New E20 Stuck Pixel Question

[Paul Harris86145]

Just got a new E20P, I ran the Stuck/Hot pixel test on a Lens cap picture and it reported 16 Hot/Stuck pixels, I have run the pixel mapping utillity 6 times and it has made no difference.

Question: Am I over reacting, is 16 stuck pixels OK, ( my Nikon 900 reports none) or is it faulty and should be returned.

The utility report can be found at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/deadpixeltest.jpg)

The orriginal file, if you have a fast connection is at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/p3030032.jpg)

If you zoom in to the picture verious red, blue and green stuck pixels can be seen

Thanks for any help

Paul

 

[Brian Mackey]

Personally I would xchange it..
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/998087928.html

Just got a new E20P, I ran the Stuck/Hot pixel test on a Lens cap
picture and it reported 16 Hot/Stuck pixels, I have run the pixel
mapping utillity 6 times and it has made no difference.

Question: Am I over reacting, is 16 stuck pixels OK, ( my Nikon
900 reports none) or is it faulty and should be returned.

The utility report can be found at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/deadpixeltest.jpg)

The orriginal file, if you have a fast connection is at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/p3030032.jpg)

If you zoom in to the picture verious red, blue and green stuck
pixels can be seen

Thanks for any help

Paul

-- http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm 'I have discovered digital photography' Livin life at 5 megapixels!

 

[forester]

Paul -

How big a problem this is, for me, would depend on what shutter speed the hot pixels appeared at. If this showed up at one of my usual shooting speeds, I'd object. If it's at 30 seconds, I'd live with it.

Bob

 

[Paul Harris86145]

Just got a new E20P, I ran the Stuck/Hot pixel test on a Lens cap
picture and it reported 16 Hot/Stuck pixels, I have run the pixel
mapping utillity 6 times and it has made no difference.

Question: Am I over reacting, is 16 stuck pixels OK, ( my Nikon
900 reports none) or is it faulty and should be returned.

The utility report can be found at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/deadpixeltest.jpg)

The orriginal file, if you have a fast connection is at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/p3030032.jpg)

If you zoom in to the picture verious red, blue and green stuck
pixels can be seen

Thanks for any help

Paul

I have just done a few more tests and found the following
Time Stuck Pixcel
1 =0
2.5 =0
8 =8
15 =60
30 =81
60 =695
Hope this helps

 

[Dodgeboy]

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6 separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession, without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it took care of the problem for good.

Dave

Just got a new E20P, I ran the Stuck/Hot pixel test on a Lens cap
picture and it reported 16 Hot/Stuck pixels, I have run the pixel
mapping utillity 6 times and it has made no difference.

Question: Am I over reacting, is 16 stuck pixels OK, ( my Nikon
900 reports none) or is it faulty and should be returned.

The utility report can be found at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/deadpixeltest.jpg)

The orriginal file, if you have a fast connection is at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/p3030032.jpg)

If you zoom in to the picture verious red, blue and green stuck
pixels can be seen

Thanks for any help

Paul

 

[Paolo 'PORK']

so far...w 2 sec "0" stuck/hot pixels...i think your cam is doin good!!

i think those are noise and not hot pixels!!

just my opinion!!i still don't have an e20...

Just got a new E20P, I ran the Stuck/Hot pixel test on a Lens cap
picture and it reported 16 Hot/Stuck pixels, I have run the pixel
mapping utillity 6 times and it has made no difference.

Question: Am I over reacting, is 16 stuck pixels OK, ( my Nikon
900 reports none) or is it faulty and should be returned.

The utility report can be found at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/deadpixeltest.jpg)

The orriginal file, if you have a fast connection is at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/p3030032.jpg)

If you zoom in to the picture verious red, blue and green stuck
pixels can be seen

Thanks for any help

Paul

I have just done a few more tests and found the following
Time Stuck Pixcel
1 =0
2.5 =0
8 =8
15 =60
30 =81
60 =695
Hope this helps

--www.pbase.com/paolo

 

[Elbert Zip Johnson]

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

HI Dave

How do you run a pixel mapping test?
in what mode with the E-20?
thanx
Zip
-- 'EVENT PHOTOGRAPHER' MID WEST check me out? HTTP: HOMETOWN.aol.com/zjohn227

 

[Jason Stoller]

I am with Brian on this one I would exchange it.

Just got a new E20P, I ran the Stuck/Hot pixel test on a Lens cap
picture and it reported 16 Hot/Stuck pixels, I have run the pixel
mapping utillity 6 times and it has made no difference.

Question: Am I over reacting, is 16 stuck pixels OK, ( my Nikon
900 reports none) or is it faulty and should be returned.

The utility report can be found at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/deadpixeltest.jpg)

The orriginal file, if you have a fast connection is at

(www.fotosite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/p3030032.jpg)

If you zoom in to the picture verious red, blue and green stuck
pixels can be seen

Thanks for any help

Paul

--
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
'I have discovered digital photography' Livin life at 5 megapixels!

