Optical Wonder Baader Fluid

[Timebandit]

 

 

1 hour ago, Dave In Vermont said:

     , say, a drug-store (chemist) in the UK or Europa,                       

Dave

 

 

If in the UK it's probably better if you don't go round asking for " a drug store" as you will probably be directed to some very dodgy people or the local PC plod may wish to put the hand cuffs on you ? ?  

[JonC]

Ebay has ACS grade solvents including acetone and methanol. Unfortunately I no longer have access to HPLC grade solvents I make GCs now so work with UHP gases, impurity measurements down to low ppb.

[Dave In Vermont]

3 hours ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

 

 

If in the UK it's probably better if you don't go round asking for " a drug store" as you will probably be directed to some very dodgy people or the local PC plod may wish to put the hand cuffs on you ? ?  

If in the US and ask for a 'chemist'- you'd likely draw a blank stare. Or the person would figure you were a dangerous psychotic and call the police - who might shoot you!

Especially in the current sociological climate.

Dave

 

p.s. - anyone got an English~American Dictionary? Perhaps one from Monty Python.....?

My nipples explode with delight?

evaD

[johninderby]

This might help.  

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/british-and-american-terms

Quite a few modern American words / terms are those that used to be used in the UK a couple of hundred years ago but while they have changed in the UK have stayed the same in the US.

              John

[101nut]

4 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

I wholly agree, Dave. I liked using spectroscopic grade at work if I could get hold of it.  There was no problem at work buying chemicals from a supplier like Aldrich. But whether they would accept a purchase from a private individual I don't know having never tried it.  

For reference, a lot of 'legit' UK suppliers are getting very tight on only supplying to registered companies.

AndyG

[Ouroboros]

It's funny how words crisscross the Atlantic. Something I've noticed in my six decades is how Americanisms, though understood by the British, but not in common usage, suddenly  become widespread. Examples include words like gotten, movie, gas (for petrol).   Some Americanisms have come into fashion, then gone out of fashion and then come into common usage. Cool is such an example. In the 50s it was cool to say cool. By the 70s you were decidedly uncool if you said cool. Then from the 90s cool became acceptable again. Where the word is now I have no idea. I still hear it from time to time. I predict the next one is going to be math. Most Brits say maths, and always have. But I'm now hearing it increasingly and would guess this will become the norm. 

[Ouroboros]

10 minutes ago, 101nut said:

For reference, a lot of 'legit' UK suppliers are getting very tight on only supplying to registered companies.

AndyG

I would guess as much. 

[Dave In Vermont]

I learned about how the language of the former colony tends to be retained in the form when it was first 'imported' from the 'mother-country.' while the latter's language evolves and changes. Found this out at Harvard. The example used was French and French-Canadian.

Fascinating! At least to me.

Thanks, all!

Dave

[Highburymark]

13 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

It's funny how words crisscross the Atlantic. Something I've noticed in my six decades is how Americanisms, though understood by the British, but not in common usage, suddenly  become widespread. Examples include words like gotten, movie, gas (for petrol).   Some Americanisms have come into fashion, then gone out of fashion and then come into common usage. Cool is such an example. In the 50s it was cool to say cool. By the 70s you were decidedly uncool if you said cool. Then from the 90s cool became acceptable again. Where the word is now I have no idea. I still hear it from time to time. I predict the next one is going to be math. Most Brits say maths, and always have. But I'm now hearing it increasingly and would guess this will become the norm. 

"Can I get a cup of coffee"

"How are you?" "I'm good."

"I was like...."

Has taken little more than a decade for these and other phrases to become standard UK English. Think it might take a little longer for '[removed word]' and 'faucet' to make the journey though.

[johninderby]

When growing up in Montreal soon found out that Quebec French was a lot different to the language spoken in France. 

Interesting to see how words come into fashion and then go out then back in again. 

          John

 

 

[Highburymark]

1 hour ago, Highburymark said:

"Can I get a cup of coffee"

"How are you?" "I'm good."

"I was like...."

Has taken little more than a decade for these and other phrases to become standard UK English. Think it might take a little longer for '[removed word]' and 'faucet' to make the journey though.

Oops. 

[ollypenrice]

On 24/11/2017 at 11:58, Timebandit said:

 

And remember to get a blower to get the worst of the dust and grim from the lens first.

