The First Casualty... at DVinfo.net

Matthew Nayman · January 7th, 2007, 12:20 AM

Well, it's sad but true. My beloved A1 is sick. It is currently convalescing at Canon Canada. After suffering a "hot pixel" (thank goodness it wasn't the dreaded 'dead pixel' or the far worse 'zombie' pixel), my camera is slated for a 15 business day stay at the infirmary, and will hopefully return home in good health.

Why does it always happen when they are so young?

Per Johan Naesje · January 7th, 2007, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Nayman

Why does it always happen when they are so young?

I think it's like what humans also got - the children's disease like mumps, scarlet rash, measles etc... ;-)

Sorry to hear about your problems Metthew, todays production line is hurry up and human control along that line is more or less absent I think!

Matthew Nayman · January 10th, 2007, 11:16 AM

UPDATE:

Canon's Service:
Pros:Camera is back from Canon (Quickly)
Cons: They couldn't find the problem and nothing has been done.

They say it is an optical thing (like dust or glare). I find this kind of laughable. I know dust when I see it, and this isn't dust. Dust shouldn't show up in total darkness as a bright white dot.

unless I am wrong.

Ideas?

Brent Graham · January 10th, 2007, 11:42 AM

There have been some cases where a piece of dust has glowed white on people's cameras.

Even in total darkness...

but that was radioactive dust...do you have any of that where you live?

Matthew Nayman · January 10th, 2007, 11:49 AM

Ha ha ha ha... come to think of it, I am posting from Chernobyl

Here is a clip, let's hear what you all think?

(unflipped from M2) The dust is there in total black as well... will find some proof.

However, it's gone now I and I can't get it to come back...

www.notomatofilms.com/deadpixel.wmv

Allan Liang · January 10th, 2007, 08:40 PM

Holy crap, that's tiny. How do you notice something like that?

Andrew Ott · January 10th, 2007, 10:27 PM

Even though it's tiny, if it was my camera, I would definitely want it fixed.

Philip Williams · January 11th, 2007, 06:08 AM

From the clip, it looks like you're using a 35mm adapter and have the gain turned on.

Can you post a short clip or screenshot with gain at -3 and the lens with no elements in front it?

Matt Crane · January 11th, 2007, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allan Liang

Holy crap, that's tiny. How do you notice something like that?

I was thinking the same. I don't know if I'd have noticed that. But agree, if my camera was doing it (and who knows, it might be...) I'd want it fixed too.

Matthew Nayman · January 11th, 2007, 11:08 AM

Phillip, you have hit my problem

I can;t get the pixel to come back. I was indeed using a redrock and gain was turned on, but Neither had anything to do with it (gain might have but it wont come back)

if you feel like a longer download, look at this www.notomatofilms.com/Deadpixelexamined.wmv

The pixel is much more noticble on an HDTV, as the 1080 lines are downsampled to 720, and therefore, the pixel doubles in area.

Canon said it was optical, but I don't buy that. Watch the longer vid for confirmation.

Philip Williams · January 11th, 2007, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Nayman

<snip>
I can;t get the pixel to come back. I was indeed using a redrock and gain was turned on, but Neither had anything to do with it (gain might have but it wont come back)
<snip>

Try testing with various shutter speeds, gain settings and different backgrounds (bright light, lens cap on, etc...).

If you can't get the pixel to show up anymore, then this may have happened:
1. Canon guy can't see stuck pixel (for whatever reason).
2. Canon guy runs the service menu's pixel mapping program just in case.
3. Pixel mapping fixes the stuck pixel.
4. Canon guy sends it back without even knowing a problem was fixed.

I'm sure weirder things have happened...

Matthew Nayman · January 11th, 2007, 02:42 PM

In the sheet that came back with my camera, it said they "checked, cleaned and lubricated" whatever the might mean.

Bogdan Tyburczy · January 11th, 2007, 03:45 PM

Matt -

Formally, hot pixels visible at gain higher than 0dB are not considered a defect. If you can not see that problem at 0dB or -3dB then it's OK. If you can not see hot spots at 6dB or higher gain, that's even better.

I had similar problem with some of my previous cams, but only with 12dB or higher gain. At 0 or +6dB hot pixels were invisible.

This phenomenon could also be induced thermally e.g. in hot room, on the beach etc.