--Jason Stoller [email protected] that special moment with a great camera

 

[Paul Harris86145]

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

Paul

 

[Paul Harris86145]

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly
showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all
get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

Paul

You've all been a bit quiet, what's happend have all you E20 owners just done the test and found you have more stuck pixels than me, come on don't be bashfull, please let me know your numbers after all I only want to know if my camera is faulty or if 900 + stuck pixels is OK

If you need the test utillity it can be found at

http://www.starzen.com/imaging

Thanks for any help

Paul

 

[David M.]

Paul;

I don't know where the lens cap test came from originally, but it's NOT an accurate test for bad pixels. As another previous poster implied, it's more likely noise that you are obsessing over.

There are much more accurate tests to perform for this. One is to take a pic of a black card at ISO 100 and low shutter speeds and then blow the image up in Photoshop to examine it pixel by pixel. This is just a very simple example. Do a search on the forum for alternate testing methods. Once again, imaging with lens cap off is not a test at all, it's misleading.
D.

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly
showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all
get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

Paul

You've all been a bit quiet, what's happend have all you E20 owners
just done the test and found you have more stuck pixels than me,
come on don't be bashfull, please let me know your numbers after
all I only want to know if my camera is faulty or if 900 + stuck
pixels is OK

If you need the test utillity it can be found at

http://www.starzen.com/imaging

Thanks for any help

Paul

 

[David M.]

Oops, meant to say LENS CAP ON at end of last post!!

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly
showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all
get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

Paul

You've all been a bit quiet, what's happend have all you E20 owners
just done the test and found you have more stuck pixels than me,
come on don't be bashfull, please let me know your numbers after
all I only want to know if my camera is faulty or if 900 + stuck
pixels is OK

If you need the test utillity it can be found at

http://www.starzen.com/imaging

Thanks for any help

Paul

 

[Jason Stoller]

David I suspect that Paul is not doing the test right. Paul you results don't sound realistic at all. Did you close off the viewfinder in the camera when you took you test shots. I have never heard results like yours and that might be why you are not getting responses. I am interested in helping you but if your post is an attempt to flame which I am suspecting it is then I would appreciate you taking it somewhere else. I would like to see you post some pictures straight from the camera. If you do then we can see what is going on. If you have as many bad pixels as you claim then I am sure that we will see it in your pictures. If you do not post then I wonder how genuine your problem really is and what your intent really is!

Jason

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly
showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all
get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

Paul

You've all been a bit quiet, what's happend have all you E20 owners
just done the test and found you have more stuck pixels than me,
come on don't be bashfull, please let me know your numbers after
all I only want to know if my camera is faulty or if 900 + stuck
pixels is OK

If you need the test utillity it can be found at

http://www.starzen.com/imaging

Thanks for any help

Paul

--Jason Stoller [email protected] that special moment with a great camera

 

[Jason Stoller]

Its clear this is an attempt to flame in my view and a waste of time.

Jason

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly
showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all
get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

Paul

You've all been a bit quiet, what's happend have all you E20 owners
just done the test and found you have more stuck pixels than me,
come on don't be bashfull, please let me know your numbers after
all I only want to know if my camera is faulty or if 900 + stuck
pixels is OK

If you need the test utillity it can be found at

http://www.starzen.com/imaging

Thanks for any help

Paul

--
Jason Stoller [email protected]
Catching that special moment with a great camera

--Jason Stoller [email protected] that special moment with a great camera

 

[LCD]

Do the same test in RAW mode at ISO 80 and see the results. Incamera processing will heighten the effect. Also you seem to be talking of hot pixels since stuck ones would be there all of the time. Hot pixels are normal the longer the ccd is on. Indeed, the E20 uses a dark frame to subtract them for longer exposures - so they are expected. Enjoy it and stop worrying over hot pixels.

--LCD

 

[LCD]

I had a couple of stuck pixels on my E20 when I first got it, as
well. Did you run the pixel mapping 6 times in a row, or 6
separate times? I had to run mine 2 or 3 times in succession,
without powering off the camera to fix mine. Once I did that, it
took care of the problem for good.

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

Not dead pixels since they are black. A 60 sec exsposure in RAW and you only got 5 hot pixels. What more do you want? If I did my E10 at 30 secs, I'd get thousands. The longer these ccds are on the more hot pixels there will be - this is NORMAL.

Look, again, just take pictures and stop worrying. If the interfere so much take the thing back but your next one might have more but will certianly have them. We all have hot pixels. The Canon D30, D60, Nikon D1x, D100 etc ALL have them but they are processed out by the cameras' firmware.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly
showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all
get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

RAW is the only way to test since you get the effects of the camera processing the data otherwise. On long exposures the E20 then takes another dark frame for the same exposure and subtracts the hoit pixels. So they are not likely to be evident in normnal shots. So yes it is okay. Now take pictiure and stop worrying.