Also remember to spray Badder wonder fluid onto a spotlessly clean cloth to clean your lens. . Do not spray BWF directly onto the lens/ glass. 

 

Why's that? I tend to think that the non-intrusive dissolving effect of an initial application reduces the need for wiping force but I'm happy to wrong.

Olly

[Timebandit]

On 24/11/2017 at 10:58, Timebandit said:

 

And remember to get a blower to get the worst of the dust and grim from the lens first.

Also remember to spray Badder wonder fluid onto a spotlessly clean cloth to clean your lens. . Do not spray BWF directly onto the lens/ glass. 

 

 

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Why's that? I tend to think that the non-intrusive dissolving effect of an initial application reduces the need for wiping force but I'm happy to wrong.

Olly

 

Obviously to my mind blowing off as much particles and dust first has a great advantage. The less particles on the lens the better . As it reduces the risk considerably as when cleaning with a wet cloth the less particles, then this reduces the grinding paste possible effects of the cloth / fluid cleaning and therefore reduces the possibility of scratching/ damage to the lens.

 

As for fluid on cloth and not directly onto the lens. To my mind there are a number of advantage. If you spray to much onto a cloth, the cloth either soaks it up or you have the option of getting another cloth and starting again. You spay to much directly onto the lens then you have no choice but to wipe it off the lens. To my mind the less times you wipe the lens when cleaning the better. As the less times you wipe it then the less chance by percentage of causing some type of surface damage. Also by spraying onto the lens to my mind you could get excessive fluid going around the edge of the scope lens possible into the internals of the scope. My understanding is also wonder fluid should be be used sparingly as it is my understanding that it can start to remove coatings if excessively used, therefore I find spraying onto a cloth achieves enough to clean the lens effectiveness in a wet state, but without the possibility of flooding the lens by direct spraying and possible problems as described above. 

 

[Ricochet]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Why's that? I tend to think that the non-intrusive dissolving effect of an initial application reduces the need for wiping force but I'm happy to wrong.

Olly

I think the problem is that that same dissolving effect can also take place when the excess cleaning fluid runs down the sides of the lens and cleans off the edge blackening. 

[ollypenrice]

37 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

Obviously to my mind blowing off as much particles and dust first has a great advantage. The less particles on the lens the better . As it reduces the risk considerably as when cleaning with a wet cloth the less particles, then this reduces the grinding paste possible effects of the cloth / fluid cleaning and therefore reduces the possibility of scratching/ damage to the lens.

 

As for fluid on cloth and not directly onto the lens. To my mind there are a number of advantage. If you spray to much onto a cloth, the cloth either soaks it up or you have the option of getting another cloth and starting again. You spay to much directly onto the lens then you have no choice but to wipe it off the lens. To my mind the less times you wipe the lens when cleaning the better. As the less times you wipe it then the less chance by percentage of causing some type of surface damage. Also by spraying onto the lens to my mind you could get excessive fluid going around the edge of the scope lens possible into the internals of the scope. My understanding is also wonder fluid should be be used sparingly as it is my understanding that it can start to remove coatings if excessively used, therefore I find spraying onto a cloth achieves enough to clean the lens effectiveness in a wet state, but without the possibility of flooding the lens by direct spraying and possible problems as described above. 

 

I don't think Baader will knock out a product which attacks coatings and so I tend to think that spraying it on directly and letting it dissolve contaminants first is better than using a predominantly mechanical action first. I don't pretend to know this for sure but I've never read anything from professionals on lens cleaning which recommended mechanical action first. As I've never seen any ill effects from 'dissolving first' I guess I'll stick with that. 

Olly

[ollypenrice]

3 minutes ago, Ricochet said:

I think the problem is that that same dissolving effect can also take place when the excess cleaning fluid runs down the sides of the lens and cleans off the edge blackening. 

Have you ever seen this? I never have.

Olly

[Timebandit]

7 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I don't think Baader will knock out a product which attacks coatings and so I tend to think that spraying it on directly and letting it dissolve contaminants first is better than using a predominantly mechanical action first. I don't pretend to know this for sure but I've never read anything from professionals on lens cleaning which recommended mechanical action first. As I've never seen any ill effects from 'dissolving first' I guess I'll stick with that. 

Olly

 

I not saying Baader would knock out a product that would attack coatings. But if I remember correctly I spoke to a chap that supplied such products and I think there was a mention not to over use a product due to possible effect of over use on possible coatings. I suppose its a chemical and a cleaning product so this is possible. I understand you are not supposed to use it on mirror coating due to possible effect on coatings used on mirrors. Again I suppose the over use of any cleaning chemical could have an effect depending on the type and make up and hardness  of coatings used?

 

 

[Ricochet]

7 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Have you ever seen this? I never have.

Olly

I don't know. I've just trusted the advice not to do it rather than risk it on my eyepieces. I did buy a used Meade SWA that had suffered some sort of liquid ingress. There was water staining on the internal lens surfaces but I can't remember the condition of the edge blackening and if I had to redo it. 

[ollypenrice]

1 minute ago, Timebandit said:

 

I not saying Baader would knock out a product that would attack coatings. But if I remember correctly I spoke to a chap that supplied such products and I think there was a mention not to over use a product due to possible effect of over use on possible coatings. I suppose its a chemical and a cleaning product so this is possible. I understand you are not supposed to use it on mirror coating due to possible effect on coatings used on mirrors. Again I suppose the over use of any cleaning chemical could have an effect depending on the type and make up and hardness  of coatings used?

 

 

That adds up to quite a lot of hearsay. I'd go from first principles. The dissolving process is going to separate contaminants from the optical surface and, once loose, they will be removed from it easily. I'm going to stick with 'dissolve first and wipe last' (but a prior 'blow off what you can' makes perfect sense.)

Olly

[Timebandit]

6 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

That adds up to quite a lot of hearsay. I'd go from first principles. The dissolving process is going to separate contaminants from the optical surface and, once loose, they will be removed from it easily. I'm going to stick with 'dissolve first and wipe last' (but a prior 'blow off what you can' makes perfect sense.)

Olly

 

I suppose each to there own. From what I remember it made sense in theory to me .

I have blown then sprayed onto the cloth first and then wipe gently and not used the same cloth twice. It has worked for me without any problems. So as I say each to there own?

 

[Ouroboros]

A reason I probably wouldn't apply fluid directly to the lens is the concern that it might run under the rim holding the lens and dislodge and spread dust and muck across the lens surface. I prefer the more controlled method of applying fluid to a cloth or lens tissue. 

[Piero]

On 25/11/2017 at 09:19, mikeDnight said:

I think you can buy this stuff from any opticians but there are two types. There's the one containing solvents and then there's one which is solvent free. You really need the solvent free version. ☺ It's not expensive and the lens cloth is also well worth buying. The cleaning spray is not just designed for spectacle lenses but also for use on expensive camera lenses too.

Thanks again Mike. I just ordered two alcohol/solvent free cleaning sprays and two lens cloths (same brand you suggested). I know that the Tak and the Zeiss zoom have fluorite elements, but I'm not entirely sure that the Docter, Zeiss barlow, and VIP are completely fluorite less. I will only use the Baader fluid to clean the two TV Pans and TV60 objective. 

[N3ptune]

Many many great advices, thanks. I think maybe the coat I see on my filter could be the fluid itself after all. And like @ollypenrice said, probably better for me not to look at the filter and look trough it instead. Very good advice especially for me.

I think most people here would look at my filter today and say I am crazy, it's perfectly clean.. 

At the end, I want to keep this simple so I'll order a small bottle of Baader Optical Wonder fluid, it's back order at my local store right now but.. there is no rush apparently. And check a few eyeglasses store at the same time to see if they have a fluid without solvent for me. Eyeglasses fluid like @mikeDnight suggestion. 

One store I spoke with, they have a generic fluid (re badged with their name on it like the Starguiders eyepieces) but no mentions about the solvent in it's composition... maybe another store will have an original product with all the informations.

 

 

[N3ptune]

Well what do you know!

A quick Amazon.ca search and I can order the Calotherm multicoated lens cleaner from them, 10$ (;

https://www.amazon.ca/Calotherm-CaloClean-Optical-Cleaning-Spray/dp/B004PY5T44/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1511728258&sr=8-1&keywords=caloclean+lens+cleaner

 

 

[jetstream]

Blue Windex, folded, unscented Kleenex...