 |
 | 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 / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / January 200520D a flawed camera?
I've run into two people who had lock up problems, one person who had a weird problem where downloading long exposure images took as long as the images took to aquire and now I'm hearing the camera has focusing problems. Did they release this 10D re-do too soon? -Rich Two doesn't seem statistically significant to make an assumption like that considering the tens of thousands that have been sold in the last couple of months. I've had mine for over a month and never experienced a problem. It's fast, accurate, and a joy to use. So... keep on trolling..... > I've run into two people who had lock up problems, > one person who had a weird problem where downloading > long exposure images took as long as the images took > to aquire and now I'm hearing the camera has focusing > problems. Did they release this 10D re-do too soon? > -Rich > Two doesn't seem statistically significant to make an assumption like that > considering the tens of thousands that have been sold in the last couple of [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > problems. Did they release this 10D re-do too soon? > > -Rich Basher/Troll alert. My 20D has not had one issue, so keep on trollin' How much is Nikon paying you? $0.00001 per message? Oh wait, let me guess, you're not actually getting paid for this?? ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ No real name and misusing none programs, inc's domain name ... are you, perchance, a troll? Trustworthy you are not, this much seems clear. > I've run into two people who had lock up problems, 2 out of how many? Did the firmware upgrade solve the problem? Was the battery not completely drained? > one person who had a weird problem where downloading > long exposure images took as long as the images took > to aquire I never even heard of such a bug. Details, even fabricated ones? A $15 card reader works and will not drain the battery. > and now I'm hearing the camera has focusing problems. If you hear instead of imagining, where is the URL? > Did they release this 10D re-do too soon? This is not a 10D re-do. Pray learn a bit more about the products you smear. -Wolfgang >^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ >No real name and misusing none programs, inc's domain name ... are [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >I never even heard of such a bug. >Details, even fabricated ones? All of what I've told you is accurate. Of course, a handful of such occurances doesn't mean the camera is flawed, but with electronic components being as reliable as they are, things like this can often be traced to design flaws. So, instead of acting like a little girl who was told she was ugly, just because you own the camera, why not just indicate that your camera (even though as the other poster said, the experience of two people does not = a substantive sample) works well? I really do not understand the irrational emotionalism of owners of Canon and Nikon products. -Rich > All of what I've told you is accurate. Of course, a handful of such > occurances doesn't mean the camera is flawed, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > of owners of Canon and Nikon products. > -Rich Make that 4 people Rich... I bought 2 of the mongrel things. Serial numbers not in the same group so it couldn't have been an isolated incident. Both locked up when I changed lenses (yes, genuine Canon lenses) and one died completely. I traded the dead one (full refund) for a 1D II. The other one I flashed the firmware to 1.05 and fixed the lens change problem only to find more problems when I used a grip. It too eventually died without warning in the middel of a santa shoot. I seems as if the Canon grip has an issue too. Can't use the batteries past 30% discharge or the camera kills itself. This camera is a load of crap. It forward focused out of the box and still has reliability problems. The problems with 20Ds might not surface for casual users but press them into 500 shots a day environment and they are duds! Doug >> All of what I've told you is accurate. Of course, a handful of such >> occurances doesn't mean the camera is flawed, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >Doug Interesting. I hadn't seen the focus issues myself, but it was reported by two people in a yahoo group. Also, the oddball thing where the camera takes minutes to aquire the image once the exposure was done I've seen first hand. The owner of the thing ended up using his film-based Olympus OM-1 in place of the Canon. -Rich > Also, the oddball thing where the camera takes minutes to aquire the > image once the exposure was done I've seen first hand. That would be someone not realizing that dark-frame-subtraction noise reduction was enabled.  SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com >> Also, the oddball thing where the camera takes minutes to aquire the >> image once the exposure was done I've seen first hand. > >That would be someone not realizing that dark-frame-subtraction noise >reduction was enabled. So if you take a five minute exposure, the addition of the dark frame adds five minutes to full image aquisition and process??? -Rich > On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 02:38:17 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So if you take a five minute exposure, the addition of the dark frame > adds five minutes to full image aquisition and process??? Yes, and it so states in the manual. SignatureJohn McWilliams >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 02:38:17 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Yes, and it so states in the manual. That's pretty pathetic. I wonder if they'll figure out a way to fix that? -Rich > On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:42:45 GMT, John McWilliams > <jpmcw@comcast.net> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > That's pretty pathetic. I wonder if they'll figure out a way to fix > that? You mean the manual, or the laws of physics? ;-) Dark frame subtraction is making use of the rather predictable amount of noise that is generated during exposure. Longer exposure means more noise, and is dependent on temperature. It also allows to reduce the visiblity of hot/dead/stuck pixels as well. Bart >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:42:45 GMT, John McWilliams >> <jpmcw@comcast.net> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >Bart Probably the manual. I'm pretty familiar with dark frames, owing to doing astrophotography, but to have it as a "default" is probably a mistake. But, I'd have to how it's presented in the manual to find out if the user whom I saw having the problem was just being sloppy in not reading it. -Rich SNIP > I'm pretty familiar with dark frames, owing to doing > astrophotography, but to have it as a "default" is probably a > mistake. It's off by default, so the user must have switched Custom Function 02 (1 second or longer, long exposure noise reduction) to on. Bart >Probably the manual. I'm pretty familiar with dark frames, owing to >doing astrophotography, but to have it as a "default" is probably a >mistake. Dark frame is turned off by default on the 20D. Ron Ron Lacey Murillo Ontario ron@ronsfotos.com That isn't pathetic that is just how it works. It needs two images with the same exposure one for the image and one to use to remove the noise. If it was to do a 1/500 of a second frame to remove the noise to speed up the process it wouldn't have any noise to remove. This is why this function is turned off by default. It should only be used by those that truly understand what it is doing and why so that they don't bitch and complain like morons. John >>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 02:38:17 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > that? > -Rich > That isn't pathetic that is just how it works. It needs two images with the > same exposure one for the image and one to use to remove the noise. If it > was to do a 1/500 of a second frame to remove the noise to speed up the > process it wouldn't have any noise to remove. This is why this function is > turned off by default. It should only be used by those that truly understand > what it is doing and why so that they don't bitch and complain like morons. Who is bitching and complaining like a moron? SignatureJohn McWilliams >> That isn't pathetic that is just how it works. It needs two images with the >> same exposure one for the image and one to use to remove the noise. If it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >Who is bitching and complaining like a moron? The moron who bitched that the process was pathetic, perhaps? >>> So if you take a five minute exposure, the addition of the dark frame >>> adds five minutes to full image aquisition and process??? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That's pretty pathetic. I wonder if they'll figure out a way to fix > that? It's not something to "fix". That's how the process works. It has to take the same length of time as the initial exposure. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com >>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 02:38:17 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >That's pretty pathetic. I wonder if they'll figure out a way to fix >that? That's not pathetic; that's the definition of dark frame subtraction. You can turn it off if you want, but if you want it on, there is no other way to get the proper dark frame to subtract than to take an exposure of equal length with the shutter closed. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >In message <1kb5t0th6k795o8lghl7ns2dd1m14q3d39@4ax.com>, >That's not pathetic; that's the definition of dark frame subtraction. >You can turn it off if you want, but if you want it on, there is no >other way to get the proper dark frame to subtract than to take an >exposure of equal length with the shutter closed. Is that the only way it could be implemented? That's a lot of down time when shooting a series of 5-minute exposures. Could Canon have designed this feature like custom white balance, where one reference dark frame (of 5 minutes) is taken and then subtracted from all of the subsequent 5-minute exposures? John -- > Could Canon have designed this feature like custom white balance, where > one reference dark frame (of 5 minutes) is taken and then subtracted > from all of the subsequent 5-minute exposures? No, not and have it work properly. Variables that affect noise are exposure time, ISO, and sensor temperature. Because of the latter, the dark frame has to be done at the same time as the exposure, especially with long exposures, where the sensor will get hotter as you do more exposures in a row. That will change the noise pattern. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com >>In message <1kb5t0th6k795o8lghl7ns2dd1m14q3d39@4ax.com>, >>That's not pathetic; that's the definition of dark frame subtraction. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >dark frame (of 5 minutes) is taken and then subtracted from all of the >subsequent 5-minute exposures? You always have the option to do that yourself. You can also break your shots down into multiple, smaller segments, and generate a blackframe of the length of each segment, and subtract it from each, and blend the results together. for even lower noise. If there are moving trails, though, you'll get a dropout between exposures. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< What's more important...done right or done fast? You get one or the other seldom do you ever get right and fast. John >>In message <1kb5t0th6k795o8lghl7ns2dd1m14q3d39@4ax.com>, >>That's not pathetic; that's the definition of dark frame subtraction. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > -- > >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 02:38:17 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> > >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > That's pretty pathetic. I wonder if they'll figure out a way to fix > that? you obviously have trouble with the dark frame concept. > -Rich That is what I was wondering because then a say 30 second exposure would be a 60 second one. 30 Seconds for the image and another 30 seconds for the frame that the camera uses to remove the long exposure noise. John >> Also, the oddball thing where the camera takes minutes to aquire the >> image once the exposure was done I've seen first hand. > > That would be someone not realizing that dark-frame-subtraction noise > reduction was enabled. > I seems as if the Canon grip has an issue too. Can't use the batteries past > 30% discharge or the camera kills itself. This camera is a load of crap. It > forward focused out of the box and still has reliability problems. The > problems with 20Ds might not surface for casual users but press them into > 500 shots a day environment and they are duds! If you're doing 500 shots a day, you need to be using professional grade equipment. > > I seems as if the Canon grip has an issue too. Can't use the batteries past > > 30% discharge or the camera kills itself. This camera is a load of crap. It [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If you're doing 500 shots a day, you need to be using professional > grade equipment. This is what I mean by operator error. I had a friend at work who owned a B-grade sports coupe and took it motocross racing on weekends. He complained about his car having reliability problems with steering and suspension!! Now, the 20D is not a B-grade camera (I own one, so ofcourse I dont feel that way), but it is not a full pro body. It can be used for professional purposes, but in a 500/day shooting situation, a 20D should not be the main body. I would be surprised if any sub $2000 DSLR body would not exhibit some type of problem over a period of time where it was taking 500 shots per day. Some of the issues might even be battery! Some real wackos out there, I tell ya. > This is what I mean by operator error. I had a friend at work who owned a > B-grade sports coupe and took it motocross racing on weekends. He complained [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Some of the issues might even be battery! Some real wackos out there, I tell > ya. I have yet to see a 20D, but I've had a 10D since shortly after they came out. It's a great camera but I certainly wouldn't expect it to do 500 shots per day. > > This is what I mean by operator error. I had a friend at work who owned a > > B-grade sports coupe and took it motocross racing on weekends. He [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > out. It's a great camera but I certainly wouldn't expect it to do 500 shots > per day. Why? I had several days this summer, and 2 days in the spring, where I shot 600-700 pictures with my Olympus C-2100UZ. Granted I did go through at least one battery change. For snap happy amateurs, I don't see 500 shots/day as being unreasonable. I am looking at DSLRs right now, and I would expect any of them to be able to handle 500 shots/day. SignatureMichael Meissner email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org http://www.the-meissners.org > Why? I had several days this summer, and 2 days in the spring, where I shot > 600-700 pictures with my Olympus C-2100UZ. Granted I did go through at least > one battery change. For snap happy amateurs, I don't see 500 shots/day as > being unreasonable. I am looking at DSLRs right now, and I would expect any of > them to be able to handle 500 shots/day. I'd say you need to be more discriminating before pressing the button. > This is what I mean by operator error. I had a friend at work who owned a > B-grade sports coupe and took it motocross racing on weekends. He complained [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Some of the issues might even be battery! Some real wackos out there, I tell > ya. FYI the problems I have with 20D (other than focus issues) didn't exist in the 10D and none of them exist in the 1D. I've seen my rivals shoot 600 and 700 shots a day with Nikon coolpix consumer cameras. I used to do it on film with Canon 3000s. No... Your assesment of the likelyhood of reliability for 6 weeks work a year is off the mark. Randall will love this... My SD9 Sigma shot this assignment last year and was the backup for the 20D this year. Guess which camera did the last 2 weeks work and never faltered? Come on Randall... Take a wild guess!! Doug > FYI the problems I have with 20D (other than focus issues) didn't exist in > the 10D and none of them exist in the 1D. I've seen my rivals shoot 600 and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Guess which camera did the last 2 weeks work and never faltered? Come on > Randall... Take a wild guess!! Mmmm boy. Gotta love them Sigmas. Best overpriced 3.42MP camera out there, especially if you like Homer Simpson skin tones. I don't normally agree with Randall here, but this time I do. I wish people had those Sigma's up their a.s. That is after all the same place that Sigma got them from after all. Which explains why they are sh.t! John >> FYI the problems I have with 20D (other than focus issues) didn't exist >> in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Mmmm boy. Gotta love them Sigmas. Best overpriced 3.42MP camera out > there, especially if you like Homer Simpson skin tones. > I don't normally agree with Randall here, but this time I do. I wish people > had those Sigma's up their a.s. That is after all the same place that Sigma > got them from after all. Which explains why they are sh.t! > > John Well John... I won't disagree about your assumption. The SD9 is not my favourite camera but it has something going for it the 10D and 20D don't have... Rock solid reliability. Doug >I won't disagree about your assumption. The SD9 is not my favourite camera >but it has something going for it the 10D and 20D don't have... Rock solid >reliability. How many SDx cameras have sold, compared to 10Ds an 20Ds? You're going to hear a lot more complaints about the ones that have sold better, all other things being equal. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< > In message <33gl9aF3tiqcuU1@individual.net>, > > How many SDx cameras have sold, compared to 10Ds an 20Ds? You're going > to hear a lot more complaints about the ones that have sold better, all > other things being equal. > -- I have bought one, SD9 I bought 2, 20Ds and I bought one, 10D previously. For me that makes 3 problem cameras from the same maker compared to none from Sigma. Hey... I know, I just got a fluke in the Sigma and was downright unlucky with the Canon's, right? If Canon would just tell me they are on the case I might feel better but all they say is bring the camera in and we'll take two weeks to look at it. Good one John. Doug >> I seems as if the Canon grip has an issue too. Can't use the batteries >> past [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > If you're doing 500 shots a day, you need to be using professional > grade equipment. I use this camera for 400-600 shots at any given time, and never a battery problem, forward or backfocus or any other "reliability" problem. The only one I've had, related to the camera and after the update on firmware, is the gawdawful flash metering wit EX series flashes. And that stupid AA battery holder with the grip, that now is reposing in a drawer, soon to be forgotten. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >>>I seems as if the Canon grip has an issue too. Can't use the batteries >>>past [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > holder with the grip, that now is reposing in a drawer, soon to be > forgotten. Don't forget that the most vocal crier of "foul" against Canon's 20D was taking seventeen trillion shots in high Aussie heat, *using the built in flash*! And some of the time with the above battery grip that certainly sounds suspect..... SignatureJohn McWilliams > I bought 2 of the mongrel things. Serial numbers not in the same group so it > couldn't have been an isolated incident. If you assume 1% flawed cameras, your chance to get 2 bad ones is 1:10.000. People have been known to win the lottery with much worse chances. > I seems as if the Canon grip has an issue too. > Can't use the batteries past > 30% discharge or the camera kills itself. How do you measure 30% discharge? Display? Amperage counter? Images taken? Volt meter? Voltage under load? Time to load the battery afterwards? Anyway, I cannot duplicate your grip problems. -Wolfgang >I bought 2 of the mongrel things. Serial numbers not in the same group so it >couldn't have been an isolated incident. Both locked up when I changed [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >used a grip. It too eventually died without warning in the middel of a santa >shoot. So Doug, how much do you want for your 'dud' 20D? I asked you the same question in the other thread where you were claiming it was a lemon, & that you were goiong to sell it on Ebay, but I haven't yet seen a reply from you. SignatureW . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^--------------------------------------------------------------- > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:49:20 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg >>> I've run into two people who had lock up problems, >>2 out of how many? >>Did the firmware upgrade solve the problem? >>Was the battery not completely drained? >>> one person who had a weird problem where downloading >>> long exposure images took as long as the images took >>> to aquire >>I never even heard of such a bug. >>Details, even fabricated ones? > All of what I've told you is accurate. Accuracy does not make truth. For all we know you have run into 2 people with lock up problems and 20.000 20D owners without these problems. Care to answer the questions? > Of course, a handful of such > occurances doesn't mean the camera is flawed, > but with electronic components being as reliable as they are, > things like this can often be traced to design flaws. I imagined there was a computer inside. I must have been mistaken, it's all hardwired and there's no firmware which might have simply normal bugs, so it must be a design flaw. > So, instead of acting like a little girl who was told she was > ugly, just because you own the camera, Are the grapes that sour, fox? > why not just indicate > that your camera (even though as the other poster said, the > experience of two people does not = a substantive sample) > works well? So 2 nebulous bug reports make a design flaw, yet many 'no problems here' reports are not a substantive sample. How do you rule out that a few bad cameras slip through QA? > I really do not understand the irrational emotionalism > of owners of Canon and Nikon products. Has your lordship, the paragon of ice-cold rationality, ever held the 20D, much less used it in earnest? And yet your lordship judges it and breaks his staff over it? -Wolfgang > So 2 nebulous bug reports make a design flaw, yet many 'no > problems here' reports are not a substantive sample. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > -Wolfgang Not sure where you've been during all the ruckus Wolfgang but it couldn't have been lurking on where a lot of early owners reported all the problems it had. There were also a fair few who upgraded their firmware and killed the cameras with version 1.04 which Canon rushed out a few weeks after the camera was released. When I took mine in to have the thing reset, I just happened to notice the rows and rows of what looked like 20Ds in the workshop. This is the camera the OP found 2 reports of malfunction over. It is quite a trick to actually come across 2 people with 20D cameras this early in their life. For both to have reported problems like I have, some 10,000 miles away is a rare coincidence indeed. As for your query as to how I arrived at 30% battery capacity... The charger Canon provide has little winking lights to indicate battery life in thirds as it is charged. 2 winks and it's 1/3rd! Each time the camera malfunctioned with the grip, the batteries were at 30% charge. Since then I have done away with the grip and used just the single battery without any lockups. Does this give you a clue as to what might be the problem? Cheers, Doug SNIP > Not sure where you've been during all the ruckus Wolfgang but > it couldn't have been lurking on where a lot of early owners > reported > all the problems it had. All the problems? AFAIK there was a lock-up issue which was fixed by a firmware update. Other issues were related to unspecified brand lenses and dirty lens contacts, possibly a few failing CF cards, and don't forget inexperienced user error. The battery grip is something I distrusted from the beginning, and has been found to cause at least some if not most of the reported issues. Lose the grip and problems are usually solved (which is of course not a real solution, it should work as sold). SNIP > When I took mine in to have the thing reset, I just happened to > notice the rows and rows of what looked like 20Ds in the workshop. Yes, it is a very popular camera, so even a small percentage of issues will amount to a significant quantity. Of course the cameras may have been there for other reasons than you assume (e.g. firmware upgrade, sensor cleaning, checking for often (unjustly) claimed focus inaccuracy). Bart > "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message >> So 2 nebulous bug reports make a design flaw, yet many 'no >> problems here' reports are not a substantive sample. >> How do you rule out that a few bad cameras slip through QA? >> > I really do not understand the irrational emotionalism >> > of owners of Canon and Nikon products. >> Has your lordship, the paragon of ice-cold rationality, ever held >> the 20D, much less used it in earnest? And yet your lordship >> judges it and breaks his staff over it? >> -Wolfgang > Not sure where you've been during all the ruckus Wolfgang but it couldn't > have been lurking on where a lot of early owners reported all the problems > it had. Probably not yet looking for a DSLR, but I think I did quite extensive research, especially on the 20D --- after all, a DSLR is rather expensive --- and saw nothing which said the camera was a bad product. I have not yet had any reasons to revise my opinion. The camera is not perfect, obviously, but so far I only hit minor things. > There were also a fair few who upgraded their firmware and killed > the cameras with version 1.04 which Canon rushed out a few weeks after the > camera was released. Actually, the firmware in 1.0.4 was not flawed. It's exactly the same firmware as in 1.0.5. (Which is why I don't believe it was rushed.) The firmware loading program of 1.0.4 was not working correctly in some cases, causing a lot of problems --- which Canon acknowledged and apologized for. As to "upgrades a few weeks after the camera was released": you are using Outlook Express as a news reader, aren't you? I can point you to bugs unfixed for years and critical upgrades mere days after releasing the software. Are you measuring by a different yard stick there? > When I took mine in to have the thing reset, I just > happened to notice the rows and rows of what looked like 20Ds in the > workshop. Try going to your workshop and ask how many they sold and how many ever came back with problems, including a broken 1.0.4 upgrade. > This is the camera the OP found 2 reports of malfunction over. It is quite a > trick to actually come across 2 people with 20D cameras this early in their > life. Why? Do you believe only a handful of units were ever sold? I was under the impression it was a very well selling camera. > For both to have reported problems like I have, some 10,000 miles away > is a rare coincidence indeed. Only if distance is a variable in the error reported. Otherwise the locality is not relevant. > As for your query as to how I arrived at 30% battery capacity... The charger > Canon provide has little winking lights to indicate battery life in thirds > as it is charged. 