Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-12-2008, 05:54 AM   #91
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 593
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Lance, if you accept the pain to read my post just 2 above yours, you find your answers, in the section starting with "Test procedure".

However, if you didn't notice it, I am asking myself why I spent the work preparing my posting
I did see your post but thought it was just *another* way to induce the hot pixel phenomenon, not the *only* way. The way that DPReview were going on about it made me think it was an everyday occurance which we all need to watch out for and this is why they decided to advise us of the fact. If they had to go to this much trouble just to get a few hot pixels then it makes me think it it s *real storm in a teacup scenario* and so one must wonder about the objectives of DPReview in making sure everyone is advised of the problem.

There was also a good deal of tongue in cheek with my post.

05-12-2008, 07:07 AM   #92
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Lance B Quote
If they had to go to this much trouble just to get a few hot pixels then it makes me think it it s *real storm in a teacup scenario* and so one must wonder about the objectives of DPReview in making sure everyone is advised of the problem.

There was also a good deal of tongue in cheek with my post.
Hi Lance,

oh sorry then. I am not great in detecting tongue in cheek as this often implies mother tongue

And yes, i think too that it is a storm in a teacup.


My post actually was meant to be a mini tutorial for everybody else how to actually see their hot pixels and verify/falsify that there are few/many and in LiveView only/or not.

In order to be able to so so, you must have managed to see a single hot pixel at least. I tried to explain how to achieve this. This is why I referred to your "Classes" proposal
05-12-2008, 07:39 AM   #93
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 593
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Hi Lance,

oh sorry then. I am not great in detecting tongue in cheek as this often implies mother tongue

And yes, i think too that it is a storm in a teacup.


My post actually was meant to be a mini tutorial for everybody else how to actually see their hot pixels and verify/falsify that there are few/many and in LiveView only/or not.

In order to be able to so so, you must have managed to see a single hot pixel at least. I tried to explain how to achieve this. This is why I referred to your "Classes" proposal
Don't apologise. I really don't think my tongue in cheek came across too well anyway.

Your tutorial was very helpful, but I am not going to bother trying it as it is not a scenario that I think I would ever do and I would be surprised that too many others would either.
05-12-2008, 08:07 AM   #94
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by Lance B Quote
The way that DPReview were going on about it [...]
Okay, again, can someone point to exactly where DPReview is or was "going on about it" not random forum posters, but the actual DPReviewers?

QuoteOriginally posted by Lance B Quote
[...]and so one must wonder about the objectives of DPReview in making sure everyone is advised of the problem.
People were wondering why the K20D review hadn't shown up. There were the normal suggestions that DPReview was somehow conspiring against Pentax (or at least giving them sub-standard treatment) by not having a review up already. So there was a terse post explaining that there was a problem that they're working with Pentax to find a solution for before they complete the review. You don't have to wonder: their "objectives" are to let their readers know why there's a delay.

I don't mean to sound like a DPReview fanboy (I'm not!), but, c'mon, some fairness is in order.

05-12-2008, 09:34 AM   #95
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
Matt,

I think the objection is that DPreview should not have said that the delay in the review is due to a "hot pixel" issue. A more professional response would have been to state that "the k20d review is in progress." Or something similar. By releasing just a bit of information without explanation, they are the ones that started this "hot pixel" firestorm. By releasing this little "gem" of information without explanation or background information, they disparage the entire line.

It would be like the IIHS releasing a statement: "We have temporarily ceased crash testing of all chevrolet vehicles because we have found unnaceptably high levels of trauma to our test dummies" That would sure scare people away from chevy's. Then maybe we find out months later (after the damage is done to chevrolet) that the reason for the high trauma rates was that the test rig was broken, and the speedometer was reading low or something like that.
05-12-2008, 10:30 AM   #96
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ohio
Posts: 247
I would agree with your objection the problem had been with just one camera but 2 cameras in a row??????? Bob
05-12-2008, 10:35 AM   #97
Veteran Member
Rickster's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SE Idaho - Rocky Mtns
Posts: 433
So far DPR has shown an absolute lack of professionalism in this matter. They never should have posted what essentially amounts to 'troll bait' on their forum. If they had an issue with the K20D they should have spelled it out in detail in their review where it could have some semblance of peer review. If they wanted to hit Pentax hard they couldn't have done it more effectively. My guess is that they got new K20Ds that hadn't had their stuck pixels mapped out and they haven't read the manual yet. (it's page 235 by the way)
05-12-2008, 11:17 AM   #98
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ohio
Posts: 247
I don't think anyone would want to see a review of a defective camera...Bob

