Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon d3x - Dead Pixels in some copies ?

Go to last post
J

J_P_P

Well-known member
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Location
Lisboa, PT
Hi,

I brought the d3x one week ago in London, been there for holidays. It's my First Nikon, i only had a Sony a700 before., so i am still struglling a lot with the comands and huge menu options, this baby surely is complex / very customizable :)

Anyway...the 1st copy i got, had some dead pixels in the lower right corner , that formed soemthing like a very small cross '+'. The Pixels were White and i noticed them when i shot a image from my hotel room, in a dark area. Anyway...them i took a shot with the Lens Cap on , and noticed the White / Dead Pixels.

Next Day i went to the shop, and explained the problem, they had another copy , tried again, and this time there was a small single Blue Pixel in the lowe right corner, when i took another shot with the lens cap on.

Finally in the 3rd copy, everyting seemed to be perfect.

It was not a case of the Monitor having these dead pixels, it was soemthing in the sensor. I even tried moving the CF card to another machine to check it.

I took the photos in RAW , with Long Exp NR = off and High ISO NR = off.

Anyway...was i just extremelly unlucky...or is Nikon having some Quality Control issues ???

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jppimenta/
 
do a quick search here - you'll find most of us with the d3x have at least one or two dead or hot pixels.. mines near center of the frame, but what can you do.. acr finds and removes them anyhow and we are talking one pixel from 24.5 million of them..

thats not too bad really yeah ?..

took me a week to even notice mine btw..

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rexyinc/
 
Thanks...didn't noticed this :) Then i think i am a lucky one for having a copy without it :)

Only problem i came across before buying it, was the problem Thom Hogan had with the 1st copy. Fortunatelly i tried doing a long exposure also, and didn't had it then :)

Anyway i got the 14-24 to go with it...it's a great lens.

First Impressions is that is a great great camera, seems kinda bulky and huge, but when you get it in your hand doesn't feel heavy at all.

The Noise is much much better than with a SONY a900, and the metering and Focus is simply superrb compared to the Sony also. I had/tried a a900 for a couple days before returning it due to not being satisfied with the Metering and Noise Perfomance.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jppimenta/
 
Hot, dead, stuck pixels have and will be on almost every sensor regardless of the make. The fix is easy, just map them out. Olympus built this into their E-10 firmware many years ago after buyers started complaining about it and it overwhelmed their service department when everyone started sending their E-10's in to have their sensor remapped. Nikon and Canon could easily add this function to the Firmware of the camera. I've never understood why they don't. It's really easy to do. Just close the eyepiece shutter, put lens cap on and go into menu and run feature and in 10 seconds you have a clean looking sensor, free of hot, stuck or dead pixels.

I just bought a D700 and so far I have two hot pixels. I'd like to map them out but don't want to send the camera in for just this.

--
John M. Polston
Atlanta, GA
 
I would have done the same as you, request a new copy until no hot pixels

I don't like hot pixels, and paying USD 8.000 for a camera I think Nikon should ensure there is NO Hot pixel at all.

In fact, Nikon states that they do a thoroughly test on each D3 camera to ensure the best quality and performance even under conditions beyond those than the camera are built for.

I know every DSLR have hot pixels mapped.

And as someone else said, I don't understand why the manufacturers don't include a feature to remap them by the customer. It will be included in my list of features to be implemented in future DSLRs for sure.

Good luck with your machine.

BTW, if I was you I would pay an insurance covering as many as possible problems (loosing, dropping, being stolen, etc), it well worths it.

AND thanks a lot for reporting thiis. This thread should have had much more replies or maybe it's just that the hot pixels problem is not often in the D3x or not much people notice them.
 
I suspect that, either Nikon's assembly line for the D3X has fallen down on the end-of-line mapping function, there's a problem with their technique or software for this particular new camera, or this new sensor is prone to developing new hot pixels early after the initial mapping at the factory.

IMHO, repeatedly exchanging for replacements until one finds one with NO hot pixels is only delaying the inevitable. Me...I'd just keep shooting with it until I was sure I wasn't developing more bad pixels, then I'd send it in for remapping (as well as AF adjustment and general cleaning).
 
Mine can be seen at ISO 100 and I already asked for a replacement. Still waiting... Just for the records, NX do not mask the bad ones, so your best bet is ACR, C1 or Lightroom, which, in my view, do not give the best output for this camera.
Best,
Roberto
 
Any other case such this?

I suppose it's very weird to ask 2 replacements fot finding one without a hot or stuck pixels.

would be good to know if more people had this issue too.
 
This is exactly why the D3x costs $8,000. Because Nikon knows people are going to go bonkers about having a 0.00000004 percent pixel failure rate, and demand a replacement camera.

If you only missed 0.00000004 percent of the questions on your tests in college, you'd be the valedictorian.
 
I'm in the process of adding support for the D3X to Pixel Fixer ( http://www.pixelfixer.org ) but I need sample NEFs taken in FX, 5:4 and DX mode... ideally with a hot pixel visible in each frame. Could anyone provide some samples?
Roberto Smera said:
Mine can be seen at ISO 100 and I already asked for a replacement.
Still waiting... Just for the records, NX do not mask the bad ones,
so your best bet is ACR, C1 or Lightroom, which, in my view, do not
give the best output for this camera.
Best,
Roberto
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pixelfixer.org
 
--

Oh dear.. Ok at this momment I got cannon dont say I am trolling or something.. Its just a 7000euro worth of curiosity, the same question is about 1dsmk3 (I dont know if the owners have this problem) .. But what the companys say about it!! its redicules to give such money and get dead pixels?

its to expensive for mistakes!. I think you should exhange it... Its a steal if they say NO.. But Uk its a horrible center after all.
 
Most high res sensors have dead pixels, even the phaseone backs so itsa nothing to worry about. Either map them out or just leep shooting. Your exchange sample could end up suffering from something worse.
 
The 2 i seem in the shop, wasn't a case of hot pixels... shooting in 100 ISO, just normal shot with a fast shuuter speed i'd get them.

If i do a 15 min exposure at 800 ISO , with NR off like Thom hogan did with it's firs copy (defective) i get a lot of hot pixels....

That's normal...nobody expected otherwise. I even tried in the shop doing a 15 min exposure, to make sure i wasn't getting a defective copy like Thom did. I think that's reasonable when you are spending that insane amount of money.

The 1st copy was even several Dead Pixels i think , they formed something like a '+' in the lower right corner. Those were White Pixels

But i think that if i buy a d3x that's supossed to be tested by nikon,if i shoot a 100 ISO shot... I changed from Sony and my "cheap" a700 doesn't have any, why should i expect less from a pro model that cost several times more ???

I am glad i exchanged it , and demanded a better copy. It's not a question of being "picky", i think :)

Anyway...i am getting familiar with the camera and this new Controls / Menus and i think it's a great camera. I don't shoot at 6400 Iso or 3200 many times (or ever came to think of it...)... but just in terms of noise i'd say that around 800-1600 you can see better perfomance then the a900 ...and if you go to 3200-6400 it's worlds apart, there's almost no chroma noise compared to the a900.

I owned a a900 and returned it after 3 days, because i was unhappy with it's Metering (unpredictable and with a great tendency to underxpose sometimes by 1 EV or something like that, which didn't happened in the a700 ...and the noise that is visibly worse than in a a700)

Waited awhile to see if Sony would improve the firmware, they didn't...and 2 weeks ago i borught the d3x. It's Expensive but it's a hell of a camera.

I am still glad that the copy i ended up with doesn't have dead pixels, and didn't had to return it to nikon to remap.
douglas d said:
in extremely long exposures.
--
I'm there to enjoy the scenery, I just happen to bring my camera along

http://www.pbase.com/ddietiker/nature
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jppimenta/
 
J_P_P said:
The 2 i seem in the shop, wasn't a case of hot pixels... shooting in
100 ISO, just normal shot with a fast shuuter speed i'd get them.

If i do a 15 min exposure at 800 ISO , with NR off like Thom hogan
did with it's firs copy (defective) i get a lot of hot pixels....
That's normal...nobody expected otherwise. I even tried in the shop
doing a 15 min exposure, to make sure i wasn't getting a defective
copy like Thom did. I think that's reasonable when you are spending
that insane amount of money.