BTW thre test program you are using uses arbitrary settings for the threshold. What is the right one????--LCD

 

[Paul Harris86145]

David I suspect that Paul is not doing the test right. Paul you
results don't sound realistic at all. Did you close off the
viewfinder in the camera when you took you test shots. I have
never heard results like yours and that might be why you are not
getting responses. I am interested in helping you but if your post
is an attempt to flame which I am suspecting it is then I would
appreciate you taking it somewhere else. I would like to see you
post some pictures straight from the camera. If you do then we can
see what is going on. If you have as many bad pixels as you claim
then I am sure that we will see it in your pictures. If you do not
post then I wonder how genuine your problem really is and what your
intent really is!

The way I am doing the test is lens cap on viewfinder blind closed, camera set to 80 asa and 60 seconds exposure shooting in TIFF mode, the dead pixel utility then reports anything from 600 to over 900 hot/stuck pixels. If I view the picture in photoshop at 300% magnification I can clearly see the various stuch Red, Green and Blue Pixels, if I also print the file I can also see the pixels, this is not noise, it is clearly stuck pixels, Clearly this should not happen, all I was after was some help in confirming that my camera is faulty, however from the comments of some this is not the place to find help.

Please do not bother replying anymore as my presence has upset you all so much I will go elsware for HELP

 

[Paul Harris86145]

Just did the pixel mapping 10 times to make sure.
Re done the test with the camera set to
60sec 80ASA and TIFF and got 987 dead/hot pixels.
Then set it to.
60sec 80ASA and RAW and got 5 dead/hot pixels.

Not dead pixels since they are black. A 60 sec exsposure in RAW and
you only got 5 hot pixels. What more do you want? If I did my E10
at 30 secs, I'd get thousands. The longer these ccds are on the
more hot pixels there will be - this is NORMAL.

Look, again, just take pictures and stop worrying. If the interfere
so much take the thing back but your next one might have more but
will certianly have them. We all have hot pixels. The Canon D30,
D60, Nikon D1x, D100 etc ALL have them but they are processed out
by the cameras' firmware.

But when both pictures were Viewed in photoshop they both clearly
showed the same high level of what are actualy stuck pixels.

is 987 OK for a 60 second exposure or is it faulty, what do you all
get at 60 seconds in TIFF mode.

RAW is the only way to test since you get the effects of the camera
processing the data otherwise. On long exposures the E20 then takes
another dark frame for the same exposure and subtracts the hoit
pixels. So they are not likely to be evident in normnal shots. So
yes it is okay. Now take pictiure and stop worrying.

BTW thre test program you are using uses arbitrary settings for the
threshold. What is the right one????
--

If you re read what I said you will see I said that in RAW mode the Deadpixel utility only reported 5 but the file when viewed CLEARLY showed the same HIGH Number, they are also clearly STUCK not hot or dead, A Stuck pixel is easely distinguished from a dead or hot pixel

 

[Paul Harris86145]

Do the same test in RAW mode at ISO 80 and see the results.
Incamera processing will heighten the effect. Also you seem to be
talking of hot pixels since stuck ones would be there all of the
time. Hot pixels are normal the longer the ccd is on. Indeed, the
E20 uses a dark frame to subtract them for longer exposures - so
they are expected. Enjoy it and stop worrying over hot pixels.

--
LCD

I have taken 5 test exposures and opend them all in photoshop and copered all the images side by side, all show the same stuck pixels in exactly the same place.

The only thing about shooting in raw mode is the deadpixel utility fails to detect them, they are still clearely visable when the files are examined .

 

[glowluzid]

All: I've found in testing for dead/hot pixels on the E20, ORF don't get mapped.

Paul, you probably should exchange that E20 (assuming one more thing--below). It apparently is faulty--same pixels hot over several shots is not noise, unless failed to account for the following.

The Hot pixel search done correctly assumes that thresholds were matched to shutter.

In testing for dead/hot pixels (on JPG mapped images) you need to use a sufficient threshold (counts) for a given shutter. Example, when i did this, from memory I recall getting several pixels with about 5-10 counts (pixels with values of 5 or greater) for a shutter of .25-.5 seconds. In a few consecutive shots, there were a few pixels that kept coming up with counts of 3 or 4 consistently. When I tried it an hour or two later, those pixels weren't hot anymore. In a normal image, they'd never be more than a little noisy, not bright hot pixels.

If you go to 1 or 2 second shutters expect the counts to go to 10-15. for any shutter under 1 second, if you see a pixel with something like 50 - 150 counts, that's trouble.

I have taken 5 test exposures and opend them all in photoshop and
copered all the images side by side, all show the same stuck pixels
in exactly the same place.

The only thing about shooting in raw mode is the deadpixel utility
fails to detect them, they are still clearely visable when the
files are examined .

--Photos, tips and tests at: http://www.geocities.com/glowluzid