Junior

I still want to find a geiger counter now and see what my Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.2 does.. that thing just looks toxic. 

Do it! And don't keep it near your bed (in your basement would be better).

10 μSv is the dose everyone just got from background radiation in the last 24hrs.

 

So 1 hour of cuddling the rear element of your radioactive lens = 1 normal day living on earth.

 

Just after Fukushima I went to Japan.

 

People there over the entire year had a 1,052 μSv dose of radiation based on Tokyo's readings.

 

That is still only 2% of what the US allows workers to receive per year at work!

 

Source: http://www.blacksmithinstitute.org/blog/radiation-101-what-is-it-how-much-is-dangerous-and-how-does-fukushima-compare-to-chernobyl/

 

So say you spent 5 hours shooting with your radioactive lens per day, EVERY DAY of the year. That is still only 1825 Î¼Sv exposure and still under 5% of the total limit which is considered 'safe' by the US authorities.

Andrew, our body receives a natural telluric daily dose of 0,5 μSv per day. If you add to this natural one, the industrial, medical, cosmical etc it makes approximately 2,4 mSv/year (people get unequally 1,5 to 6,0 mSv/year in France - official numbers! Check it: http://www2.cndp.fr/themadoc/radioactivite/radioactiviteimp.htm ).

What the specialised guys told me yesterday is that even if it doesn't stay around your neck or on your chest for hours, (or under your bed), it's still dangerous because of lost dusts. One of the main risks is to let it fall and break it for example. Vacuum cleaner wouldn't help you there…

Once ingerated (accidentally of course), Radium 226 is known to stay on bones and in liver for life!

Maybe you think that if all this was true it would be a more widely reported issue? I agree, but you need to know that the famous firemen department where I was yesterday has just added my Mamiya in their "hot" database. Think about it. I've sent them some other links cause they asked me for. I don't know why it's not much more a reported issue… but it should be!

I had enough of contradictory forums that's why I took a train to get personnaly a real specialist. We made 3 different test and they were all very bad (results are in my top post). Takumar f1.4 is known to be worse than Mamiya, so what I say comes from pros, not from this rich but unreliable world wide web. Anyway, each one is free.

If it can help, my clean checked "vintage russian lenses" are:
- Helios 44m;
- Tair 11A;
- Jupiter 9 ;
- Mir 24M.
My Sankor 16D is clean too. (And modern lenses aren't concerned.)
Take care of 70's russian lenses.

Pilots and hostess have cancer increase. Radiologists are really protected and supervised). You Andy take plane maybe 5 times a year and go to the dentist (for x-rays) maybe once a couple of years, for 30 seconds. You can't compare! Aluminium won't help, just concrete or lead. Radioactive lenses is a very UNDERESTIMATED problem, espescially on photo forums. I know what told the geiger and the officers. I think we talk about health here, not bokeh.
 

'>

http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Radioactive_lenses

Hi!
It's one of my first posts here but not the funniest I guess…
I'm not especially talking about a magic C-lens in particular here but about a very underestimated question: radioactive lenses!
One of my friends is a fireman captain and introduced me yesterday to one of his colleagues specialized in technological risks and chemical dangers (at Poissy, France : they're known to have very great equipments.) We made 3 different tests on all my Russian lenses which are all OK excepted the Mamiya Sekor 55mm f1.4 (M42).
Here are the results:
From 5 to 10 µSV per hour (by direct touch), and 1720 shocks per second.
Element involved is Thorium 232.
They told I really shouldn't keep it. Work with it more than one hour is dangerous. It must be gifted to specialized services and absolutely not be destroyed! Or thrashed! The most dangerous exposure isn't even radiations but dusts to inhalate or ingerate (when a lens gets old it disaggregates - it's something you can't always clearly see).
I'm lucky cause until today I kept it in my basement.
So, say it please to your friends and all potential Mamiya/Takumar users that you know via websites etc, it's a strong matter of health.

- T H A N K  Y O U ! -

Hi!

Do you know, please, Sankor 16D's rear cap size?

I bought already some different sized caps and it never fits. Damn!

So? Any idea? This info is very hard to find out…

> I know it's not 49mm. 49mm is the rear element size but not the rear cap size. (I'm sure cause bought too a 49mm cap and it's a little bit too small) <

Not a very essence question for this brilliant forum, but I hate dust and scratches! I hate 'em more than Indiana Jones hates nazis!

Thanks!

At this point, it looks like the best thing to do is to wait one more year, watching prices and specs evolve.

RE the be-steady. My friends bought one and it has been a lot of trouble for them.

Damn! I'll definitely forget the idea to buy it.

I have a BeSteady One, and I have to say I've had nothing but issues with my unit.

I'm really disappointed about it...

A good value company is someone called Big Balance.

Great thanks! I'll take a look at "Big Balance".

I just found it too on EOSHD:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11026/perspective-aerials-match-movi-performance-at-13rd-of-price

No new stabilisers at NAB 2014? There was so many, I lost count!

Haha! Damn! Looks like I missed them all... sorry.

Hi EOSHD people!

Which one to use with GH4? MÅVI? BeSteady? Defy? Others?

Looks like nothing new came out at NAB 2014…

Did someone try it? I'm really interested by BeSteady One: it looks like a very good value for money.

(Really hard to find a review: would you write about it Andrew)?

Thanks!

YEAH!

-DAY #5 PLEASE!-

Same concept as equ FL,I just use FF to say to avoid confuse.

This lens looks need above 135mm in FF.

I'm using Mico 4/3, so it's OK.

It's a "Tokina" achromat. It does sharpen the image but more so is to help you get closer minimum focus. 

"Tokina" yes, sorry for the bad "copy and paste". Thanks Lucian!
A guy told me that this lens is a Sankor 16D even if it's not written on. He told me too that it's good enough to work without the Tokina and use a single element achromat (I'm talking about sharpness not about closer focus).

So what do you think about it? Do agree? Is it exactly a Sankor 16D? Would a Tokina overkill it?

Thanks.

Hi!

I have this anamorphic lens but I can't really know what it is exactly. Who can tell?

It's exactly similar to a Kowa/Sankor/Singer 16D (and the "72mm Front Filter Ring" works on it), but it's only written on "Japan 2X anamorphic lens for BELL & HOWELL". Is it better or cheaper than the others Kowa/Sankor/Singer?

My other question is: would it need an achromat or is it good enough to work "nude"? (I would like to try an "okina achromatic close up +0.4" with this anamo and have maybe a sharper image.) Would it work inevitably better with an Okina, or not?

Thanks a lot!