Ricoh has introduced the RICOH GR IV HDF as a new version of its premium compact camera line, which extends the recently launched standard GR IV model. The model maintains all essential features from the GR IV, which include its 25.7-megapixel APS-C sensor, 28mm-equivalent f/2.8 lens, 5-axis image stabilization, 3-inch LCD, and excellent image quality. […]
Hello everyone! I have recently spotted two small patches of "white pixels" on my R7, and have been wondering if accidental exposure to the sun could have caused that during a recent shoot where I walked around with my mounted Nifty Fifty at f/1.8 without a lens cap (and focusing continuously). During that time, the sun definitely entered the frame a few times, but wasn’t stationary for more than ~10 seconds, so I am unsure if that caused it.
By doing some research, I had hoped to find a comprehensive guide on where the "danger zone" begins and which configurations are safe, but could not find anything concrete. Thus, I am hoping that some more experienced photographers could share their experiences to determine in an empirical way what is safe and what isn’t.
From what I understand, there are two distinct scenarios that are dangerous:
Thermally overwhelming single photosites: Focusing the sun with a low focal length and wide open aperture onto single photosites (sun covers very small area on sensor), overheating and damaging them, causing them to permanently malfunction, while adjacent photosites remain (mostly) intact.
Thermally overwhelming the sensor cooling capability: With a telephoto lens, project a larger image of the sun onto the sensor (lower intensity/photosite, but much more energy deposited on sensor overall), causing large portions of or the entire sensor to overheat, melt, and potentially cause a fire.
For the purpose of this thread (to make values comparable), I would like to mostly focus on the first scenario, although hearing about instances of the second will be insightful as well. I will also assume that the photosites are always the same size, also ignoring technicalities such as dual pixels and wiring for now. Let us also assume that we take a picture of the bright midday sun that emits a fixed (maximum) light intensity. Let us further assume that the camera is focused at "infinity" (or, you know, the distance of the sun) to produce the smallest-possible spot on the sensor.
It is my understanding (please correct me if I am wrong, though!) that the f-number and the duration of the exposure are the only relevant variables, with other things like focal length actually not (strongly) affecting the intensity of light at a single photosite (and instead mostly the total thermal load on the sensor).
If I have a 200mm lens with f/1.8 compared to an 18mm lens with f/1.8, it is my understanding (based on this this formula) that the light intensity hitting each photosite is identical, only the image of the sun is much larger on the sensor in the former case (risking damage to many more photosites at the same time, and requiring larger turns of the camera to get the photosites out of the sun projection, and producing a much higher thermal load on the sensor as a whole). A wide-angle lens simply projects the same-intensity sun because of the same f-number, but onto much less photosites. This is correct, right?
I am aware that I am ignoring the fact that in case of telephoto lenses, there is a greatly reduced heat dissipation to neighboring photosites if they are also illuminated by the sun, since a whole section of the sensor then heats up as a whole. This may well introduce a (weak) dependence of the formula also on focal length, however, its impact should be lower (at most linear) compared to the f-number, which has a squared relationship according to this formula. For the sake of simplicity, I will thus ignore focal length.
ISO should not have any impact whatsoever, because it doesn't impact the intensity of light that shines onto the photosite.
Thus, I think it would be most useful to derive an approximation formula for maximum safe exposure time of a single photosite to the sun as a function of f-number ("N"). I created a simple prototype below: t₀/N² < t_max(N²) < t₁/N²,
where t₀ is the largest reported time where you observed no sensor damage when using a lens of f-number "N", and t₁ is the smallest reported (by you, below!) time where you observed sensor damage when using a lens with f-number "N". t_max then is the f-number-dependent threshold exposure time, where sensor damage is starting to be expected.
As mentioned, I would like to derive upper time limits of what is safe and the lower time limits of when sensor damage can be expected (probably differing by a factor >2).
Therefore, I would like to ask YOU, if you ever photographed the sun without an ND filter for a certain amount of time and experience no damage, as well as if you ever photographed the sun and experienced sensor damage (with or without ND filter), to report the duration and f-number of the lens that you used, as well as approximate time and sun intensity/weather (all of which is conveniently stored within images if you didn't use ND filters). It is important to note that the camera must have remained steady for this shot for wide angle lenses (less important for telephoto lenses, because the sun covers a large area of the sensor!).
As this is essentially two formulas in one, not only those who damaged their sensors are asked to comment their exposure times, f-numbers and lighting conditions, but also everyone who pointed at the sun and DIDN'T damage their sensor. This will allow everyone reading this thread to get a feeling for what is generally safe, and what is generally destructive.
