Radioactive lens: do you know?

A

AGX2015

Member
Local time
2:27 PM
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Messages
26
Ho,

I have some lens:

- Takumar smc 1.8 55mm
- yashica ml 50mm 2.0
- Helios 44m version 4 and 6

Do you know if the my radioactive? Radioactive lenses are dangerous?

Thanks
 
None of the radioactive lenses are dangerous. I have an image I will post later that will startle you. I've been in treatment for prostate cancER and have radioactive Pd103 seeds implanted. I took a piece of 4x5 HP5 and placed in a cardboard film holder and taped coins over the film. Over several days while sitting down for lunch and dinner I sat on the holder. I processed the film and as expected I was radioactive enough to expose the film.

If this level of radiation inside my body isnt enough to injure me or people around me the tiny amount In a lens is of no concern. You're constantly being bombarded from radiation that natural occurs in everything around you and from outer space. Don't worry about the tiny amount of thorium or lanthinum in a lens. Most of the radiation is absorbed by the glass anyway.

Edit: I'm now cancer free! Psa 0.28
 
Excellent news, x-ray.

As to the lenses, maybe if you ground them up and ate them, otherwise not dangerous.
 
Here is an image exposed by the Palladium 103 seeds in my body and an image of the survey meter at my skins surface set on X100 the least sensitive scale. Internally the radiation level is much more intense.

Do not worry about the tiny amount of radiation in a lens. If there was enough radiation to be of concern it would expose your film. Have you ever heard of anyone fogging their film because of the lens on the camera? NO!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2810.jpg
    IMG_2810.jpg
    11.1 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_2746.jpg
    IMG_2746.jpg
    32.7 KB · Views: 0
x-ray said:
None of the radioactive lenses are dangerous. I have an image I will post later that will startle you. I've been in treatment for prostate cancER and have radioactive Pd103 seeds implanted. I took a piece of 4x5 HP5 and placed in a cardboard film holder and taped coins over the film. Over several days while sitting down for lunch and dinner I sat on the holder. I processed the film and as expected I was radioactive enough to expose the film.

If this level of radiation inside my body isnt enough to injure me or people around me the tiny amount In a lens is of no concern. You're constantly being bombarded from radiation that natural occurs in everything around you and from outer space. Don't worry about the tiny amount of thorium or lanthinum in a lens. Most of the radiation is absorbed by the glass anyway.

Edit: I'm now cancer free! Psa 0.28
Click to expand...
Most sincerely pleased to hear this.
Best,
Brett
 
Here in Rochester there is a field behind one of the Kodak chemical plants that contains a lot of disposed Thorium that was used for lens coating. I have no fear walking around there, there are no warning signs posted.
 
Thank you all! It's no cakewalk but but I was fortunate to have a great team of physicians and caught it very early. I can't stress enough how important getting your psa checked after 50 or if there is any prostate cancer in your immediate family start getting checked at 40. Unfortunately it genetic.
 
Trius said:
Here in Rochester there is a field behind one of the Kodak chemical plants that contains a lot of disposed Thorium that was used for lens coating. I have no fear walking around there, there are no warning signs posted.
Click to expand...

Since you're in Rochester, I just licensed one of my art images to Rochester Regional Health to produce a new mural. As my screen name implies I work with X-rays as an art form. Rochester Regional is either building a new wing or remodeling and will be producing a mural around 10' in size of an xray or a southern magnolia blossom. It'll be a month or so before it's finished though. If you happen to be there and see it let me know how it looks.
 

Attachments

  • Southern Magnolia 2 best 24x30.jpg
    Southern Magnolia 2 best 24x30.jpg
    14.9 KB · Views: 0
The radiation level about three feet from the these lenes is barely above the ambient, background radiation level.

Thorium in finder glass surfaces (especially eye pieces) is another story. Those levels are significant (similar to dental X-Rays or numerous trans-continental air plane trips).

Thorium-232 emits primarily alpha radiation. Alpha particles barely make it through scotch tape, let alone a lens cap. Measure the radiation level from an alpha emitter with and without scotch tape over the source was one of the first experiments we did back in 1968 during training at Oak Ridge Associated Universities. The point was to show alpha particles are easily absorbed by the first material they hit.

But many people do not care about scientific evidence. They hear the word radioactive and after that it's all over.

So I underscore X-Ray's point with two simple questions.

Has anyone ever heard of photographic film being damaged when stored in a camera fitted with lens containing thorium glass?

If the film is not exposed to significant amounts of radioactivity, how would a photographer be exposed to significant amounts of radioactivity?

PS Thanks for sharing your good news X-Ray. A close friend is in a serious caner battle right now, so it's wonderful to learn of a positive result.
 
