Canon Rebel XT - Hot Pixels - Yep! This thread again....

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Have a new XT and I wonder about the number of hot pixels I'm getting
with the lens cap test.
My results:

Parameter 2
no dead pixels

iso 100
1 sec 0 hot pixels
5 sec 1 hot pixels
10 sec 6 hot pixels

iso 400
1 sec 1 hot pixels
5 sec 39 hot pixels
10 sec 143 hot pixels

Is this to be expected? Should it be returned?
Thanx for your input.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <o0vuh198schdie6t8dksulck1tusnmd45v@4ax.com>,
spbarron@rogers.com says...
> Have a new XT and I wonder about the number of hot pixels I'm getting
> with the lens cap test.
> My results:
>
> Parameter 2
> no dead pixels
>
> iso 100
> 1 sec 0 hot pixels
> 5 sec 1 hot pixels
> 10 sec 6 hot pixels
>
> iso 400
> 1 sec 1 hot pixels
> 5 sec 39 hot pixels
> 10 sec 143 hot pixels
>
> Is this to be expected? Should it be returned?
> Thanx for your input.

I'd say you're fine.

For anything over 1-2 seconds, enable the noise reduction under the
custom functions. That will map out the dead pixels.

Or shoot RAW and process with a reputable RAW converter. IT will also
map out the dead pixels.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
newsp4vh1thg7fjl0nhmmm5fj7ntkhhu7ksum@4ax.com...
> Try pixel mapping. Oops! Sorry!
> -Rich

Isn't that just a method to hide them and pretend they don't exist ?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d8a51b0451cb991989a28@news.verizon.net...
> In article <11hvrt21gjj7f9@corp.supernews.com>, getnews1@dslextreme.com
> says...
> > > custom functions. That will map out the dead pixels.
> >
> > On the Rebel XT I believe that is only for exposures over 30 seconds,
and it
> > effectively doubles exposure time.
>
> Yeah, but it does work well for removing noise from longer exposures.
>
> > > Or shoot RAW and process with a reputable RAW converter.
> >
> > Which ones?
>
> ACR does it, as does Capture One. I can't speak for the others.

Which version of ACR? I'm stuck with 2.4 for awhile. Is it automagical or
a preference?

Greg

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:11hvrt21gjj7f9@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d89937cca0de223989a27@news.verizon.net...
>> In article <o0vuh198schdie6t8dksulck1tusnmd45v@4ax.com>,
>> spbarron@rogers.com says...
>> > Have a new XT and I wonder about the number of hot pixels I'm getting
>> > with the lens cap test.
>> > My results:
>> >
>> > Parameter 2
>> > no dead pixels
>> >
>> > iso 100
>> > 1 sec 0 hot pixels
>> > 5 sec 1 hot pixels
>> > 10 sec 6 hot pixels
>> >
>> > iso 400
>> > 1 sec 1 hot pixels
>> > 5 sec 39 hot pixels
>> > 10 sec 143 hot pixels
>> >
>> > Is this to be expected? Should it be returned?
>> > Thanx for your input.
>>
>> I'd say you're fine.
>>
>> For anything over 1-2 seconds, enable the noise reduction under the
>> custom functions. That will map out the dead pixels.
>
> On the Rebel XT I believe that is only for exposures over 30 seconds, and
> it
> effectively doubles exposure time.
>
>>
>> Or shoot RAW and process with a reputable RAW converter.
>
> Which ones?
>
> Greg<

--


Silkypix does, Adobe Camera Raw does - RSE does not, Bibble does not,
Capture One LE does not

Since Silkypix is *the* best 'affordable' converter, that's the one to go
for.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<

"Tony Polson" <tp@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
newsuk2i15ln8h3efgmge384o9t767elmtnlv@4ax.com...
> "Pink & Perky sing Moody & Sankey" <pigs@work.com> wrote:
>
>>It's got to be said that Pixel Mapping is the best Olympus feature, and
>>one
>>that really should be incorporated in other manufacturer's firmware.
>
>
> It is the *third best* Olympus feature, behind the absolutely
> outstanding (near-) telecentric lenses and the dust removal<


The lenses are no better than, and often not as good as, other high quality
glass - and the 'dust removal' facility is one of *the* most over-rated
'features' ever devised by marketing monkeys.

Cleaning a sensor takes only a minute or so - and only the totally clueless
would be loathe to perform this simple task themselves, and know that they'd
made a much better job of it than any 'supersonic sensor shaker' ever could.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 11:32:53 +0100, "Pink & Perky sing Moody & Sankey"
<pigs@work.com> wrote:

><
>
>"Tony Polson" <tp@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
>newsuk2i15ln8h3efgmge384o9t767elmtnlv@4ax.com...
>> "Pink & Perky sing Moody & Sankey" <pigs@work.com> wrote:
>>
>>>It's got to be said that Pixel Mapping is the best Olympus feature, and
>>>one
>>>that really should be incorporated in other manufacturer's firmware.
>>
>>
>> It is the *third best* Olympus feature, behind the absolutely
>> outstanding (near-) telecentric lenses and the dust removal<
>
>
>The lenses are no better than, and often not as good as, other high quality
>glass - and the 'dust removal' facility is one of *the* most over-rated
>'features' ever devised by marketing monkeys.
>
>Cleaning a sensor takes only a minute or so - and only the totally clueless
>would be loathe to perform this simple task themselves, and know that they'd
>made a much better job of it than any 'supersonic sensor shaker' ever could.
>

At $10 per specialized q-tip, it should.
-Rich

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Tony Polson disingenuates:

> This newsgroup seems to be a repository for some people who make
> dogmatic and usually totally incorrect statements about equipment they
> have never handled, let alone used.

Isn't it awful! I mean, there are even those who claim to have taken a
picture that landed on the cover of a well known magazine, and still
_refuse_ to identify the issue! Can you even believe such nonsense?
How can people do such things and then expect to be taken seriously?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <11i15ckdnupcie4@corp.supernews.com>, getnews1@dslextreme.com
says...
> > ACR does it, as does Capture One. I can't speak for the others.
>
> Which version of ACR? I'm stuck with 2.4 for awhile. Is it automagical or
> a preference?

I'm running 2.4. It's automagical - it just looks for out of place RAW
values for each pixel.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <11i4ecvpsj73u43@corp.supernews.com>, getnews1@dslextreme.com
says...
> > I'm running 2.4. It's automagical - it just looks for out of place RAW
> > values for each pixel.
>
> Got it. I hadn't paid attention.

They don't advertise the feature. Honestly, I didn't know until I
stumbled across an image I had processed with Canon's RAW software and
re-did it using ACR.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird