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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 13, 2007, 6:03 AM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
Default

[email protected] wrote:
Quote:
<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
Thanks for the website - had a look, you really seem to know your way around the innards of a camera, settles my mind a lot! I do think the problem or weakness was there from day one on reflection.. It's not the flash card, I'd tried an xd card from my S5500 (works fine in that) and a compact flash card, same result.

I've contacted the seller, they've requested that I return it for a replacement. Hopefully it won't take months
Quackles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2007, 6:32 AM   #22
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 38
Default

Jim

I have taken similar shots and even some with the lens cap on (a test for hot pixels) without any such problems as the OP. Whether this is a problem is up to the OP. At least he doesn't have any hot pixels, a worse problem and very common. It's the type of problem that 90% of people would never notice so it may be more common than we think.
tbcass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2007, 6:24 AM   #23
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 14
Default

Ihavea S9500, Canon 300d and S3and have taken quite a few picture of the moon and with the moon in them and haven't notes any real problems with the sensor in any of these cameras. It seems to me that the exposure time of 30sec is far too long asmy moon shots are just alittle more exposed than my normal daylight shots. Most of mine are taken at ISO 200 at 1/100 at F4.5 or in that region. Its all too easy to overexpose the moon so I always switch to manual and bracket my exposure around the above starting point.

I have also taken a lot of night photos at higher ISO,400 and above and occasionally see speckling whichever camera I use etc. but nothing that can't be handled in a photo package. I think its just the sensors doing their best to handle awkward and unusual lighting conditions.


John
jacom70 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2007, 4:51 PM   #24
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 88
Default

< It's the type of problem that 90% of people would never notice so it may be more common than we think>
<I think its just the sensors doing their best to handle awkward and unusual lighting conditions>

Hi guys, I don't buy either of these proposals, and I've studied a lot of "anomalies". (certainly not saying I'm always 100% right). After VERY close observation of the speckle, my conclusions are -
Dust / smudges etc are TOTALLY ruled out
Processing / aliasing errors are totally ruled out, wrong pattern
Lens abberations are ruled out
Scene anomalies / reflections are ruled out
That only leaves -
Aliens ... or ... a Heat fault on the CCD (bad bonding again?)
Since the problem is more prevalent at longer exposures, I'd go with the last theory.
Based on facts that heat IS a problem with CCDs, either constant / heavy use or long exposures etc etc
Hopefully OP will get a FREE repair and can retest and post back.
JKirk


jkirk@oz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2007, 2:06 PM   #25
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
Default

[email protected] wrote:
Quote:
< It's the type of problem that 90% of people would never notice so it may be more common than we think>
<I think its just the sensors doing their best to handle awkward and unusual lighting conditions>

Hi guys, I don't buy either of these proposals, and I've studied a lot of "anomalies". (certainly not saying I'm always 100% right). After VERY close observation of the speckle, my conclusions are -
Dust / smudges etc are TOTALLY ruled out
Processing / aliasing errors are totally ruled out, wrong pattern
Lens abberations are ruled out
Scene anomalies / reflections are ruled out
That only leaves -
Aliens ... or ... a Heat fault on the CCD (bad bonding again?)
Since the problem is more prevalent at longer exposures, I'd go with the last theory.
Based on facts that heat IS a problem with CCDs, either constant / heavy use or long exposures etc etc
Hopefully OP will get a FREE repair and can retest and post back.
JKirk

Aliens it is, then! Camera is currently en route back to supplier for a replacement. Just so I know when I get the next one, is it a problem using the long exposure? Should I give it time to recover from one long exposure before doing another? Or was it a weakness which would have happened eventually anyway? in your opinion, that is, I realise all you saw was a picture..
Quackles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2007, 2:13 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 978
Default

I don't know if such long exposures of the moon are dangerous, but I do know that they are totally unnecessary. I have taken very good shoots at 1/500 or 1/750 of a second. Take a picture of a darkened street with long exposure - ok. The moon doesn't need that.
robbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2007, 2:28 PM   #27
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
Default

I know, robbo, most of the pictures I'd taken were a fraction of a second, I was just messing with my new toy
Quackles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2007, 4:40 PM   #28
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 88
Default

".. is it a problem using the long exposure?"

Irrespective of why the fault actually occurred - NO. Long exposures are perfectly ok

"Should I give it time to recover from one long exposure before doing another?"

CCDs DO heat up with fast action / long exposures. IF it is a HOT day, and you are doing a many long exposures in a row, you **may** start to see what looks like high ISO noise appearing, but thats about the worst of it.
Years ago, I did a wedding shoot (backup) in 50oC+ (120F+) heat (road surface) for 3hrs, with over 2,000 shots (S602). The cammie was literally red hot. I couldn't even hold the batteries when I had to change them ! Even with very fine checking, I saw NO appreciable "extra" noise in the photos.

Just remember, 10s of millions of digital cammies get sold every year. IF* this was even remotely an issue, you'd be hearing a LOT more about it on www !!! Not just the occasional, OFTEN untraceable / unprovable, comment in some forum. The *real* number of faults I hear about / see is consistent with what I'd expect as a MTBF.
That doesn't include manufacturing batch failures though, thats a - shlt happens :-)

"was it a weakness which would have happened eventually anyway?"

Nope! There is NO evidence to suggest that CCDs will eventually fail in that way.
The highest fault probability in an ageing CCD is - Hot / Stuck pixels. But even then you should expect 5yrs min with say a 1-2% failure rate. Usually just annoying.
Even if you abuse your cammie a lot (like I do), it won't affect the CCDs MTBF much at all. ok the rest of the cammie won't fair as well :-)

Keep us posted how the replacement goes.
JKirk

jkirk@oz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2007, 5:01 PM   #29
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
Default

Will do! Thanks again for the assistance! I just hope that I can get over it, I'm worried I'll be overly cautious with the replacement and my photography will suffer as a result.. Sometimes you have to take risks to get nice shots
Quackles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2007, 6:41 PM   #30
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3
Default

Hi all,

I have similar problem with my s9600. Under long exposure > 1 sec, my camera shows many speckles/hot pixels. The difference is that they are not concentrated. I run hot pixel test (all with ISO 100), close the lens and took several photos with different shutter speed and then thest them using dead pixel test software.
Here is the result:
30 sec : 37 hot pixels
15 sec : 18 hps
5 sec : 55 hps ??????
2 sec : 13 hps
1/3 sec : 3 hps
1/4 sec : 3 hps
1/8 sec : 3 hps

I run the same test using Canon PowerShot A520, there are none hps even for 15 sec exposure.
Are those normal result for s9000/s9100? If this is normal why then a chepaer Canon point&shoot camera perform better than DSLR syle camera such as s9100? Should I ask for replacement?
Any comment/help will be much appreciated.
upai 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 5:02 AM.