Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 52

Thread: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

  1. #31
    Intrepid Camera
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    56

    Re: Disasterous Consequences

    Quote Originally Posted by brianentz View Post
    Unbelievably, the lens board appears to be the problem. It is a genuine Intrepid lensboard and it isn't lightproof. I put a flashlight up against the lensboard and it just shines through. Attachment 208383
    It sure looked light proof. I'm aghast. I will let Intrepid know about this.
    Hello, I believe Naomi has all ready spoken to you about this but I just wanted to personally apologise that you received a faulty lens board, they are supposed to have a rubberised light proof backing (similar material to our bellows) and the ones you received did not have the backing applied. I'm really sorry this wasn't spotted before they were sent out. We have been through all our current stock of lens boards and can confirm they are all light proof. We will have some replacement boards on the way to you tomorrow and more than happy to add in a box of film to make up for the lost sheets.

    If you have any questions feel free to reply to me on here or Naomi's email

    - Max

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Iowa City, Iowa
    Posts
    1,206

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    Wow, that's a fast response from a supplier. Well done.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,957

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    Not impressed. Very possible reason for using FR4 which is a printed circuit board material very common in the electronics industry is cost. FR4 is low cost and easy to have made in the shape needed due to the widely availability of manufacturing facilities and low cost for the finished part. There is no possible way FR4 is light tight as delivered or painted. If rubberized, that coating has a very good possibility of developing pin holes light leaks as the material ages and flakes off in unpredictable ways. This is every reason to never used any lens boards made with this material and coated with any material.

    Given the cost of photographic materials, resourced required to make images and the fact images made could be near impossible to replicate, the risk of a pin hole or worst light leak due to a known problem lens board design is not tolerable in any way.

    IMO, ditch the problem maker, apply what is needed to get a proper lens board made of aluminum or wood as these are well proven lens board materials with a record and history of being durable-reliable.

    Any manufacture that is willing to sell a product like lens boards made of FR4 then coated says much about the company and those involved with their product design and manufacturing.



    Bernice

  4. #34
    Intrepid Camera
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    56

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Not impressed. Very possible reason for using FR4 which is a printed circuit board material very common in the electronics industry is cost. FR4 is low cost and easy to have made in the shape needed due to the widely availability of manufacturing facilities and low cost for the finished part. There is no possible way FR4 is light tight as delivered or painted. If rubberized, that coating has a very good possibility of developing pin holes light leaks as the material ages and flakes off in unpredictable ways. This is every reason to never used any lens boards made with this material and coated with any material.

    Given the cost of photographic materials, resourced required to make images and the fact images made could be near impossible to replicate, the risk of a pin hole or worst light leak due to a known problem lens board design is not tolerable in any way.

    IMO, ditch the problem maker, apply what is needed to get a proper lens board made of aluminum or wood as these are well proven lens board materials with a record and history of being durable-reliable.

    Any manufacture that is willing to sell a product like lens boards made of FR4 then coated says much about the company and those involved with their product design and manufacturing.



    Bernice
    Hi Bernice,

    thanks for your thoughts, rubberised was probably the wrong term to use, the coating is Vinyl, tested thoroughly and holds up well under heavy use. no need to worry about pinholes in the material. The reason we have gone with fibreglass for the boards is as you state, we can utilise the massive PCB manufacturing industry and have thousands of them made for considerably less than an aluminium or wood equivalent, a saving we pass onto the customer. Despite your assumptions about the boards they do work very well and are just as good as an aluminium or wood board, and a bit lighter too!

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,957

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    Make a correct lens board out of wood or aluminum. Cost reduction on an absolutely crucial part (lens board) is absurd.

    One sheet of 4x5 color transparency film about $5-7 USD, add processing per sheet. Lose one sheet of film due to a light leak of any kind results in the lost of those materials and cost involved. More important, lost of an image that is often impossible to replicate.


    ~"Penny Wise _ Pound Foolish"~


    No possible way you're going to convince me a coated FR4 lens board will be as good and reliable as an aluminum or high quality wood lens board. Having been around FR4 via the electronics industry for decades, this is simply not a good idea or choice.

    If the aluminum or wood lens board cost $20 - $50 or more, so be it as losing any sheet of film due to an unexpected light leak is simply unacceptable
    in every condition.


    Bernice



    Quote Originally Posted by Max Grew View Post
    Hi Bernice,

    thanks for your thoughts, rubberised was probably the wrong term to use, the coating is Vinyl, tested thoroughly and holds up well under heavy use. no need to worry about pinholes in the material. The reason we have gone with fibreglass for the boards is as you state, we can utilise the massive PCB manufacturing industry and have thousands of them made for considerably less than an aluminium or wood equivalent, a saving we pass onto the customer. Despite your assumptions about the boards they do work very well and are just as good as an aluminium or wood board, and a bit lighter too!

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    395

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    With waterjet cutting available very easy and low cost I see no advantage in using FR4. In fact unclad FR4 might be even more expensive than plain alu as it is a less standard product than copper clad FP4. Neither is the precision used in PCB manufacturing needed. And making a .dxf of something as simple as a lens board isn't that hard. Shouldn't cost more than a few money units ($//€) piece.

    I agree with Bernice that this is a badly inspired choice.
    Expert in non-working solutions.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    359

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    Go to eBay and buy a CNC aluminum lens board from Luland for like $13.99 free shipping.
    No issues, and will last forever.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,957

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    Cost to water jet cut FR4 or aluminum is about the same. Since the FR4 is coated, finishing cost would be very similar. Very possible raw material cost would be more for the FR4 as non-copper plated FR4 is not a standard item.


    Bernice


    Quote Originally Posted by Havoc View Post
    With waterjet cutting available very easy and low cost I see no advantage in using FR4. In fact unclad FR4 might be even more expensive than plain alu as it is a less standard product than copper clad FP4. Neither is the precision used in PCB manufacturing needed. And making a .dxf of something as simple as a lens board isn't that hard. Shouldn't cost more than a few money units ($//) piece.

    I agree with Bernice that this is a badly inspired choice.

  9. #39
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    15,364

    Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    I second that, I have bought many lensboards from Luland

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi7475 View Post
    Go to eBay and buy a CNC aluminum lens board from Luland for like $13.99 free shipping.
    No issues, and will last forever.
    2022

  10. #40
    Intrepid Camera
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    56

    Post Re: Disastrous Consequences (solved: fog with Intrepid lensboard)

    Quote Originally Posted by Havoc View Post
    With waterjet cutting available very easy and low cost I see no advantage in using FR4. In fact unclad FR4 might be even more expensive than plain alu as it is a less standard product than copper clad FP4. Neither is the precision used in PCB manufacturing needed. And making a .dxf of something as simple as a lens board isn't that hard. Shouldn't cost more than a few money units ($//) piece.

    I agree with Bernice that this is a badly inspired choice.
    I really do appreciate everyones opinions on this but FR4 is a great choice for our lens boards I will explain why,

    Aluminium boards = Cutting (water jet or laser) + Deburring + Tumbling or Linishing + Anodising + Laser engraving our logo + high shipping cost when done at our scale = surprisingly high cost of lens board

    Wood boards = it's very hard to find 2mm thick wood that can be easily held down and cut. making the 100s of boards we need each month would be impracticle

    FR4 = board arrives all ready duburred, finished in black and with logo on it as this is all part of standard pre existing product manufacturing process (PCBs) they are excellent quality light weight and work just as well as any other material we have used.

    We used to make boards out of aluminium using the method above, it was a pain. I wouldn't even bother trying to make them out of wood. Work holding 2mm wood is nightmare inducing. I know lots of people on here have all sorts of experience in a range of fields but as someone who has had to make literally tens of thousands of lens boards over the last 6 years the FR4 process is miles better than anything else we have tried, and we have tried all sorts! maybe its not your cup of tea but they make for great lens boards and the whole production process is so simple we would never look back.

    if you are still not sure then we will have to just agree to disagree

    - Max

Similar Threads

  1. spherical aberration solved?
    By Bruce Watson in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 10-Aug-2019, 12:21
  2. Tiny chip in rear element: consequences ?
    By Cor in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 2-Mar-2016, 07:52
  3. Problem solved
    By ignatiusjk in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 4-Sep-2008, 17:16
  4. Consequences of Fatali incident
    By QT Luong in forum On Photography
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 5-May-2001, 16:56

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •