 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / October 2005EOS 3 underexposure
I just received exposure check images of my vintage EOS 3 body, and it really seems to be underexposing by 2/3 stop. The body is fairly old and has never been cleaned. Would you suggest a CLA or just set the ISO down to 32? If CLA with exposure fix, would Canon or KEH be a better choice? Thanks! > I just received exposure check images of my vintage EOS 3 body, and it > really seems to be underexposing by 2/3 stop. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks! Early released EOS 3's had this problem. I don't know what the remedy is, but I suspect that it's not a cleaning issue, rather that it is one of the defective early units. You might do well to contact the Canon service center and inquire, letting them know the serial number, etc. They should be able to tell you whether its one of the effected units. At that point, they MAY repair it for you.. > I just received exposure check images of my vintage EOS 3 body, and it > really seems to be underexposing by 2/3 stop. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks! My EOS3 was like this from new. I just changed either the ISO or the +/- setting. It also had an insatiable hunger for 2CR5 batteries. Eventually after I'd moved to an EOS10D and I could afford the downtime, I paid Canon UK to fix the battery problem, and they also fixed the exposure problem. (My cheapo plastic film planed EOS 30V is on the button exposure wise, is much lighter but can still wind film fast, and the ECF works with me and my bifocals. The ECF on the EOS3 never really worked for me wearing bifocals.)  SignatureM Stewart Milton Keynes, UK http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm >> I just received exposure check images of my vintage EOS 3 body, and >> it really seems to be underexposing by 2/3 stop. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > fast, and the ECF works with me and my bifocals. The ECF on the EOS3 > never really worked for me wearing bifocals.) Sounds like you got a double whammy... (battery/exposure) Mine was fine, and used an amazingly small amount of battery power. I then used the booster with AA batteries, and the things last forever, it seems. > Sounds like you got a double whammy... > (battery/exposure) > Mine was fine, and used an amazingly small amount of battery power. > I then used the booster with AA batteries, and the things last forever, it > seems. Yes, buying new from Canon hasn't been too good an experience for me, but I still do it - so they've won. My EOS3 is a totally different beast now that I rarely use it. Strangely, I've done much better with my many s/h purchases. Just hope that my 3 day old 5D is OK... SignatureM Stewart Milton Keynes, UK http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm >> Sounds like you got a double whammy... >> (battery/exposure) [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > beast now that I rarely use it. Strangely, I've done much better > with my many s/h purchases. Just hope that my 3 day old 5D is OK... I would have to agree that Canon has a spotty record with these sort of things. Skip has reported that one of his two 5Ds appears to have an off-set sensor(?). Get with it, Canon!! Sheesh. I'm a Canon guy, but they really need to get their act together in this regard. There has been a flurry of design-flaw announcements lately from Sony, Canon, Nikon and others... -They're either coincidental, or perhaps they are taking advantage of the opportunity to announce bad news in the context of announcements from their competitors. >>> Sounds like you got a double whammy... >>> (battery/exposure) [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >opportunity to announce bad news in the context of announcements from their >competitors. Shame. The 20, 30, 40 and 50 year old cameras I own all work as new. Some are even Canons. Thanks for the entertainment. ;) RP© - Congratulations Chicago White Sox > Thanks for the entertainment. > ;) ??? >> Thanks for the entertainment. >> ;) > >??? C'mon Mark. I'd *hope* you can figure it out. RP© - Technology, it's a wonderful thing when properly managed. >>> Thanks for the entertainment. >>> ;) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > RP© Dang. I guess I (even more) dense (than usual) tonight... ? >>>> Thanks for the entertainment. >>>> ;) [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >I guess I (even more) dense (than usual) tonight... >? Here is a clue... Spending several thousands dollars on something that does not work as advertised. Where I come from that's called mismanagement. Hello......... Canon, Sony, Nikon..... RP© - CHICAGO WHITE SOX WORLD CHAMPIONS - Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary. - Frank L. Visco, How to Write Good >>>>> Thanks for the entertainment. >>>>> ;) [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Where I come from that's called mismanagement. > Hello......... Canon, Sony, Nikon..... I should think it is a new production process that is only showing its limitations after continued use, mostly in very hot and humid conditions. It is the process by which the CCD is attached to the circuit board. Individual management can't be blamed for that. The process goes back to the canon 600 series camcorders. Thats two generations ago. Everyone has been using this technique which is why ALL the manufacturers are suffering with it. > RP© > - > CHICAGO WHITE SOX WORLD CHAMPIONS Don't you mean American Champions? SignatureDD (everything is temporary) www.dallasdahms.com >> RP© >> - >> CHICAGO WHITE SOX WORLD CHAMPIONS > >Don't you mean American Champions? I'm not making this up. ;) RP© > >> RP© > >> - [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I'm not making this up. > ;) I was just having a dig. Us outlanders find it amusing that the World Series only happens in North America. SignatureDD (everything is temporary) www.dallasdahms.com In article <hip8m1hrlv9u3hcleb10tt3vljf7i6p6r0@4ax.com>, rich@wrongaddress.net says... > RP© > - > CHICAGO WHITE SOX WORLD CHAMPIONS Don't you mean American Champions? SignatureDD (everything is temporary) www.dallasdahms.com Considering where the US finished in the Olympic baseball tourney, I find that hard to argue with. But they named the World Series before the rest of the world, or even all of the US, played the game...the hype of advertising in the 19th century. -- Skip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >In article <hip8m1hrlv9u3hcleb10tt3vljf7i6p6r0@4ax.com>, >rich@wrongaddress.net says... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Don't you mean American Champions? MLB does include Canada but not Mexico so I suppose it could read.... CHICAGO WHITE SOX NORTH AMERICAN CHAMPIONS SANS MEXICO. Then again, some people *think* Mexico is Central America. RP© I |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.