Lens Cleaning Solution

[RalphLambrecht]

READ the inert ingredients in rubbing alcohol.
Some is water (OK), but others have other "stuff" that may get left behind on the lens (NOT good).

I found isopropyl alcohol 99% at the local pharmacy; it dries residue free.

 

[guangong]

Germany is such a nanny state that one cannot buy household ammonia in a grocery store? As Charlie Brown would say,”Good grief!”

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Denatured alcohol is alcohol with something added to make it taste bad so people don't drink it. The basic alcohol before denaturing could be any of the common ones, ethyl, isopropyl, or methyl.

The fuel for cigarette lighters is usually naptha, a mild liquid solvent that is not so plastic-safe as IPA, caution is advised when using it in the vicinity of plastic parts. Having no water content it is a very good lens cleaning fluid that leaves no moisture trails.

Not quite, the additive is usually methanol, which merely makes you go blind.

MSDS - http://thinkbox.case.edu/sites/engineering.case.edu.thinkbox/files/msds-1-denatured_alcohol.pdf

 

[Billy Axeman]

Another vote for isopropyl alcohol. Contrary to other types of alcohol it doesn't dissolve (certain) plastics and paint.

It is generally believed that a higher percentage is better, but alcohol is very hygroscopic. So if you open a bottle of 99% it immediately starts sucking up moisture from the air and it is 95% before you know it.

 

[tedr1]

Not quite, the additive is usually methanol, which merely makes you go blind.

MSDS - http://thinkbox.case.edu/sites/engineering.case.edu.thinkbox/files/msds-1-denatured_alcohol.pdf

The document at the link shows an equal mixture of two alcohols, ethanol (ethyl alcohol) and methanol (methyl alcohol) and also a few percent of a ketone. The two alcohols are both solvents and can also be used a fuels. Ethanol is drinking alcohol. Methanol is poisonous. It is not the methanol that tastes bad, that is caused by additives deliberately introduced for their bad taste, in the case of the page linked to that is possibly the purpose of the few percent ketone.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

The document at the link shows an equal mixture of two alcohols, ethanol (ethyl alcohol) and methanol (methyl alcohol) and also a few percent of a ketone. The two alcohols are both solvents and can also be used a fuels. Ethanol is drinking alcohol. Methanol is poisonous. It is not the methanol that tastes bad, that is caused by additives deliberately introduced for their bad taste, in the case of the page linked to that is possibly the purpose of the few percent ketone.

Historically, "methylated spirits" (as it was known in Great Britain) was 10% methanol; it can be, and was, consumed as a drink, resulting in death and blindness particularly during American prohibition. I don't think they were overly concerned about the taste.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Germany is such a nanny state that one cannot buy household ammonia in a grocery store? As Charlie Brown would say,”Good grief!”

environmental protection agencies do not allow it.

 

[tedr1]

Some people in America believe in pi**ing in the well.

 

[fdonadio]

I used lighter fluid (naphtha) with good results.

I clean (very dirty) film with hexane (benzine?) and have used it on lenses.

Both dry really fast and don’t leave marks.

 

[CMoore]

Holy Cow.!
I am just a beginner, but...i cannot imagine a Lens, or especially Film, ever needing Benzene or Naphtha.
Besides a thinning agent, we used those things to get Grease/Tar off of metal and construction equipment, or remove the adhesive that is left behind when Duct/Masking tape is left on a surface (especially in the sun) for several years.
Are those chemicals found in that Anti-Stat stuff.?

 

[fdonadio]

Holy Cow.!
I am just a beginner, but...i cannot imagine a Lens, or especially Film, ever needing Benzene or Naphtha.

I was told, about 20 years ago, that the best thing to clean off smudges and fingerprints from film before scanning was hexane. I have several slides that were cleaned with hexane over 10 years ago and they look as good as they looked then.

I never tried naphtha on film. I used it to clean stuck dirt deposits (a few drops and a very soft brush to loosen the dirt) and fingerprints on lenses.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

For remouving fingerprints and alikr, spit on it the enzymes will solve the grease.

 

[Pieter12]

Just anecdotal evidence here, but I ruined a pair of eyeglasses cleaning them regularly with Zeiss lens cleaning wipes. I was told by the optician that the alcohol ruined the anti-reflective coating of the lenses. I just use dish soap and warm water for my eyeglasses now. Still use Zeiss spray (not the wipes) for my camera lenses--it does not seem to have any alcohol content that I can tell.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Just anecdotal evidence here, but I ruined a pair of eyeglasses cleaning them regularly with Zeiss lens cleaning wipes. I was told by the optician that the alcohol ruined the anti-reflective coating of the lenses. I just use dish soap and warm water for my eyeglasses now. Still use Zeiss spray (not the wipes) for my camera lenses--it does not seem to have any alcohol content that I can tell.

I was told the same thing when the coatings on my eyeglasses started fail after less than one year of use.

What I can't understand is this: Why does Zeiss, a legendary name in optics, and one of the companies first involved with the development of antireflective coatings, advertise their alcohol-based lens wipes as recommended to "Safely and quickly clean eyeglasses ..." and "Safe for use on lenses with anti-reflective coatings" - while at the same time, some vendors in the eyeglasses business are saying, "Not so"?

Is Zeiss selling a product that has not been adequately tested for safety on coated eyeglasses, so they are somehow unaware of the problem with anti-reflective coatings?

Is Zeiss aware that their product can shorten the life of coating on eyeglasses - but cares more about profits than destroying consumers' eyeglasses?

Are the eyeglasses vendors trying to hide the shortcomings of their anti-reflective coatings by unjustly blaiming Zeiss and similar alcohol containing products?

As for the equally significant question, "Are the Zeiss Lens Wipes safe for camera lenses?" - who knows for sure? I believe the coatings on camera lenses are much more durable than the anti-reflective coatings used on eyeglasses, BUT. If Zeiss is wrong about their Lens Wipe product being safe for eyeglasses, how can I trust them when they say it's safe for my camera lenses?

The individually wrapped <Zeiss Lens Wipes> do have different ingredients from the <Zeiss liquid cleaning spray> The lens wipes list both propanol and ethanol, while the liquid spray lists 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)ethanol, described as "Butyl diglycol" - glycols are a type of alcohol, as are many substances ending in -ol.

Zeiss has a third product called <Display Wipes> which are packaged as individual wipes similar to the Lens Wipes, but marketed for cleaning LED screens. These are promoted as being "alcohol-free" because, as they say, "Unfortunately, aggressive cleaning agents containing alcohol can attack optical surfaces and many moistened cleaning wipes contain alcohol." No kidding, Zeiss, like the ones you sell. Neither eyeglasses nor camera lenses are specifically mentioned, but the Display Wipes are said to be "suitable for all optical surfaces"

So it makes no sense to me that Zeiss is marketing a product specifically for use on eyeglasses, cameras and binoculars, which contains alcohol - while at the same time marketing an alcohol-free free product said to safer for optical surfaces because it does not contain alcohol.

 

[MattKing]

Is it Zeiss who is doing the marketing, or just another case of someone licensing the name?

 

[Pieter12]

Interestingly, the "Zeiss Lens Cleaning Wipe" is made in China and distributed by Carl Zeiss Vision, San Diego, CA (but it does have a copyright from Carl Zeiss Vision International GmbH). The "Pre-Moistioned Lens Cloth" doesn't state where it is made and it is from Carl Zeiss Optical, Chester, Va. The "Zeiss Cleaning Fluid for High-Quality Optics" is made in China and just says made for Zeiss.

 

[BAC1967]

I use dish soap for really dirty filters and lenses that I have taken apart. I wouldn't want to get water moisture into a lens that I can't dry properly. The dish soap works great for lenses that may have grease from a shutter deposited on them. Just dry everything thoroughly before putting it back together. Some cleaners just seem to smear the grease around, dish soap like Dawn take it off easily.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Is it Zeiss who is doing the marketing, or just another case of someone licensing the name?

On the back of the box of Zeiss Lens Cleaning Wipes it gives the web address <www.vision.zeiss.com> and from that website I linked to the home page at <https://www.zeiss.com/corporate/int/home.html?vaURL=www.zeiss.de/en> and from there to company history at <https://www.zeiss.com/corporate/int/about-zeiss/history.html>

And this webpage <https://www.zeiss.com/corporate/int/about-zeiss/history/history-of-zeiss-subsidiaries.html> says:
"2010 - Carl Zeiss Vision becomes a 100 percent subsidiary of Carl Zeiss AG."

 

[George Nova Scotia]

Denatured alcohol is alcohol with something added to make it taste bad so people don't drink it. The basic alcohol before denaturing could be any of the common ones, ethyl, isopropyl, or methyl.

The fuel for cigarette lighters is usually naptha, a mild liquid solvent that is not so plastic-safe as IPA, caution is advised when using it in the vicinity of plastic parts. Having no water content it is a very good lens cleaning fluid that leaves no moisture trails.

