Originally posted by glasbak It's not a big deal,
Sorry, my post did not use "international" English.
In colloquial English, "If . . . is such a big deal, . . . "
implies that I don't think it is.
Originally posted by glasbak but using a radioactive eyepiece could be unadvisable because of the short distance to the eye.
That seemed to be the issue raised in the report David quoted.
Originally posted by glasbak I have read that if you put a radioactive takumar 50/1.4 for a few weeks on a piece of photographic paper, you could see some effect, but in a camera the distance film to lens is already quite large (45mm), and the radiation very low.
There were times when people used to carry film next to lenses in a bag.
With the film only a couple of millimeters from the glass,
one might have expected any significant radiation to be noticeable.