Article about Radioactive lenses...

I just came across this article about Radioactive lenses - in this case a 1952 50mm Summicron.

 

A Radioactive Lens

 

Note: not dangerous if you have one, but an interesting short article.

Love it michael_levy|3. Don't know where you got it from, but it's great. Should we be worried? As the article says: 'no'. A wonderful read. You're a gem. I wonder if 'radioactive' was a selling point in the 1970's - much like 'electricity' was a point for, say, Mary Shelley, and Frankenstein. Modernity. There may be more things to worry about right now, I'd have thought. A lunatic narcissistic liar who prances around as POTUS, the gun happy killing in American culture (I wonder when the Americans will finally wake up - but maybe they won't. Their culture is shoot first, as many as you can, and refuse to answer questions later). As an outsider, the capacity of Americans to kill each other is dismaying. From my undergraduate days, I remember that old joke about lawyers on a crashed plane. Just a good start. Good read. I've now learned about micro sieverts. Regards, Arthur

One that's rarely mentioned is the front section of the Xenon lens used on the Kodak Retina IIIc.

Was the ver.1 Summicron 50 Leica's only "hot" lens?

An interesting read & very nice to see it written by someone who actually knows something about radioactivity, even better that they use SI units :)

Was the ver.1 Summicron 50 Leica's only "hot" lens?

It's the only one I've heard of, apart from the protoypes that were engraved "Summitar*". They switched to (minimally radioactive) lanthanum in the Summicron from around 1953, so their experiment with thorium was pretty short-lived.

 

Interesting that this lens seems to be hot at both ends - if (as is often claimed) they used lead glass in a rear element to protect the film, it doesn't appear to be doing much. I suppose the lens is hotter than when it was made, due to the accumulation of more radioactive daughter products in the thorium series (assuming the thorium was free of them to start with).

Was the ver.1 Summicron 50 Leica's only "hot" lens?

 

Actually, there are a bunch of lenses that are radioactive, including Takumars.

They were made with radioactive rare earths.

 

See Radioactive lenses

Arthur . . . Nice mash up from slightly radioactive lenses made in Germany to a knock on the supposed "shoot'em up" culture here in the U.S. . . .

 

Can you point me to your comments where you point out the propensity of the Irish to blow each other up over religious differences? Can you provide a list of "cultures" who have started World War? Maybe those who ended them? I've read of a large spike in stabbings in the U.K. over the last ten years.

 

Maybe we can discuss this mechanism that we are communicating on right now and who developed that? Would you like to have discussion on the rape problems in Sweden now that they are not nearly such a homogenous society or the immigration issues now occurring in France and the Netherlands?

 

No . . . How about we stick to discussions of photography here and post about politics on other sites that aren't dedicated to a subject?

Hmm... I used to be a

chimpanzee until I used

a radioactive lens...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

I just came across this article about Radioactive lenses - in this case a 1952 50mm Summicron.

 

A Radioactive Lens

 

Note: not dangerous if you have one, but an interesting short article.

Very cool, thanks for sharing. I wonder why lead isn't allowed to be used in lens elements these days. It's not like you're going to drink out of these things. I guess bureaucrats like to make themselves feel useful.

There may be more things to worry about right now, I'd have thought.

Arthur, I'd like to ask that you don't try and sneak in political comments on this site. It isn't very tasteful and nobody likes it, whether they agree with you or not. That sort of thing may not end friendships, but it can kill businesses.

Actually, there are a bunch of lenses that are radioactive, including Takumars.

They were made with radioactive rare earths.

 

See Radioactive lenses

Very useful. Thanks!

I wonder why lead isn't allowed to be used in lens elements these days. It's not like you're going to drink out of these things. I guess bureaucrats like to make themselves feel useful.

 

They followed this up with the problematic ban on leaded solder for electronics. Lead-free circuits have a propensity to short themselves out over time. Thirty years from now, photographers might still be discussing and using radioactive Takumars, Zeiss Jenas and Summicrons, or leaded Biogons. But a significant number of Sony GM, Sigma Art, Nikkor AFS, Fuji X and Canon EF gems could be rather crippled by then (if motor wear doesn't kill them, lead-free whisker shorts might).

Edited August 14, 2019 by orsetto

What about binoculars with radioactive lenses? I have some old Pentax binoculars that are very good but have radioactive glass. A radioactive camera lens might be harmless, but what about binocular lenses held for hours directly against one's eyes? I don't know anyone who has a Geiger counter.

What about binoculars with radioactive lenses? I have some old Pentax binoculars that are very good but have radioactive glass. A radioactive camera lens might be harmless, but what about binocular lenses held for hours directly against one's eyes? I don't know anyone who has a Geiger counter.

If you have reason to believe they are radioactive, then I'd suggest not risking it. Eyes are particularly vulnerable and, as you say, they'd be very close to the source of radiation (at least if the eyepieces are hot).

This was a good read.

 

Until some moron used it as a soapbox to go off on a political attack.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Brian

When I joined Photo.net, this type of rant was common.

 

Could be passed off with "WHAT AN ASSHOLE!", go onto the next thread.

 

It has no place here. If this is a return to those times- get used to being called an asshole and worse.

When I joined Photo.net,...

Arthur is a valued member of this forum. The post he made should probably not have included the extra remarks, and he was (gently) called out for them. That was sufficient. None of us are perfect.

Compared to 2002, when I joined photo.net- I was being gentle.

 

If this crap is back, and is acceptable to the Moderators, that is their call. They can edit, delete, ban, or leave it in place.

Compared to 2002, when I joined photo.net- I was being gentle.

 

If this crap is back, and is acceptable to the Moderators, that is their call. They can edit, delete, ban, or leave it in place.

 

At this point, it is not common . . . If we just drop it (the post was two weeks ago) it should just go away . . .

Brian, believe me, it's not back. It's actually very rare. We're a very politically diverse bunch of people, and we do our best to keep personal stuff out of our discussions. :-)

 

You know, this is a good time to point out the importance of punctuation and capitalization. There's a difference between "It's Radioactive Man!" and "It's radioactive, man!".

Speaking of radioactive glass, at one time Tiffany made and sold beautiful lead glass candlesticks colored with Uranium Oxide to a beautiful yellow-green color. Their radioactive level was well above background levels.