Based on this thread, we already have a first reported exposure duration of around 5 minutes that did not cause damage, although the f-number is missing. @Kit Lens Jockey if you are seeing this, do you by chance still have the picture and can report on the f-number and a rough approximation of the density of the solar-blocking filter on the window?
As discussed in the replies, this little project does not aim to produce exact threshold values. They will have a large uncertainty and may even be off by a factor of 2, 5, or even more. But it would be immensely helpful to have at least some rough guidelines, such as "When using f/1.8, it is safe to point your camera at the sun for 1-2 seconds" versus "[...] 10-20 seconds" versus "[...] 2-3 minutes". As in, understanding the rough order of magnitude, without having to go through a potentially very expensive trial-and-error experiment of "just risking it".
Thank you all for your help! Once some of you reported your experiences and concrete values, I will update this post to derive lower and upper limits (t₀ and t₁).
Canon has two RF versions of the 35mm focal length, but its flagship L series lens hasn't yet seen the light of day. The Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM has been rumored for quite some time, and if it continues for much longer, it will be granted unicorn status. The Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM […]
PhotonsToPhotos is back, and this time, they have finished up their analysis of the Canon EOS R6 Mark III sensor, so we have some actual numbers to quantify here with the sensor and how it measures up against the earlier versions of the Canon EOS R6 lineup and its competition. If we compare all the […]
BCN released its data for November, and there are a few other interesting pieces of information that have come out lately, so I'm going to lump it all into my musings, so lets get into things and oh, we have to talk about the R3 Mark II, R7 Mark II, R10 Mark II along the way. What is BCN and Why? Just for those completely unfamiliar with BCN, BCN tracks sales receipts from over half of all Japanese retail stores (online storefronts and physical stores). Of any market, BCN gives us the most accurate look at what is being sold […]
BCN released its data for November, and there are a few other interesting pieces of information that have come out lately, so I'm going to lump it all into my musings, so lets get into things and oh, we have to talk about the R3 Mark II, R7 Mark II, R10 Mark II along the […]
There's a rumor that Viltrox will be the next manufacturer granted the ability to make lenses for the electronic RF mount, and the first lenses will be coming “soon”. This honestly doesn't surprise me much – Viltrox was one of the 3 manufacturers that made mirrorless autofocus lenses for the EOS-M mount. What does surprise […]
Looking at this patent application (2025-179579), there are a lot of designs in here that I found intriguing, but there are certainly two that reached out and smacked me across the side of the head, and that's a Canon RF 300mm f/2.0L IS and a 200mm f/1.8L. But this is one of those patents where […]
The original Canon EOS R3 was a “stop-gap” for lack of a better term until Canon could develop what they considered a true 1 series flagship. The EOS R3 certainly resembled Canon's gripped DSLRs like the EOS-1D Mark III, that was and is extremely popular among professionals in various disciplines. The EOS R3 has a […]
A new rumor has circulated that Fujifilm is looking at more small sensor compact cameras for next year. The rumor states that Fujifilm is considering another compact with a 1″ sensor size. Fujifilm has done small sensor compacts before, and last year did the Fujifilm X half, which also featured a 1″ sensor. But at […]
Okay, it's been over 3 years since the RF-S lineup was released by Canon, and they have yet to really capitalize on what those cameras were. I know some people dismiss the EOS-M system and what it was for Canon and wanted it to die (Ahem, Craig), but for me, anyway, it was the perfect […]
Life was grand before IBIS (in body image stabilization) because camera manufacturers could simply slap a hunk of metal onto the back of the sensor, and things would stay cool, as heat would transmit through the camera body chassis and dissipate. However, when the camera is stabilized, the weight and size of the platform that […]
Rumors and talk about Canon's coming ‘Retro' style camera that will likely pay hommage to the Canon AE-1 to celebrate its 50th anniversary in 2026 have been relatively quiet over the last few months. There have been a few things mentioned over that time, but nothing worth publishing. This past week I had a discussion […]
Firmware Version 2.2.1 incorporates the following fixes:
Fixes an issue that, in rare instances, may prevent certain CFexpress cards from being formatted in the camera.
Fixes an issue that may prevent the camera's firmware from being updated via an Internet connection, even when a newer firmware version is available on Canon servers.
Please perform the firmware update with only the firmware file to be updated stored on the memory card.
If the camera's firmware is already Version 2.2.1, it is not necessary to update the firmware.
I bought a Digital Rebel with the 18-55 kit lens in September 2003 and upgraded regularly through the T6s. Eventually I also got three 5D series bodies. I had been using the EOS system since 1993, so I was well equipped with EF lenses and Speedlites.
My main problem was the lack of wide primes and fast zooms. The EF-S 17-55/2,8 was great, but it had L size and price. Eventually two Tokina f/2.8 zooms made up a variant of the Holy Trinity.
But for primes I only found three, the 24/2.8 pancake, the 60 macro and one more. For a while I used the EF 28/1.8 as a normal lens, but the results were suboptimal. Eventually a Sigma 30/1.4 (pre Art) came to the rescue. I could use my 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 as portrait lenses, but at the wide end, nada!
With great fanfare Canon introduced the R system in 2018. What they left unsaid, though, was that they had started the M series in 2012 and developed it significantly. With the M5 in 2015 I started using it professionally. In 2018 appeared the M6 II which to some extent is still my favorite camera. Early on they had introduced the EF-M 22/2 which was a nice little lens. Late in the game Canon introduced what I think was their most ambitious normal lens to date, the 32/1.4. That puppy had 14 elements, at a time when the Zeiss Otis 55/1.4 had 12 elements. Anyway, in 2022 they pulled the plug on the M system. Long live the R!
The R7 and R10 have now been available for a while and variable aperture zooms abound. There should have been adequate time to remount the two EF-M primes as RF-S lenses. Definitely hasn’t happened yet, maybe it never will. “Wasn’t invented here!”.
Sony is successfully running a two format system, with lenses for both, primes and zooms. I still have most of my EF system and still use it for some jobs. But for travel the M system is still my preference. I have, however, built up my R7 system. I like primes and I have bought a batch of Sigma Contemporary f/1.4 primes and two f/2.8 zooms, as well as an f/1.8 Art zoom. Canon has NOTHING like it!!!
We don’t all need/want Full Frame, or even if we have it, we may still want an APS-C outfit. I like my R7, I like the stabilizer and the full sviwel screen. Personally I don’t need two cards and I would prefer an LP-E17 battery, it’s easy to carry extras in return for a smaller body.
By its policy Canon lost out on about $ 4-5 K in lens purchases. Good job, guys!
Over the course of the year, the biggest trend has been that consistently every month, compact or built-in lens camera sales have been much higher than last year. CIPA has just released its October CIPA 2025 results, which show against the past reporting period of October, shipments of built-in lens cameras jumped to 60% growth […]
I'll say it right off the top, nailing down when firmware is going to be announced has always been difficult to nearly impossible. Though, the odd time it does work out. We recently saw new firmware for the R5 Mark II and R1, those updates focused more on compatibility and bug fixes than new features. New Features! I have been told that a “firmware announcement” is tentatively scheduled for February ahead of CP+, and that it looks like it'll be announced before it will be available for download. This has happened many times over the years, so it's not a […]
I'll say it right off the top, nailing down when firmware is going to be announced has always been difficult to nearly impossible. Though, the odd time it does work out. We recently saw new firmware for the R5 Mark II and R1, those updates focused more on compatibility and bug fixes than new features. […]
Today, Sony announced the Sony A7 V, the latest in the long line of prosumer full-frame mirrorless cameras from Sony, going back to 2013 with the release of the A7. The Sensor and Stuff The Sony Alpha A7 V features a new 33 megapixel BSI sensor and a BIONZ XR2 processor. The sensor's ISO range […]
Canon has likely finished their announcement cycle for 2025, which is a bit of a bummer as we were hoping that some exciting new lenses would make an appearance before we flip over to 2026. It's still possible, but the usual suspects haven't heard anything about announcements dates. I think Canon will be announcing new […]
Meet DWARF 3: Smart telescopes for exciting tracking experiences.
dwarflab.com
I don't do bird photography so I can't comment about how good this is, only to say that the glossy demo/pictures/videos look deceptively good. And yes, I'm sure they cherry picked a scenario for the video, it's advertising afterall.
I just received my first mirrorless camera, and I would like to use this thread to post questions as they pop up. I do not have any SD cards at the moment, so I cannot play with the camera too much yet. I do have some micro SD cards and an adapter, but I discovered in the user manual that it was not recommended. Of course, "not recommended" is not the same as "DO NOT USE A MICRO SD", so I was curious if this is really something to not do, even if it is to just have the ability to take a few pics while I am waiting on the regular SD cards to arrive???
In late 2024, Canon surprised us with the announcement of the RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM, a fast zoom in a very small package. Earlier this year, Canon followed that up by launching the RF 16-28mm f/2.8 IS STM. Both lenses have been well received by the Canon community and for good reasons. This is […]
dwarflab.com