All DSLR cameras, for example, suffer the same way. At ISO 100, 200 or 400, images are clean, but with 800 or 1600 you will notice some hot pixels under close inspection in Photoshop. They may be more or less visible depending on which component is affected (R, G or B).

Anthony Leong · January 11th, 2007, 04:36 PM

That was very small

Matthew Nayman · January 11th, 2007, 05:03 PM

indeed it looks small, but it jsut hit me so hard on a 42" HDTV right smack in the middle of the frame.

It wasn't very hot out, but it was a little humid... think that might have soemthing to do with it? We were using gain, as well, but although it appeared around 6db of gain, it didnt vanish at 0 until we restarted the camera.

January 7th, 2007, 12:20 AM	#1
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	The First Casualty... Well, it's sad but true. My beloved A1 is sick. It is currently convalescing at Canon Canada. After suffering a "hot pixel" (thank goodness it wasn't the dreaded 'dead pixel' or the far worse 'zombie' pixel), my camera is slated for a 15 business day stay at the infirmary, and will hopefully return home in good health. Why does it always happen when they are so young?

January 11th, 2007, 06:08 AM	#8
Philip Williams Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Snellville, Georgia Posts: 614	From the clip, it looks like you're using a 35mm adapter and have the gain turned on. Can you post a short clip or screenshot with gain at -3 and the lens with no elements in front it? __________________ www.philipwilliams.com

January 10th, 2007, 11:16 AM	#3
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	UPDATE: Canon's Service: Pros:Camera is back from Canon (Quickly) Cons: They couldn't find the problem and nothing has been done. They say it is an optical thing (like dust or glare). I find this kind of laughable. I know dust when I see it, and this isn't dust. Dust shouldn't show up in total darkness as a bright white dot. unless I am wrong. Ideas?

January 10th, 2007, 11:42 AM	#4
Brent Graham Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 222	There have been some cases where a piece of dust has glowed white on people's cameras. Even in total darkness... but that was radioactive dust...do you have any of that where you live?

January 10th, 2007, 11:49 AM	#5
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	Ha ha ha ha... come to think of it, I am posting from Chernobyl Here is a clip, let's hear what you all think? (unflipped from M2) The dust is there in total black as well... will find some proof. However, it's gone now I and I can't get it to come back... www.notomatofilms.com/deadpixel.wmv

January 10th, 2007, 08:40 PM	#6
Allan Liang New Boot Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 9	Holy crap, that's tiny. How do you notice something like that?

January 10th, 2007, 10:27 PM	#7
Andrew Ott Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 62	Even though it's tiny, if it was my camera, I would definitely want it fixed.

January 11th, 2007, 11:08 AM	#10
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	Phillip, you have hit my problem I can;t get the pixel to come back. I was indeed using a redrock and gain was turned on, but Neither had anything to do with it (gain might have but it wont come back) if you feel like a longer download, look at this www.notomatofilms.com/Deadpixelexamined.wmv The pixel is much more noticble on an HDTV, as the 1080 lines are downsampled to 720, and therefore, the pixel doubles in area. Canon said it was optical, but I don't buy that. Watch the longer vid for confirmation.

January 11th, 2007, 02:42 PM	#12
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	In the sheet that came back with my camera, it said they "checked, cleaned and lubricated" whatever the might mean.

January 11th, 2007, 03:45 PM	#13
Bogdan Tyburczy Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Brooklyn Posts: 161	Matt - Formally, hot pixels visible at gain higher than 0dB are not considered a defect. If you can not see that problem at 0dB or -3dB then it's OK. If you can not see hot spots at 6dB or higher gain, that's even better. I had similar problem with some of my previous cams, but only with 12dB or higher gain. At 0 or +6dB hot pixels were invisible. This phenomenon could also be induced thermally e.g. in hot room, on the beach etc. All DSLR cameras, for example, suffer the same way. At ISO 100, 200 or 400, images are clean, but with 800 or 1600 you will notice some hot pixels under close inspection in Photoshop. They may be more or less visible depending on which component is affected (R, G or B).

January 11th, 2007, 04:36 PM	#14
Anthony Leong Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: United States Posts: 93	That was very small

January 11th, 2007, 05:03 PM	#15
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	indeed it looks small, but it jsut hit me so hard on a 42" HDTV right smack in the middle of the frame. It wasn't very hot out, but it was a little humid... think that might have soemthing to do with it? We were using gain, as well, but although it appeared around 6db of gain, it didnt vanish at 0 until we restarted the camera.