Reading mode: Light Dark

ok. so just how bad is this orb issue

Go to last post
Exactly right. Inference is 'heard but not said' and the implication is 'meant but not stated'.

People get those two backwards a lot - similar to 'mis- and dis-', i.e. 'mistrust' and 'distrust'.
--
'Bass-ackward' does not equate to 'superior'.
 
Midwest said:
John Carson said:
Daniel Lowe said:
Midwest said:
Summit_pg wrote:
If you're the shoot and upload to facebook type the orbs won't be an issue.
Click to expand...
This sort of ignorant comment is what starts so many unnecessary flame wars around here.

What you are effectively saying is that no one can be a 'proper' photographer and own an X10.
Click to expand...
No, he is saying the converse; that if you are not a "proper" photographer, then the orbs won't bother you.
Click to expand...
Or maybe he is saying no one who is a proper photographer would own one.
Click to expand...
I responded to Daniel's post without reading the original post from which he quoted. There is no doubt that the passage he quoted doesn't justify the conclusion he drew. That involves confusing a proposition with its converse, as I have already stated.

Reading the original post, I find:

"Honestly, if I were you I would wait for the new firmware or buy something else. If you have a critical eye and review/process/print your photos you will notice and will be annoyed by the orbs."

That particular passage is more supportive of the conclusion drawn, though it is not conclusive. He is indicating his preferences and, in addition, saying that the orbs will annoy someone with a critical eye. However a person may still buy a camera even though one aspect of it is annoying.

--
john carson
 
Silent Oracle said:
. My parents once had a horrific argument and poppy ended up calling mom a heifer. In all the decades that followed, she never allowed him to forget, that she would never forget, that moment.
Click to expand...
Ugh. Once said, something cannot be un-said. That was a very bad slip to make even in the heat of argument.
 
Jolly Oly said:
but for all of you "orb is no-issue" snapshoters here, I just cannot wait for summer holidays and vacations; I wish you lots of sun , shiny stuff and reflective surfaces .. in your frames :D :D :D
Click to expand...
Shooting at ISO3200 will prevent those shots from being ruined. :)
 
Billx08 said:
Wellington100 said:
Billx08 said:
Will, Bill & Del....in my neck of the woods, female bovine are known as...heifers.
Click to expand...
If you think about it for a second that is a really dumb name, surely they should be called sheifers?

Its a cow for gods sake. Does male chauvinism have no limits?
Click to expand...
None whatsoever. Cows are the bull's udder half, so heifers must be a corruption of halfers. But as my good buddy Bart says,



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJd5bPHRVOg
Click to expand...
LOL Wellingon & Bill... Funny stuff....

--
Jada

http://silentoracle.weebly.com/blog.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/the_silent_oracle/
 
Midwest said:
Silent Oracle said:
. My parents once had a horrific argument and poppy ended up calling mom a heifer. In all the decades that followed, she never allowed him to forget, that she would never forget, that moment.
Click to expand...
Ugh. Once said, something cannot be un-said. That was a very bad slip to make even in the heat of argument.
Click to expand...
Not as bad as the time that Poppy was flirting with the neighbor lady over a hand of 'canasta'. :-)
--
Jada

http://silentoracle.weebly.com/blog.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/the_silent_oracle/
 
knurl said:
just to clarify this. a dedicated thread to get some grip on how big a problem this is for the actual X10 user.

how often did you get orbs/white discs/... ?

a/ never,
b/ 1% of your shots ,
c/ 10% of your shots,
d/ all the time.
Click to expand...
THE ORB REPORT

Knurl, since some of us got a little carried away here in your thread, here is a recap of the totals.

14 photographers participated thus far and referenced 18 different shooting conditions.

KNURL 5 shots in 1,000
ALFA Less than 1%
PAUL 29 out of 30 Night Shots
PAUL 100% orbs in all long exposures
TIMUR 10% of family photos
TIMUR 100% dark scenes
TREVOR 3 dozen in 2,000 images
DANIEL B 1 in 487 exposures
RAY S 1 in 2,000 exposures
DDTAN 2 out of a few 100 exposures
WILL H Never
GARYJP Excessive
SHUTBOB 10% of images
SHUTBOB 90% when photographing musical instruments have orbs
WJ 4 in 185 indoor exposures
WJ 150 orb infestations in 435 exposures at car show
TOM S 1% to 10% of all exposures
ENIR4 1 in 1,032 exposures

Based on their numbers, only one falls in the NEVER category (Will H). Congratulations, Will. Can we touch your camera? :-)

I'm seeing 8 shooting situations that fall into the 1% range (CATEGORY B) and 8 shooting situations falling into the 10% or more Category C.

It's very easy to see as many photographers stated here - it's those certain subjects/situations in which orbs appear.

--
Jada

http://silentoracle.weebly.com/blog.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/the_silent_oracle/
 
GaryJP said:
What's frustrating to some of us is that we DO like this camera so much in every other way. It's a great little camera with an Achilles' heel.

If we didn't love it, we wouldn't be so annoyed with this issue.
Click to expand...
Zackly!
 
Midwest said:
Exactly right. Inference is 'heard but not said' and the implication is 'meant but not stated'.

People get those two backwards a lot - similar to 'mis- and dis-', i.e. 'mistrust' and 'distrust'.
Click to expand...
Another pair where the difference is not always clear or even understood is "deduction" and "induction". A description of the difference and an interesting inducement.

http://atheism.about.com/od/criticalthinking/a/deductivearg.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleusis_%28card_game%29
 
rattymouse said:
and if it is the hardware that is the problem? What then? What if the sensor was designed so poorly that it overloads far more often than other sensors?
Click to expand...
Then we are stuck.

But, as I think I might have indicated somewhere before, that would not make me mad, or want to get rid of the camera.

--
Cheers ;-)

Trevor G

Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com
 
As annoying as it is, for those who take lots of night shots, or objects with lots of shiny surfaces the x10 is of no use to you. There's no point in going on and on and on about it. Just face it, get another camera.

As far as $600 being a high price to pay. That's up to how much you can afford or are prepared to spend. I think that as far as digital camera prices go, anything under $1000 is not a very high price as long as the camera does a reasonable job producing what it was bought for.

Don't tell people they shouldn't buy it and don't tell people there is not a problem with some subjects.

--
Regards,
Peter.
http://gowerphotos.tripod.com
 
This post has helped me understand that certain needs and shooting situations will determine individual opinions. I was rather skeptical of some of the hardest critics, but I can see their point of view even though it is not an issue for me.......yet. Let's hope that Fuji will step up and make everyone happy. I hope to learn more from this forum.
--
Visit my site and give me feedback!
http://dbarnett.smugmug.com/
 
I am wondering if a polarising filter would cut out the daylight orbs which to me are worse than the night orbs because the day orbs appear randomly against reflections of the sun, hence the light is polarised and should be eliminated by the filter before it reaches the sensor.

The night orbs bother me less because they are at least occurring where one expects to find them which is at sources of artificial light that may be blown or have some speculars anyway.
--
S100, S6500, S5, F300, F200, F70, F11, F31 (deceased), Z5, V10, D40, EX1
 
Silent Oracle said:
THE ORB REPORT

Knurl, since some of us got a little carried away here in your thread, here is a recap of the totals.

14 photographers participated thus far and referenced 18 different shooting conditions.

KNURL 5 shots in 1,000
ALFA Less than 1%
PAUL 29 out of 30 Night Shots
PAUL 100% orbs in all long exposures
TIMUR 10% of family photos
TIMUR 100% dark scenes
TREVOR 3 dozen in 2,000 images
DANIEL B 1 in 487 exposures
RAY S 1 in 2,000 exposures
DDTAN 2 out of a few 100 exposures
WILL H Never
GARYJP Excessive
SHUTBOB 10% of images
SHUTBOB 90% when photographing musical instruments have orbs
WJ 4 in 185 indoor exposures
WJ 150 orb infestations in 435 exposures at car show
TOM S 1% to 10% of all exposures
ENIR4 1 in 1,032 exposures

Based on their numbers, only one falls in the NEVER category (Will H). Congratulations, Will. Can we touch your camera? :-)

I'm seeing 8 shooting situations that fall into the 1% range (CATEGORY B) and 8 shooting situations falling into the 10% or more Category C.

It's very easy to see as many photographers stated here - it's those certain subjects/situations in which orbs appear.

--
Jada
Click to expand...
hi silent oracle.

thanks for the roundup but...

you mix two kinds of percentages.

percentages that represent the number of orbs in the total amount of photos taken so far (which i asked) and percentages that reflect how big a chance you have of orbs in a given situation.

you do seem a little biased as you turn "a handful" into 10% and omit "closer to 1%" in the sentence 1 to 10%. :-P

you can also come to another conlusion if you only look at the people that gave percentage of the total nr of pics so far.
then you're actually seeing :
7 shooters that fall into the 1% or less category,
2 shooters that fall into the 2% category (trevor and tom schum) and
1 shooter falls into the 10% category (shutterbobby)

besides that there are 4 shooters that don't give total number but describe shooting situations (!) in which they got up to 100% of orbs. (paul, timur, wj & shutterbobby)

(garyjp only describes it as "far too many". which is too subjective. for some 1% could already be far too many.)
 
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