There are very few that have a significantly radioactive exposed element (e.g. the Aero Ektar). Thorium (and its decay products) is essentially a alpha and beta emitter - these don't make it outside a lens, if only one of the inner elements is thoriated. And significantly radioactive elements turn orange or brown over the course of a few decades - so there is no question of it remaining unnoticed.

Thorium may be the only entirely radioactive element used in a rare earth glass, and was not used in that many lenses. There is a higher number of lenses containing lanthanum, where the main isotope is not radioactive. Their radioactive impurities are small and only a fairly insignificant part of the total radioactivity found in plain glass lenses made in the era of atmospheric nuclear tests and nuclear incidents.

That said, I would not sleep on the rear side of a Aero Ektar without placing at least a sheet of paper over it. More seriously, don't break them, and dispose on them properly, so that they don't get smashed up by some kid - the reason why they were banned are the risks involved in production and disposal...
 
AGX2015 said:
But some of my lens are radioactive?
Click to expand...

You are radioactive as well as everything around you. Radiation bombards all of us constantly. Take a survey meter and check the background count. It's radiation from our environment and from outer space. It's a fact of life and there's nothing that can be done about it.

I grew up in the cold war era when the US and Russia were doing above ground nuclear tests. I did an experiment once by taking a piece of 4x5 TX and wrapping it in aluminum foil to make it light tight. I smeared a thin film of petroleum jelly on one side and took it into my front yard that night and placed the sticky side up. I left the tim over night and the next morning processed it. There were black spots all over the film from the fallout landing on the film and exposing tiny spots on it.

This is what each of us grew up with. We were drinking milk and eating food that was contaminated with cesium, strontium and cobalt radio isotopes. We still are to a lesser degree but these isotopes wound up in all of our bones and bodies so don't worry about the super low level of radiation in a lens.
 
willie_901 said:
The radiation level about three feet from the these lenes is barely above the ambient, background radiation level.

Thorium in finder glass surfaces (especially eye pieces) is another story. Those levels are significant (similar to dental X-Rays or numerous trans-continental air plane trips).

Thorium-232 emits primarily alpha radiation. Alpha particles barely make it through scotch tape, let alone a lens cap. Measure the radiation level from an alpha emitter with and without scotch tape over the source was one of the first experiments we did back in 1968 during training at Oak Ridge Associated Universities. The point was to show alpha particles are easily absorbed by the first material they hit.

But many people do not care about scientific evidence. They hear the word radioactive and after that it's all over.

So I underscore X-Ray's point with two simple questions.

Has anyone ever heard of photographic film being damaged when stored in a camera fitted with lens containing thorium glass?

If the film is not exposed to significant amounts of radioactivity, how would a photographer be exposed to significant amounts of radioactivity?

PS Thanks for sharing your good news X-Ray. A close friend is in a serious caner battle right now, so it's wonderful to learn of a positive result.
Click to expand...

Oak Ridge Associated University is one of my clients. Do you know Dr Paul Frame? Super nice guy and has quite a museum collection relating to this.

Best of luck to your friend. I know several people that were stage 4 that have survived long term.
 
Here is an informative Link:
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Radioactive_lenses

It includes the 50mm Collapsible Summicron among the list of radioactive lenses. I have two of those. I've known for years that at least some of them are radioactive. I believe, based on numerous articles on the subject, that they are safe.

Another link:
http://petapixel.com/2013/05/03/dec...dioactive-especially-if-theyre-made-by-kodak/

A discussion on the extent of risk:
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/6257-the-very-underestimated-problem-of-radioactive-lenses/
 
x-ray said:
Thank you all! It's no cakewalk but but I was fortunate to have a great team of physicians and caught it very early. I can't stress enough how important getting your psa checked after 50 or if there is any prostate cancer in your immediate family start getting checked at 40. Unfortunately it genetic.
Click to expand...
Good Luck with your cancer in the future. There are long term effects to radiation treatment as my wife had 32 rads and 16 chemo. I only hope that hospitals and treatment center's can afford to get the newer Proton units into North America soon. The shots from these units are way smaller (narrow beam), than the wider beam ones on the regular radiation units now in use.
 
x-ray said:
..

If this level of radiation inside my body isnt enough to injure me or people around me the tiny amount In a lens is of no concern. You're constantly being bombarded from radiation that natural occurs in everything around you and from outer space. Don't worry about the tiny amount of thorium or lanthinum in a lens. Most of the radiation is absorbed by the glass anyway.

Edit: I'm now cancer free! Psa 0.28
Click to expand...

Congratulations x-ray. Best wishes that it stays that way for the decades to come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom