radioactive lenses

[ampguy]

very interesting

very interesting

I'll post some of my lens soon.

According to the site below, your lens is from around 1970-1971:

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html

Here are the readings for an Nikkor-N (slr) 35mm f1.4 lens (serial No.35205*, does anyone know the age of this lens?).
Gamma reading taken with a NE Electra GM, averaged over 60 seconds (if a range is given it because three independent reading were taken) all readings in uSv/h. Note, the centre of the detector for the GM is 15mm below the instruments surface. Background dose rate 0.16-0.20.
Front of lens 3.6 -4.1, rear of lens 6.5-6.8, side of lens 3.5-3.6. Back of Nikon F camera with lens attached 1.4.
front of lens B+W Filter attached 3.3, no filter 3.5 (note GM positioned filter thickness away from from of lens ~3mm).
Camera on CCS small holdall dose rate on surface of holdall ranged from 0.5 to 1.0.

With a Mini SmartION no difference was detected with the Bea slide open or closed. Readings from smartION erratic🙁, background dose rate ~1.2 ( Instrument not suitable for these low dose rates - great at higher levels). Note the centre of the detector for the SmartION is 45mm below the instruments surface, no averaging fluctuating range given
Front 3.3-4.2
Side 3.1-3.7
Back 3.8-4.9

 

[Roger Hicks]

Here are the readings for an Nikkor-N (slr) 35mm f1.4 lens (serial No.35205*, does anyone know the age of this lens?).
Gamma reading taken with a NE Electra GM, averaged over 60 seconds (if a range is given it because three independent reading were taken) all readings in uSv/h. Note, the centre of the detector for the GM is 15mm below the instruments surface. Background dose rate 0.16-0.20.
Front of lens 3.6 -4.1, rear of lens 6.5-6.8, side of lens 3.5-3.6. Back of Nikon F camera with lens attached 1.4.
front of lens B+W Filter attached 3.3, no filter 3.5 (note GM positioned filter thickness away from from of lens ~3mm).
Camera on CCS small holdall dose rate on surface of holdall ranged from 0.5 to 1.0.

With a Mini SmartION no difference was detected with the Bea slide open or closed. Readings from smartION erratic🙁, background dose rate ~1.2 ( Instrument not suitable for these low dose rates - great at higher levels). Note the centre of the detector for the SmartION is 45mm below the instruments surface, no averaging fluctuating range given
Front 3.3-4.2
Side 3.1-3.7
Back 3.8-4.9

Thanks for some interesting hard data.

If you're passing through the Loire Valley you can try reading my Aero Ektar...

Cheers,

R.

 

[kram]

Roger, if the pound eventually improves against the Euro I may eventually go to France (never been, although have lived in Belgium, been to Holland, Germany, Italy, Spain, Cyprus etc. and through Austria - but not France) and take you up on your offer. have just spoken to Mike, I think the XL is a few more weeks yet.

 

[Carterofmars]

When were radioactive lenses discontinued?

I have a Yashica Electro 35
A Super speed graphic with Rodenstock

Did any of there contain Thorium?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeB_aL27chI

1950's to 1980's!!! 😕

Post from Photo.net

http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00OnNJ

So any pre-1953 Summicron lens may contain Thorium. How about post 1953 Leica glass?

 

[Ed S.]

Roll over to unblinkingeye.com and read about uranotypes: http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Uranium/uranium.html.

The low-level radioactivity is a problem, but the chemistry of uranium and many other metals (some even essential) is a bigger problem. "Tasty" might not be a term to be applied to lenses.

More details here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranyl_nitrate
here ("Effects"): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium
and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_metal

 

[Johnny RF]

I'm not too worried about the storage of a radioactive lens and it's radiation, however, I do have some concerns regarding the handling and possible intake/ingestion of the thorium:

Is it ok to touch the front glass with your bare hands (for whatever reason)? Do you have to wash your hands afterwards everytime? Would it be extremely dangerous to have touched the lens then your eyes or mouth?

Would a fresh scratch on the glass surface be dangerous? Would a microfiber cloth used to clean a lens be contaminated after use?

 

[filmtwit]

have a Rokkor 58mm f1.2 that's radio active.
They tend to cloud up a bit, but under lots of UV light they clear up. If you have any cloudness, stick it in a house window with the cap off and the f-stop open for a couple of days, some times week.

any owners measure them? How comfortable are you around them?

The oldest lens I have, a collapsible Summicron, is s/n 121... about a year past the Thorium versions, but I sitll plan to measure it.

 

[Beemermark]

You need to measure the radiation off your fire detector, fiesta ware plates (they're really hot), the amount of dose in an airliner above 20,000 feet when your taking a trip, blacktop emission, etc. Oh yeah, don't forget your wrist watch or the night sights on your pistol (if you have one). If your really, really worried, don't ever go to the dentist.

I wonder how I ever lived so long.

 

[nikon_sam]

I now own a copy of the Super-Takumar 50mm 1.4 lens...I'm not too worried about it's radioactivity...(a little secret...I keep the lens cap on it and that holds all that toxic stuff inside...)

 

[rover]

have a Rokkor 58mm f1.2 that's radio active.
They tend to cloud up a bit, but under lots of UV light they clear up. If you have any cloudness, stick it in a house window with the cap off and the f-stop open for a couple of days, some times week.

I didn''t know the big Rokkor was a glower.

Good to know. This is the best non Leica lens I own. Maybe not so technically when compared to my Pentax limiteds, and I wish it worked on a modern camera system, but the Rokkor 58/1.2 is a killer lens.

 

[gb hill]

I didn''t know the big Rokkor was a glower.

Good to know. This is the best non Leica lens I own. Maybe not so technically when compared to my Pentax limiteds, and I wish it worked on a modern camera system, but the Rokkor 58/1.2 is a killer lens.

I hope you meant killer in a good way!😀 As far as having radioactive glass. I have 2. The 50/1.4 Tak & the industar 61/ld. I don't worry about either one. Working in the oil industry, oil will probably claim me before my lenses do!🙂

 

[K14]

I hope you meant killer in a good way!😀 As far as having radioactive glass. I have 2. The 50/1.4 Tak & the industar 61/ld. I don't worry about either one. Working in the oil industry, oil will probably claim me before my lenses do!🙂

I'm right there with you Greg! I'm not worried about that Aero Ektar in the closet. Mothballed a tin can destroyer, must have stripped out a ton of asbestos, without a mask. 5th grade teacher showing us his milk bottle of mercury and then spilling it accidentally on the floor, of course all of us kiddies scooping up the little balls. 😀 I'm toast but I assume most of us are too...

Lenses are the least of my worries.

Cheers!
Gary

 

[nikon_sam]

I've never removed asbestos but I have played with mercury...still have some in the closet somewhere and "No" I don't play with it...anymore...

 

[Johnny RF]

So does anyone have any comment on handling a radioactive glass lens? Must you wash your hands after handling? Will there be problems touching your eyes or mouth after touching the glass?

 

[Chris101]

So does anyone have any comment on handling a radioactive glass lens? Must you wash your hands after handling? Will there be problems touching your eyes or mouth after touching the glass?

No. The thorium is locked into the matrix of the glass - it isn't friable. That is, it's won't come off when touched. No thorium will transfer from the glass to your hands.

Same for uranium glass.

 

[slm]

Hi Everyone, I was reading through this thread because I just bought a Minolta Rokkor 28mm f2.5, which apparently contains rare earth elements too (thorium from what i've read). Does any know specifically for this lens, if it is indeed thorium emitting alpha radiation (and nothing to worry about) ?

Many thanks
steven

 

[crawdiddy]

I tested my Canon FD 55mm f/1.2 recently. Nothing coming from the front element. When I held the geiger counter near the rear element, there was perhaps 5-10x background level. In contrast, an antique watch dial (probably radium, for god's sake) was much hotter.

I don't worry about the lens, and the results are very nice.

 

[kram]

The thorium is bound into the glass (which is what they do with high level waste) so it will not come out. The concern is with the gamma radiation. I guess they stop using thoriated glass, because when they ground the lens elements into shape, they were producing very dust which could be breathed in. Having extremely fine glass powder in nooks and crannies is no big deal (basically, grime). However, having radioactive powder surrounding workers in nooks and crannies, is not so good (internal and external exposure):bang:

 

[yingxuy]

I never measured mine, I do not sleep. I have it comfortable. I think there are more than just the lens, will be in the same boat, about radioactive smoke detectors.

 

[kram]

I second Chris101 comments. You can use your uranium fruit bowl to store fruit in. However, the UK'S HSE states that if your fruit gets really ripe (some people like ripe fruit, I'm thinking of my father any the bananas he eats- ugg), the acid could dissolve some of the glass and therefore uranium, this could be ingested. I personally think people's over indulgence of alcohol is going to give them more problems than worrying about tiny amounts of uranium from glass on there fruit.