Methyl alcohol is often used to denature other alcohols
It is posionous and it's also absorbed thru the skin. No longer recommended for most uses.

 

[John51]

The antidote to methyl alcohol is ethyl alcohol.

 

[CMoore]

Methyl alcohol is often used to denature other alcohols
It is posionous and it's also absorbed thru the skin. No longer recommended for most uses.

It has been a staple in the painters union for years......i imagine industry avoids a tax by using denatured alcohol.?

 

[jim10219]

I was told the same thing when the coatings on my eyeglasses started fail after less than one year of use.

What I can't understand is this: Why does Zeiss, a legendary name in optics, and one of the companies first involved with the development of antireflective coatings, advertise their alcohol-based lens wipes as recommended to "Safely and quickly clean eyeglasses ..." and "Safe for use on lenses with anti-reflective coatings" - while at the same time, some vendors in the eyeglasses business are saying, "Not so"?

Is Zeiss selling a product that has not been adequately tested for safety on coated eyeglasses, so they are somehow unaware of the problem with anti-reflective coatings?

Is Zeiss aware that their product can shorten the life of coating on eyeglasses - but cares more about profits than destroying consumers' eyeglasses?

Are the eyeglasses vendors trying to hide the shortcomings of their anti-reflective coatings by unjustly blaiming Zeiss and similar alcohol containing products?

As for the equally significant question, "Are the Zeiss Lens Wipes safe for camera lenses?" - who knows for sure? I believe the coatings on camera lenses are much more durable than the anti-reflective coatings used on eyeglasses, BUT. If Zeiss is wrong about their Lens Wipe product being safe for eyeglasses, how can I trust them when they say it's safe for my camera lenses?

The individually wrapped <Zeiss Lens Wipes> do have different ingredients from the <Zeiss liquid cleaning spray> The lens wipes list both propanol and ethanol, while the liquid spray lists 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)ethanol, described as "Butyl diglycol" - glycols are a type of alcohol, as are many substances ending in -ol.

Zeiss has a third product called <Display Wipes> which are packaged as individual wipes similar to the Lens Wipes, but marketed for cleaning LED screens. These are promoted as being "alcohol-free" because, as they say, "Unfortunately, aggressive cleaning agents containing alcohol can attack optical surfaces and many moistened cleaning wipes contain alcohol." No kidding, Zeiss, like the ones you sell. Neither eyeglasses nor camera lenses are specifically mentioned, but the Display Wipes are said to be "suitable for all optical surfaces"

So it makes no sense to me that Zeiss is marketing a product specifically for use on eyeglasses, cameras and binoculars, which contains alcohol - while at the same time marketing an alcohol-free free product said to safer for optical surfaces because it does not contain alcohol.

It's because they're safe on most lens coatings. The problem isn't Zeiss. The problem is the lens manufacturers. They can make lenses where the coatings are embeded into the "glass", and they won't be effected by the rubbing alcohol. That's how camera lenses are made, and that's why they don't react to alcohol. But they don't. They use overly delicate coatings and materials on purpose.

So the real problem isn't the wipes. The real problem is the eyeglass industry. They overcharge for their cheap, plastic lenses. And they make them delicate on purpose so that you'll have to replace them more often. They charge ridiculous amounts for coatings that barely last, and while some companies offer coatings that last longer, they charge you even more ridiculous amounts for them. They can do this because Luxottica owns the majority of the eyeglass industry brands (like Oakley, Ray Ban, Ralph Loren, Chanel, Coach, Michael Kors), and a large chunk of retailers (like Lens Crafter, Pearle Vision, and Target Optical) and set the prices that everyone else adheres to. They even own Eyemed Vision Care insurance. It's a monopoly that everyone ignores because it's all conducted behind closed doors out of public view.

The whole industry is corrupted. They lobby the government to makes sure you can't buy glasses without a prescription. I guess it's to keep the general population from overdosing on sharpness. They claim it's so they can make sure that you get the correct prescription, but the last time I went to get my glasses done, they gave me the wrong prescription two times before finally getting it right. And to add insult to injury, they blamed me for the mix-up, since I was the one who determined my own prescription when they sat me in the chair with the ophthalmoscope. So basically I determined my own prescription, but I just needed a doctor in the room to keep me company, or else I was breaking the law. And all of the other equipment they use is fully automated. I just stare and something, it does something, and prints out something for the doctor to read back to me. Because until I get my prescription right, I can't be trusted to read things correctly. Even the corrective laser eye surgeries often require an ophthalmologist to run, which is ludicrous because all they do is push a button to start the machine and then a computer does everything for them. A barista could do an identical job, at a fraction of the cost. But a barista doesn't have the political power to make that happen.

