live and learn! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10362
Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 4:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Mineral oil softens the bond between the calculus and the glass/coating; the calculus can then be softly wiped without scratching glass/coating.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Macro-Takumar 1:4/50
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4749
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Thank you. I didnt know this, however I still believe the borax wont do any harm as it is soft.
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sceptic
Joined: 01 Jun 2013
Posts: 255
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
sceptic wrote:
I stand corrected; cold cream is probably harmless to lenses. Still, I would find it messy to clean off and prefer using only ethanol.
As a sidenote, I noticed that the coating on some of the internal lens surfaces behaved quite differently to those on the outside surfaces. The internal surfaces ended up with a "smeary" residue (like it had been cleaned with an oily rag) after cleaning with ethanol and required some extra cleaning to get it off.
_________________
Sony A7R and wildly varying flora of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guardian
Joined: 18 Mar 2009
Posts: 1747
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
guardian wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| Mineral oil softens the bond between the calculus and the glass/coating; the calculus can then be softly wiped without scratching glass/coating. |
Understood. This is along the lines of what I had in mind and I appreciate the clarification.
Further, though, to this line of thinking:
I believe calculus formation varies from situation to situation, depending on (not in order of importance):
1. fungus species
2. type of coating
3. chemical makeup of glass
4. length of time since inception of attack
Thus, in some instances there could be considerable calculus formation . . . while in others there is less and/or the calculus is softer.
Bottom line, I suspect some fungus infestations might require application of mineral oil for eradication, while in other (not so severe or long standing) instances less aggressive measures might suffice quite well.
In my last fungus attack hand lotion was my weapon of choice. I looked at the cold cream in the stores, but it was (in my humble view) unreasonably expensive. A check of the label revealed mineral oil as (what seemed to me to be) the active ingredient. Hand lotion has lots of mineral oil, and I already had plenty at home no need to buy, so that's what I used. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Langstrum
Joined: 16 Feb 2014
Posts: 351
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Langstrum wrote:
I dealt with fungus several times, and in general, even for normal cleaning, the 1:1 isopropanol : distilled water is always the best. I tried 70% ethanol before, it's good but it's not good enough since it easily leaves some colored spots on the surface that you only can see if you change the angle.
I always wipe off the fungus and dirty things with this solution, using soft cloth or fiber cleaning paper very quickly, then wipe the second time with dry cloth immediately. The quicker, the better.
I kept those lenses for several months now and the fungus didn't come back, at least not very soon 
_________________
Camera: Sony A7 mark III, A6300
AF Lenses:
Canon EF 50/1.8; EF 200/2.8 L, EF 200/1.8 L, EF 300/4 L Sony E mount SEL 50/1.8 OSS, SEL 16/2.8 Fuji X mount XF 35/1.4 R
MF Lenses: Peleng MC 8/3.5, 17/2.8 Samyang 14/T3.1, 35/T1.5, TS 24/3.5 ED, 85/T1.5, Polar 85/1.4 Auto Revuenon 28/2.8; MC 50/1.4 Vega11U 50/2.8 Carl Zeiss Tessar 50/2.8 (exakta mount) Auto Chinon 50/1.9 Zenitar ME1 50/1.7 Sears Auto Sears 55/1.4; Sears 135/2.8 Auto Yashinon DX 50/1.4; Tomioka 50/1.2 SMC Pentax 50/1.7; 50/1.4 Canon FD 50/1.4 S.S.C; 55/1.2 S.S.C; FD 50/1.2 L; FD 85/1.2 L; 85/1.2 S.S.C Aspherical; FD 80-200/4 L 300/2.8 S.S.C Fluorite FD 300/2.8 L FD 200/1.8 LCosina-S 50/1.2 Helios Helios 44 Chrome f/22, 44-2, 44-3, 44M-4, 44M-7 (58/2), Helios-40 85/1.5 Jupiter Jupiter-9 85/2; Jupiter-37A 135/3.5; Jupiter-21M 200/4 Nikon Ai 105/2.5 Tairs-3S 300/4.5
Voigtlander 15/4.5 Aspherical; Ultron 35/1.7
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4749
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Interesting, I didn't know fungus residue was calculus. The tartar we get on our teeth if we dont brush properly is also calculus. Mouthwash containing 70% alcohol is used to soften it.
So perhaps a dose of Listerine might work. Seriously.
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 7768
Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I cleaned some fungus off a lens with nothing more than a lens wipe, the sort I use for my glasses, the other day. If it's caught early it's easy to shift. The more persistent I've always used cold cream and found it very good. But when it gets this bad -
there's just no hope.....
_________________
LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guardian
Joined: 18 Mar 2009
Posts: 1747
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
guardian wrote:
| philslizzy wrote: |
Interesting, I didn't know fungus residue was calculus. The tartar we get on our teeth if we dont brush properly is also calculus. Mouthwash containing 70% alcohol is used to soften it.
So perhaps a dose of Listerine might work. Seriously. |
Not a bad approach. Listerine is unlikely to be abrasive and your lenses will become clean, sweet smelling, sanitized, and kissing fresh!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4749
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 4719
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
Is there only one type of fungus that attacs lenses? 
_________________
Lars | Lens collection | Manuellfokus.no |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 7768
Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I don't know if there is one type, or many. I suspect different types.
I have cleaned lenses with slight and moderate fungus with great success. But some, like the one pictured above, was etched to destruction.
There's a school of thought that it is time dependent. If you catch and clean it early then it's successful. But I have a Canon AF lens that I know developed fungus in less than 6 months, and it's ruined through etching. Some of the lenses I've cleaned, I have no real idea about how long the fungus has been present, I clean them as soon as I can. But I suspect that many have been fungused for a very long time. And, some fungused lenses that I haven't cleaned, mainly one touch zooms, have not got any worse at all when I store them with no caps and allowing air to circulate, and daylight to get to them.
That 100% ruined element pictured above was one single element from a Rokkor 135 / 2.8, every other element was perfect, the Canon AF has every single element ruined. There doesn't seem to be any kind of pattern or progression that can be nailed down.
_________________
LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10362
Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2014 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Glass is etched by acidic metabolites.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Macro-Takumar 1:4/50
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CuriousOne
Joined: 31 Dec 2013
Posts: 669
Location: Home
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2014 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CuriousOne wrote:
Alcohol just dissolves the fatty tissue affixing fungus to lens. It does not kills the spores, so your lens still have fungus.
_________________
I have nothing to compensate with lens |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bychance
Joined: 24 Apr 2013
Posts: 345
Location: Kent, England
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2014 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bychance wrote:
I know that with ceramic glaze suspensions you have to use a biocide to guarantee no mould growth within a glaze batch that will be stored for any length of time. Funny thing is the best one is bloody dettol 
So, a drop of that may help although a goodly amount of the great oral disinfectant known as scotch maybe the wise choice...
I'm off to seek out a bottle of Glen Dettol!
_________________
I got where I am by avoiding where I was going.
Now where was I? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2727
Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| Glass is etched by acidic metabolites. |
+1
That the damage is caused by that the fungus is "eating" the glass or the coatings is a wide spread myth.
They are living from grease, dust and dirt.
It's their "pee" or "swet" what very slowly reacts with the coatings.
| philslizzy wrote: |
Well done sceptic. I think borax despite being abrasive would be harmless to lenses as the crystals would break down in contact with the glass. I also suspect that the borax in cold cream may well be the active ingredient.
Just my thoughts
#TTP |
I would be careful with borax as the borate might react slowly with magnesium salts or other ingredients from the coatings and slowly alter, remove of destroy them.
Ethanol, Methanol, Isopropanol and lighter fluid are much safer, also for long soaking times.
| Code: |
| Alcohol just dissolves the fatty tissue affixing fungus to lens. It does not kills the spores, so your lens still have fungus. |
Double no, Methanol, 70% ethanol and 70% IPA do kill spores quite effectivly.
Only hypochlorite (bleach), hydrogen peroxide, ozone and stuff like that are more even more effective.
I'm not sure about lighter fluid though, spores might be quite inert to them, at least for a short time.
But actually doesn't matter - mushroom spores are in every old lens, always! Keep humidity low and you have no problems anyway.
The other no is because mycelias generally don't contain any noteworthy fatty tissue (they are mushrooms, not meat or plant seed!), also if that would be true lighter fluid would be ten times more effective (as lighter fluid dissolves fat much better than alcohol, especiall if aqueous) but actually alcohol with a tad of water is more effective in my experience. I guess the alcohols cleaning effect is caused by it's abbility denaturizing proteins, maybe carbohydrates, slippering between bonds of glas and fungus and softening them, rehydrating/weakening dried tissue and a slightly tenside-like effect caused by the OH-group.
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, Nikon 200/2 ED
My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CuriousOne
Joined: 31 Dec 2013
Posts: 669
Location: Home
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
CuriousOne wrote:
Methanol does not kills the spores, even at 95% concencration.
We got spores from camera lens, plant them on substrate to grow, and then applied various chemicals to test samples, to determine the most effective killer. Even 95% methanol do no significant harm to spores in 24 hours.
_________________
I have nothing to compensate with lens |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sammo
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Posts: 223
Location: CH and SI
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
sammo wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| Glass is etched by acidic metabolites. |
-1
Glass is stable in acidic conditions, but alkalines react with glass. It's the coatings that are etched easily by acids. When I cleaned fungus, I usually found that in the area about 1 mm around the fungus the coatings (or at least a certain layer) were etched away. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Posts: 2201
Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
| CuriousOne wrote: |
Methanol does not kills the spores, even at 95% concencration.
We got spores from camera lens, plant them on substrate to grow, and then applied various chemicals to test samples, to determine the most effective killer. Even 95% methanol do no significant harm to spores in 24 hours. |
I think the idea is not to kill spores - and I am pretty sure it would be quite hard since the very function of spores is to survive unfavorable conditions for long periods - but to remove the growing fungus and then store the lens in an environment which is no favorable for spores to start growing.
Even if you kill them there will be new ones inside the lens soon, as spores are almost everywhere.
_________________
C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 4719
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2014 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
+1
Lens fungus is a slow growing organism, or what? If you can remove the visible part of the spores, there might be years or even decades before you can see visible signs of fungus again?!?
_________________
Lars | Lens collection | Manuellfokus.no |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