The 1st copy was even several Dead Pixels i think , they formed
something like a '+' in the lower right corner. Those were White
Pixels
Click to expand...
It's normal for a hot pixel to affect surrounding pixels, due to the demosaic process that gets applied to raw data. White cross or x-shaped artifacts are a result of hot/defective green photosites on the sensor.




J_P_P said:
But i think that if i buy a d3x that's supossed to be tested by
nikon,if i shoot a 100 ISO shot... I changed from Sony and my "cheap"
a700 doesn't have any, why should i expect less from a pro model that
cost several times more ???

I am glad i exchanged it , and demanded a better copy. It's not a
question of being "picky", i think :)

Anyway...i am getting familiar with the camera and this new Controls
/ Menus and i think it's a great camera. I don't shoot at 6400 Iso or
3200 many times (or ever came to think of it...)... but just in terms
of noise i'd say that around 800-1600 you can see better perfomance
then the a900 ...and if you go to 3200-6400 it's worlds apart,
there's almost no chroma noise compared to the a900.
I owned a a900 and returned it after 3 days, because i was unhappy
with it's Metering (unpredictable and with a great tendency to
underxpose sometimes by 1 EV or something like that, which didn't
happened in the a700 ...and the noise that is visibly worse than in a
a700)

Waited awhile to see if Sony would improve the firmware, they
didn't...and 2 weeks ago i borught the d3x. It's Expensive but it's a
hell of a camera.

I am still glad that the copy i ended up with doesn't have dead
pixels, and didn't had to return it to nikon to remap.
douglas d said:
in extremely long exposures.
--
I'm there to enjoy the scenery, I just happen to bring my camera along

http://www.pbase.com/ddietiker/nature
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jppimenta/
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pixelfixer.org
 
J_P_P said:
The 2 i seem in the shop, wasn't a case of hot pixels... shooting in
100 ISO, just normal shot with a fast shuuter speed i'd get them.

If i do a 15 min exposure at 800 ISO , with NR off like Thom hogan
did with it's firs copy (defective) i get a lot of hot pixels....
That's normal...nobody expected otherwise. I even tried in the shop
doing a 15 min exposure, to make sure i wasn't getting a defective
copy like Thom did. I think that's reasonable when you are spending
that insane amount of money.
Click to expand...
No matter how "normal" this seems to some readers, the fact remains that we did not read this many posts about defective D3 cameras when that model was released. Something is amiss here. It sounds to me like this is yet more evidence Nikon rushed the release of this camera so they could sell more of them during the holidays.

Recommendation to potential D3X owners: now you've got another reason to wait for the D3X. After the copies from the early production runs are sold, and the price has declined, then it will be time to buy the D3X.
 
J_P_P said:
J_P_P said:
The Noise is much much better than with a SONY a900, and the metering
Click to expand...
and Focus is simply superrb compared to the Sony also. I had/tried a
a900 for a couple days before returning it due to not being satisfied
with the Metering and Noise Perfomance.
Click to expand...
much better, one stop better. One should stop the stupid noise flattening game and use sensors for what they can do by their own. On tests with noise flattening switched off, the D3X makes a half stop better.

The Sony sensor in the D3X can be compared to what Nikon made with the D200 once, using same sensor as all other brands just asking Sony to personalize the chip in a way to handle the output in a multi-channel technology. Nikon designed or asked for, and made by Sony to personal requests. Being a CMOS I doubt that htere is any difference since on just any C-Mos, every pixel can be adressed separately. The D200 used a CCD and there it was obvious that the chip had to be personalized for Nikon's purposes. The fact that the Sony Chip in the D3X is different from the A900 is something one needs to prove first. What people, including Nikon, say and what realy is are different worlds anyway. Camera business is another religion and only those who believe can be sanctified.

Up to 800 iso, both cameras perform the same, the difference starts being visible beyond 800. I can take this one stop in charge and buy a lot of glass for the 5 Grant the d3x costs more.

http://www.pbase.com/davidkilpatrick/nikon_d3x__sony_alpha_900

Judge by your own on that page.
 
douglas d said:
in extremely long exposures.
Click to expand...
I get one (and only one) with long exposures & rarely when I machine gun the camera

I rarely use fast shutter release, though as I usually shoot in 14 bit capture mode
--
--
pbase & dpreview supporter
DPR forum member since 5/2001
http://www.pbase.com/artichoke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top