My point being, don't blame Zeiss. They actually make some really nice eyeglasses, made out of real glass that last a whole lot longer than the plastic crap most places sell. And their wipes work just fine. Blame the eyeglass industry as a whole and the blind eye our politicians turn towards them. They're the ones who made your glasses specifically designed to fail when exposed to regular glass cleaners. And not so they could sell you specialized glass cleaners. But so they could sell you more glasses when you did what you were supposed to do.

 

[runswithsizzers]

It's because they're safe on most lens coatings. The problem isn't Zeiss. The problem is the lens manufacturers. They can make lenses where the coatings are embeded into the "glass", and they won't be effected by the rubbing alcohol. That's how camera lenses are made, and that's why they don't react to alcohol. But they don't. They use overly delicate coatings and materials on purpose.

So the real problem isn't the wipes. The real problem is the eyeglass industry. They overcharge for their cheap, plastic lenses. And they make them delicate on purpose so that you'll have to replace them more often. They charge ridiculous amounts for coatings that barely last, and while some companies offer coatings that last longer, they charge you even more ridiculous amounts for them. They can do this because Luxottica owns the majority of the eyeglass industry brands (like Oakley, Ray Ban, Ralph Loren, Chanel, Coach, Michael Kors), and a large chunk of retailers (like Lens Crafter, Pearle Vision, and Target Optical) and set the prices that everyone else adheres to. They even own Eyemed Vision Care insurance. It's a monopoly that everyone ignores because it's all conducted behind closed doors out of public view.

The whole industry is corrupted. They lobby the government to makes sure you can't buy glasses without a prescription. I guess it's to keep the general population from overdosing on sharpness. They claim it's so they can make sure that you get the correct prescription, but the last time I went to get my glasses done, they gave me the wrong prescription two times before finally getting it right. And to add insult to injury, they blamed me for the mix-up, since I was the one who determined my own prescription when they sat me in the chair with the ophthalmoscope. So basically I determined my own prescription, but I just needed a doctor in the room to keep me company, or else I was breaking the law. And all of the other equipment they use is fully automated. I just stare and something, it does something, and prints out something for the doctor to read back to me. Because until I get my prescription right, I can't be trusted to read things correctly. Even the corrective laser eye surgeries often require an ophthalmologist to run, which is ludicrous because all they do is push a button to start the machine and then a computer does everything for them. A barista could do an identical job, at a fraction of the cost. But a barista doesn't have the political power to make that happen.

My point being, don't blame Zeiss. They actually make some really nice eyeglasses, made out of real glass that last a whole lot longer than the plastic crap most places sell. And their wipes work just fine. Blame the eyeglass industry as a whole and the blind eye our politicians turn towards them. They're the ones who made your glasses specifically designed to fail when exposed to regular glass cleaners. And not so they could sell you specialized glass cleaners. But so they could sell you more glasses when you did what you were supposed to do.

Based on my limited research, I am pretty sure almost everything you say here is true.

But I am still not clear about how Zeiss fits into all this. Zeiss do make lenses for eyeglasses, so they are part of "the eyeglass industry" And Zeiss are one of those lens manufacturers who charges a lot of money for their lenses and coatings. But are Zeiss overcharging for overly delicate coatings that fail prematurely like many (most?) of the Luxottica brands do? I don't know the answer.

But I do know the marketing of Zeiss lens cleaning products is contradictory and confusing when they say on the back of one box, alcohol cleaners are no problem for eyeglasses and camera lenses - but on the back of another box, they say alcohol cleaners should be avoided on optical surfaces.

 

[runswithsizzers]

To answer the OP's qustion, assuming alcohol is safe for use on camera lenses (and I believe it is), I used to make my own home-made lens cleaning solution from high proof ethanol mixed with deionized water at 50+50. At the time, I had access to reagent grade ethanol and di water at the lab where I worked. Not sure what is available in Germany, but here in America liquor stores carry grain alcohol which is distilled to 95% ethanol (190 proof). One common brand is Everclear. Deionized water is available in grocery stores.

 

[guangong]

ammonia is hard to get in Germany

What? That’s hard to believe, but I accept your word. Household ammonia is sold in grocery stores here in quart and gallon sizes. Why is it considered a dangerous chemical in Germany?