Do sensors wear out through use?

[rogerxnz]

Could the sensor of an Aptus 17 with 160,000 actuations be as good as new?  Do sensors ever require overhauling after a specified number of actuations?

As far as I know, an Aptus has no moving parts relating to the image-capturing process.  In theory, the number of actuations is irrelevant to the quality of a back's images.  Is this correct?

[Andy M]

160,000?!! Wow!

What price?

[Tim Lookingbill]

Interesting question about sensors.

I wouldn't think silicon chips would deteriate too bad over time. The RGB Bayer filter might fade. I don't know what that's made of. I can only guess on this. It'ld be interesting to get some verified info.

Maybe exposed to the elements changing lenses on a DSLR might corrode the sensor over time.

Electronics in general seem to last forever. I've got a 1970 Sansui 2000A amp still playing my CD's through my 1984 Norman Lab model 82 two-way speakers. Oh what a sweet sound they make. I wouldn't trade them for a Bose setup if you paid me and you'ld have at the price they go for.

Please excuse my drifting off topic there. Quite fond of my setup as you can tell.

[DiaAzul]

Could the sensor of an Aptus 17 with 160,000 actuations be as good as new?  Do sensors ever require overhauling after a specified number of actuations?

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163372\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Electronic components do deteriorate over time. To give an equivalent analogy which should help put things into perspective semiconductors, like glass, are silicon based compounds. Over a long period of time they have properties similar to a very viscous liquid. If you have seen an old glass window then you will have noticed that the glass has distorted over time as gravity reshapes the glass. This should give you an idea of the timeframes we are talking about when discussing aging in semiconductors for the situation you are describing (10s of years rather than months).

The most likely case of deterioration in any electronic equipment is chemical attack from airborne pollutants. It is important to keep any equipment clean and wiped down with a damp cloth (no chemical cleaners) to prevent damage over a long period of time.

[JDG]

Technically yes the do lose some sensitivity over time.  However in all practicality they do not.

For instance a CCD with a native iso of 50 might measure at ISO 49 after something like 500,000 captures.  A back with 160,000 capture will serve you well for quite some time, although with the Aptus I might have some concern over the life of the cooling fan. With a warranty you should be fine.

[Ted Steppan]

"If you have seen an old glass window then you will have noticed that the glass has distorted over time as gravity reshapes the glass."


I know this is not the least bit related to photography (or this post) but, glass does not flow over time.  This is a fairly common misconception.  Glass is an amorphous solid, it does not change it's shape due to gravity.  The window argument has been proven to be untrue.  That's all.

[condit79]

I would say that you´ll be fine as backs have few moving parts.  As stated before, your biggest concern will be the fan.  My friend still lets his assistants fire up and use his old 13megapixel imacon back for their personal work and the files are pretty fantastic still...

Oh and about the glass and gravity, even if that could affect the back, it wouldn´t have anything to do with actuations (that´s the question here) but with the actual age of the back.  Actuations show that the last photographer shot with the back quite a bit, but in general those who purchase medium format backs treat them with great care.

[jjj]

I know this is not the least bit related to photography (or this post) but, glass does not flow over time.  This is a fairly common misconception.  Glass is an amorphous solid, it does not change it's shape due to gravity.  The window argument has been proven to be untrue.  That's all.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163625\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Apparently the reason this misconception arose was from the nature of how glass was made in years gone by, i.e. not very flat - "The sheets [of glass] were thicker towards the edge of the disc and were usually installed with the heavier side at the bottom."

Having said that, just because something is a solid does not preclude it from flowing like a liquid. Ice and rock can both flow, albeit not that quickly. Lots and lots of pressure needed though!

Oh and about the glass and gravity, even if that could affect the back, it wouldn´t have anything to do with actuations (that´s the question here) but with the actual age of the back.  [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164544\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Imagine if this was an issue, you'd have to remember to turn your camera the other way round each night!  

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

"If you have seen an old glass window then you will have noticed that the glass has distorted over time as gravity reshapes the glass."
I know this is not the least bit related to photography (or this post) but, glass does not flow over time.  This is a fairly common misconception.  Glass is an amorphous solid, it does not change it's shape due to gravity.  The window argument has been proven to be untrue.  That's all.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ted,

I am one of the many who had teachers in school who asserted that glass is a slow-moving liquid (like Silly Putty, but more so), so I was skeptical when you said "The window argument has been proven to be untrue" without giving a reference.

A quick Googling turned up this brief article from Scientific American that confirms what you said: [a href=\"http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa004&articleID=EB5F29F9-E7F2-99DF-3AEAF645B66DB532]Sci Am: Does Glass Flow?[/url]

I learn something new every day on the LL forum.  

[Gary Ferguson]

Phase One subjected some of their backs to a massive test programme with millions of exposures. Zero image quality degradation comparing the first to the last. Also I've heard stories of catalogue photographers using medium format backs for hundreds of thousands of exposures (wearing out a Hasselblad 555ELD camera in the process), again zero degradation in image quality.