2 winks and it's 1/3rd! Uh --- are you talking about the Canon Battery Charger CB-5L, which at least came with my 20D? If so, you are mistaken on two counts: - 1 blip is 0-50% (not 0-30%), - 2 blips is 50+%, - 3 blips is ~75+%, - continous is full. And since this is a Lithium-Ion accumulator, it'll charge rather quickly to ca. 70% and trickle-charge to full. Just for kicks I inserted a BP-511A, fully charged 2 days ago, into the CB-5L: 1 blip, 1 blip, 1 blip, 2 blips, 3 blips, continous. This has been my observation every time: it'll always start at 1 blip ... but the time spent in 1 and 2 blip mode depends on how low the battery was run. Thus I believe your method may badly underestimate the battery charge left --- you'd probably have to measure the time to load the battery fully or at least to 3 blips for a usable estimate. Anyway, the battery works well in my grip. > Each time the camera malfunctioned > with the grip, the batteries were at 30% charge. Since then I have done away > with the grip and used just the single battery without any lockups. Does > this give you a clue as to what might be the problem? Assuming the battery grip is not completely broken by design (mine works), and that your 30% may be wrong (I'll treat it as 'it works in the beginning, but later it stops') it must be an error either peculiar to your grip or to some grips. To my mind the following ideas come: - a hairline crack + - lower battery voltage. The Li-Ion-graphite discharge curve shows only a drop in the last 20%, so the battery'd probably be nearly empty at that time. - Heat. Intensive use of the camera (especially in outside heat and/or lots of internal flash) will heat up the camera and will spill over into parts of the grip as well, causing a crack to disrupt contact enough. - cold solder joint --- maybe a QA problem or shock or vibration induced (e.g. during transport to your dealer). Maybe heat or vibration will cause it to fail temporarily, maybe it 'just' increases internal resistance too much for a not very full or nearly spent battery. - corroded or marginal contacts, either at the battery-grip or at the grip-camera interface, causing too much resistance for some battery voltages. May also become worse with heat. Have you tried the other battery bay in the grip? - marginal contact grip-battery due to size and form being tolerances. - marginal contact grip-battery due to dirt (though I don't think that'd be the case with your grip) - marginal contact grip-battery due to marginal fastening to camera body (not screwed fast tightly enough) -Wolfgang > Assuming the battery grip is not completely broken by design > (mine works), and that your 30% may be wrong (I'll treat it as [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >sniped< > - On your assessment of the battery measurement, my batteries were at 50% when the camera failed. I grant their must be something wrong in the grip's circuitry because without it, I can get the whole battery life without problems. I agree also that many of the problems I had may have been environmental. I used the internal flash after I discharged the external flash batteries and didn't have fresh ones in my pocket. I was so pleased with the results I just kept using it. After the failure I looked up the manual and discovered these cameras are unsuitable for use in some parts of Australia (where I am) due to the 40C maximum operating environment. It often gets over that here and on one of the days it gave trouble, it did. I also think that when this camera is working, it has no equal in the same class. My issue with many of the disciples of EOS is the way in which you all defend the indefensible. It is just not good enough to sell a product for the cost of this camera with faults in it. It is even worse to sell a product like this camera into a country where daytime temperatures often exceed the operating environment of the camera... And Canon are not alone here. The 1D II has a 5C higher operating environment. The 1D I bought when one of the 20Ds died has given no trouble. It also cost 3 times as much! So in response to the OP's questions... Yes, I believer the 20D is a flawed camera. It might be good in Europe but it certainly is not a desert dwellers camera. Doug > > Assuming the battery grip is not completely broken by design > > (mine works), and that your 30% may be wrong (I'll treat it as [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Doug The Australian market is so tiny, its not worth for Canon to worry about the oddball case of someone in Alice Springs shootin' 500 shots a day of the sun I am not bashing Oz (just kidding somewhat) - I lived there most of my life (been livin' in the US for the past 5 years), but what you speak of is a tiny fraction of users. Not only is it hot where you are shooting, but its probably very humid. Pretty tough for any electronic device to be used heavily in that type of env. BTW, as you know much of the "habitted" parts of Oz have nice mild weather (Melbourne eg). If you hate the 20D so much, get something else, but dont get all flustered about it. Let the rest of the users enjoy their (working) cameras. They probably send the lemons to Oz anyway. >So in response to the OP's questions... Yes, I believer the 20D is a flawed >camera. It might be good in Europe but it certainly is not a desert dwellers >camera. If you really think yours is a dud, how much money do you want for it? SignatureW . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^--------------------------------------------------------------- > On your assessment of the battery measurement, my batteries were at 50% when > the camera failed. I grant their must be something wrong in the grip's > circuitry because without it, I can get the whole battery life without > problems. Circuity or contacts. I'd bet 3:1 on contact troubles over circuitry troubles --- there's not that much circuitry inside! > It is just not good enough to sell a product > for the cost of this camera with faults in it. There is no product without faults, be the product software, cameras, cars or butter knifes. All that matters is if, how much and how often these faults impede you and/or others. > The 1D II has a 5C higher operating environment. The 1D I bought when > one of the 20Ds died has given no trouble. It also cost 3 times as much! Well, there _may_ be a relationship between tolerance and price. > So in response to the OP's questions... Yes, I believer the 20D is a flawed > camera. It might be good in Europe but it certainly is not a desert dwellers > camera. That is IMHO a (clearly stated) limitation, not a flaw. -Wolfgang . > > So in response to the OP's questions... Yes, I believer the 20D is a flawed > > camera. It might be good in Europe but it certainly is not a desert dwellers [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > -Wolfgang When you walk into a camera store in Australia and the temperature is 43C... Supposedly the camera can't be demonstrated due to the temperature exceeding the camera's operating environment. Silly as it sounds this is a real scenario in Summer and in a lot of Australia. So how can you claim it a limitation when the camera is unusable in the country it is sold in? If Canon were in the least ethical, they would either not sell a product unsuitable for a countries environment or make it work in that environment in the first place. Even Volvo send their pre production cars to Australia for testing before they go into production... Why not a camera? Doug > "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message >> > So in response to the OP's questions... Yes, I believer the 20D is a flawed >> > camera. It might be good in Europe but it certainly is not a desert dwellers >> > camera. >> That is IMHO a (clearly stated) limitation, not a flaw. > When you walk into a camera store in Australia and the temperature is 43C... [...] > So how can you claim it a > limitation when the camera is unusable in the country it is sold in? Not all the world is Australia. I usually see that tunnel vision just from USAnians, though. But there are other countries --- lots of them --- where the 20D is sold, too, which do very seldom 'enjoy' 35°C. And I venture guess, the 20D is selling more there than in Australia. Additionally, you have heard of air-conditioned studios? The camera would be very usable there, wouldn't it? So it's not "unusable" after all. Oh, do the coastal regions of Australia --- you know, where most of the population resides --- do they get as hot as often as well? How comes you don't castigate the shop for not telling you the limitation they *must* have known about? > If Canon were in the least ethical, they would either not sell a product > unsuitable for a countries environment So you'd really demand that Canon violate free trade agreements and somehow force your local camera shops not to import and sell the cameras the shops think their customers want? > or make it work in that environment > in the first place. Even Volvo send their pre production cars to Australia > for testing before they go into production... Why not a camera? Unlike air-conditioned studios, the number of air-conditioned roads is severely limited, even in Australia ... -Wolfgang > Unlike air-conditioned studios, the number of air-conditioned > roads is severely limited, even in Australia ... > > -Wolfgang All your arguments considered, Wolfgang, How would you feel if you shelled out $7k AUD for a project and all the cameras died from environmental fatigue 10 day into a 6 week shoot? How would you feel also, if your plans to shoot a very rare Croc hunting expedition in the far north suddenly needed an extra $5k AUD of cameras because the "pro" 1D, II decided the heat was too much also? Free Trade agreement or not, any manufacturer selling goods in Australia has to abide by the Trade Practices Act. Part of it relates to suitability for purpose. If the cameras (20D and 1D, II) are not suitable for Professional use, the importer is in breach of the act. How too, will the Photojournalists covering the disasters of the world in arid and tropical regions react to their cameras shutting down from fatigue? Probably the same way I have... Get rid of them and go back to more reliable gear. Your arguments are flawed. I agree the 20D is a nice camera and that Australia's heat is limited to maybe 4 months of the year. Can I come and live at your place during those months? They are the most productive for me. Doug Ryadia posted: > > Unlike air-conditioned studios, the number of air-conditioned > > roads is severely limited, even in Australia ... [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Doug Many people have never heard of "tropical chocolate," either. SignaturePetros Ap' ola prin ipirche o Logos >> Unlike air-conditioned studios, the number of air-conditioned >> roads is severely limited, even in Australia ... > All your arguments considered, Wolfgang, How would you feel if you shelled > out $7k AUD for a project and all the cameras died from environmental > fatigue 10 day into a 6 week shoot? Well, I'd be pretty, aeh, unhappy, about that. Now, if I bought the camera in Australia, especially in a place where the same heat is (sand or salt or water being another problem, but one _ought_ to know about them), I'd be really non-plussed with the shop for not telling me. Assuming, of course, that is a stated limitation of said camera. However, if I took said camera to such a place (having bought it in, say, Europe --- especially if I *didn't* ask my dealer "Will it work well in central, hot, dry, dusty, desert Australia?" before) and stumbled over limitations clearly stated in TFM, my fault it is. > How would you feel also, if your plans to shoot a very rare Croc hunting > expedition in the far north suddenly needed an extra $5k AUD of cameras > because the "pro" 1D, II decided the heat was too much also? How'd you feel when you go visit McMurdo station and your camera decided that it is waaay to cold there and you'd need another one? _I_'d consider a conventional body as back-up ... > Free Trade agreement or not, any manufacturer selling goods in Australia has > to abide by the Trade Practices Act. Ah, so all camera shops belong to Canon (manufacturing arm) in Australia? I'd thought it was a more, ah, free country. > Part of it relates to suitability for > purpose. If the cameras (20D and 1D, II) are not suitable for Professional > use, the importer is in breach of the act. What is and what is not "Professional use" and if they are suitable is something for the courts to decide. I still stand on my point: They are perfectly suitable for studio work. If they are suitable for professional studio work anywhere in the world is another question, obviously. > How too, will the > Photojournalists covering the disasters of the world in arid and tropical > regions react to their cameras shutting down from fatigue? Probably the same > way I have... Get rid of them and go back to more reliable gear. Photojournalists (daily newspapers) know their equipment --- they have to --- and know their environments, at least if they do their job. Thus they'll have suitable cameras, and know the limitations and 'flaws' and flaws of their gear. They also have colleagues to ask for advice. Photojournalists (large print or magazines) probably still use slides (and medium format cameras) for the neccessary resolution. > Your arguments are flawed. So are yours. > I agree the 20D is a nice camera and that Australia's heat is limited to > maybe 4 months of the year. Can I come and live at your place during those > months? They are the most productive for me. You may find the travel costs prohibitive, and of course, shooting pictures in Australia is right out, then. Oh, your landlord does not let you dwell for free (nor does mine), so some compensation will be needed. (No, my employer will probably not be happy with me being stuck in Australia, not with all these drop bears and deadly everything around. And I don't, ah, _like_ that much heat.) Apart from that ... well, bring plenty _warm_ clothes, a storm-proof umbrella and/or tarpaulin and sou'wester, sand for the pavement and warm shoes. -Wolfgang >I've run into two people who had lock up problems, Well, I guess I wasn't one of them. My 10D locked up a few times; my 20D has never locked up (about 2200 shots). >one person who had a weird problem where downloading >long exposure images took as long as the images took >to aquire That's because the 20D has an option to take a black frame after exposures a second or longer in length, to subtract the noise. >and now I'm hearing the camera has focusing >problems. My 10D backfocuses. My 20D does not backfocus or frontfocus in any noticeable way. >Did they release this 10D re-do too soon? Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< > >I've run into two people who had lock up problems, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > That's because the 20D has an option to take a black frame after > exposures a second or longer in length, to subtract the noise. You know, its amazing how many people think this is a problem. Solution is simple, go to Cfn and turn off noise reduction. Like anything else (whether it be computer SW, cars, stereo equipment, cell phones etc etc) most of the problems people encounter are operator error. In some of those cases people abuse their equipment and expect it to work. I would just ignore these screwballs (hehe). I have been using Canon equipment for years (so have many of my friends) - never had a single problem. This would explain why Canon is the most successful DSLR/SLR maker. > >and now I'm hearing the camera has focusing > >problems. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > >Did they release this 10D re-do too soon? Let me guess, you bought a D70 and now you wish you had a 20D ? You whish you had ISO 100 ? Or a BG ? Or no almost no noise at ISO 800 ? My 20D has no problem, same for my friend. Your gonna tell me that both of us are lucky , right ? |
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
|
©2009 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.