Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Fujifilm

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 8, 2007, 5:20 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
Default

lionellobo wrote:
Quote:
I had a strange ISO related issue with an S5600 a year back, that was probably a CCD issue.

See: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=16

It was still less than a month & Fuji was very prompt in ensuring I got a replacement issued.

What you're seeing is possibly a CCD issue as well. Contact Fuji tech support with the pictures & see what they have to say about it. Do keep us posted.

Cheers,
Lionel
Glad to see your issue was resolved, anyway! Mine is also within the 28 days (I have it a week today, in fact).. I emailed the seller today, I may well contact fuji as well with the sample pictures just to see if they have any advice. Thanks for sharing your experience, I'll definitely post back and let you know how I get on!
Quackles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 5:23 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

No, it would be unreasonable for you to expect your camera to produce a perfectly black image in this situation. It is a long exposure, and they are prone to color shift. You could go and exchange it for another, but you would probably get similar results. Stop worrying and take a bunch of pictures and enjoy your camera.
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 5:43 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
Default

I don't think you are right there, jphess. A camera which claims to have a 30 second exposure yet can't take pictures beyond 2 seconds without a substantial amount of pixel distortion rendering the picture useless is not, in my view, a working product. When I spend that much on something, I expect it to perform reasonably well. I'm not an idiot, I realise there will be noise at high ISOs and that leaving the shutter open won't get me a crystal clear result, but I literally can not use the shutter exposure of more than a second on any dark background. That isn't right. If you bought a tv which had a tennis ball of pixels in the middle of it, you'd leave it back. Why is this any different?
Quackles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 5:53 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,063
Default

Fine, then, go exchange it for another. But my guess is that anyone reading this thread would see similar results if they tried the same thing with their cameras. You might expect that kind of performance from a high end camera, but the one you have is a relatively inexpensive consumer camera. It may not seem that way to you, but when you look at what the professional models cost your investment is trivial. You might consider sending a file to Fuji for evaluation. But I really think they will tell you that it is performing within the range of acceptance for this model.

Come on some of you others. Try the same thing (if you dare, or maybe you just don't want to know).
jphess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 6:03 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
flippedgazelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
Default

Quote:
Fine, then, go exchange it for another. But my guess is that anyone reading this thread would see similar results if they tried the same thing with their cameras. You might expect that kind of performance from a high end camera, but the one you have is a relatively inexpensive consumer camera. It may not seem that way to you, but when you look at what the professional models cost your investment is trivial. You might consider sending a file to Fuji for evaluation. But I really think they will tell you that it is performing within the range of acceptance for this model.

Come on some of you others. Try the same thing (if you dare, or maybe you just don't want to know).
I don't know why you are saying this... the images produced by Quackles and lionellobo clearly have unacceptable imaging anomalies. I have the S6000 and have had no such issues. Yes, noise is to be expected, but not in such finite, concentrated spots.
flippedgazelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 6:09 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
Default

I also have an S5500 and have taken such shots with no such issues. I really don't understand how anyone could possibly think that image quality is acceptable, pro camera or not.
Quackles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 7:10 PM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 41
Default

jphess wrote:
Quote:
No, it would be unreasonable for you to expect your camera to produce a perfectly black image in this situation.* It is a long exposure, and they are prone to color shift.* You could go and exchange it for another, but you would probably get similar results.* Stop worrying and take a bunch of pictures and enjoy your camera.
Quote:
Come on some of you others. Try the same thing (if you dare, or maybe you just don't want to know)
I own a s9500 and for what its worth i set my camera for a 30 sec exposure and left the lens cap on, after the 30 sec exposure i ended up with a perfectly black image no noise at all i was slightly concerned after reading this topic and thought i should check my camera for the same problem, considering the s9600 is a revised 9500 i would say that you shouldnt be seeing this problem at all and i would try to get a replacement
borrie869 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 7:19 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 41
Default

for the proof here is the picture itself all i have done is resized it the exif info is still attached
Attached Images
 
borrie869 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2007, 5:59 PM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 68
Default

Same results....30 sec, lens cap, perfectly black image. S9000

Take it back but I wouldn't tell them you shot a moon picture at 30 sec's. The moon lumen's is a lot brighter than you think and it looks like you fried the CCD.

If you look at other peoples pics of the moon, they are not using anything close to 30 sec exposures IIRC.
bill soper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 12, 2007, 7:12 AM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 88
Default

<The moon lumen's is a lot brighter than you think and it looks like you fried the CCD.
If you look at other peoples pics of the moon, they are not using anything close to 30 sec exposures IIRC>

This is one of the worst myths around. I've spent a LOT of effort disproving it as well. Results at http://www.digsys.com.au/s602/s602.html

There was more testing than I've written up, but it was so overwhelming, I didn't bother. Myth totally BUSTED.
The possibilities are -
1/ It is a bad CCD (or image processor), and I have seen MANY of those.
2/ A bad Flash card. I've seen a FEW bad cards do weird things.
JKirk

jkirk@oz is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:06 PM.