05-12-2008, 11:22 AM   #99
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
QuoteOriginally posted by robert Quote
I would agree with your objection the problem had been with just one camera but 2 cameras in a row??????? Bob
Yes, you are making my point. Read my example. If there is a problem with the testing procedure they are using on the k20d, they could test 1000 of them and get the same thing. That is what is so insideous about releasing that information the way they did. The implicit assumption is that there is something wrong with the camera. They should not have said anything about it until they really know what the issue is.
05-12-2008, 12:38 PM   #100
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by PentaxPoke Quote
I think the objection is that DPreview should not have said that the delay in the review is due to a "hot pixel" issue. A more professional response would have been to state that "the k20d review is in progress." Or something similar. By releasing just a bit of information without explanation, they are the ones that started this "hot pixel" firestorm. By releasing this little "gem" of information without explanation or background information, they disparage the entire line.
Yeah, I agree that perhaps even less information would have been a better choice, although we'd still be seeing conspiracy theories. ("Why is DPReview being so hush-hush about their supposed reason for delay? I bet they haven't invented a serious-sounding enough problem yet....") Nonetheless, it was to my knowledge just one short comment about how they're working with Pentax on the issue, no "going on" about anything.
05-12-2008, 03:26 PM   #101
Veteran Member
rfortson's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,129
QuoteOriginally posted by codiac2600 Quote
How'd they find it in RAW? Converters take it out automatically????? Now this is really getting fishy...
I don't believe the Pentax Photolab software removes hot pixels. I know it didn't in the past, and I haven't seen anything that says the current version does. It's something that I wish it did.
05-12-2008, 06:10 PM   #102
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 593
QuoteOriginally posted by mattdm Quote
Okay, again, can someone point to exactly where DPReview is or was "going on about it" — not random forum posters, but the actual DPReviewers?



People were wondering why the K20D review hadn't shown up. There were the normal suggestions that DPReview was somehow conspiring against Pentax (or at least giving them sub-standard treatment) by not having a review up already. So there was a terse post explaining that there was a problem that they're working with Pentax to find a solution for before they complete the review. You don't have to wonder: their "objectives" are to let their readers know why there's a delay.

I don't mean to sound like a DPReview fanboy (I'm not!), but, c'mon, some fairness is in order.
If you see by Edvinas quote below that apparently(according to Edvinas) Thom Hogan had this issue on a D300 but DPReview failed to mention it in their review. My point is not that DPReview *had* to make us all aware of it, just that the issue can happen with all cameras and therefore should not necessarily mean that they should target the K20D. As others have suggested, there was no reason to advise us that the review was held up due to an QC issue, but rather that they are still working on the review. Stating that their is an issue opens the door for "troll bait" as one poster said. Do they do this with other manufacturers cameras?

QuoteOriginally posted by Edvinas Quote
codiac,

The thing is that you don't specifically try those pixels to appear. Most likely in normal shooting conditions they don't appear.

DPReview simply are looking for problems. They are measurbating, torturing camera and measurbating again. And oh, look, hot pixels. They hinted that they got pixels after LiveView use. That's very understandable. During LiveView sensor heats up and chances that hot pixels appear increases very much.

Nikon D300 also have exactly the same problem (Nikon D300 Review by Thom Hogan), however DPReview didn't bother to mention it in their review.

Now it seems, they are preparing ground for another not so favourable review: K10D had "soft jpegs" (although soft D300 jpegs were OK), K20D will have "hot pixels issue"...

Last edited by Lance B; 05-12-2008 at 06:17 PM.
05-12-2008, 06:40 PM   #103
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by rfortson Quote
I don't believe the Pentax Photolab software (PPL) removes hot pixels
If you read my post #86, you'll see me claiming that PPL removes hot pixels as well. That's part of the reason I posted my testing method.

My claim is actually based on test: I don't see the hot pixels in PPL that I see in PhotoMatix (cf. my images in quoted post).

Updated info: If you make a large 100% loupe window (which is awfully slow to update), you'll see intermediate processing stages within PPL (due to its slowness). Then I can clearly state here that my hot blue pixel (cf. above) (when push brightness up a bit):

Appears, then disappears in the loupe window during processing in PPL.

This clearly proves that PPL eliminates hot pixels in one of its processing stages.


(Maybe PPL didn't do that in the past.)

Last edited by falconeye; 05-12-2008 at 06:53 PM.
05-13-2008, 11:19 AM   #104
Pentaxian
panoguy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,279
dcraw is great!

QuoteOriginally posted by Lance B Quote
Ok, so what is the best way to induce the dreaded hot pixel issue and should it be RAW or jpeg? As far as I know, whether it be RAW or jpeg, software automatically removes them either in the camera or in post process.
Well, if you are a Polish review site (or the UK site with a history of delaying Pentax reviews for the latest Canon P&S), you have the option to use "dcraw" without reading the instructions:

(Quote from the dcraw website.)

QuoteQuote:
I shot a raw photo with no light. Why does it appear all noisy, when it should be solid black?
No matter how dark an image is, dcraw's auto-exposure stretches it so that one percent of its pixels appear white. The "-b" option adjusts this behavior, while "-4" (16-bit output) avoids it entirely.
Aside from not mapping out hot pixels, this makes the results far more dramatic for posting on the interweb. Did they go to 16-bit first? I doubt it...

-Mark
05-14-2008, 07:50 AM   #105
New Member




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Saint George, Utah
Posts: 6
QuoteOriginally posted by codiac2600 Quote
My tally is officially 14 no hot pixel cameras and the likely hood DPR got two of them in a row is looking slimmer and slimmer.
Do you think it's a DPR/Canikon conspiracy?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, photography, pixel, pixels, proof
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K20D - vertical bands, noise, and hot pixel problems... :-( pentaxmz Pentax DSLR Discussion 26 04-04-2012 04:33 AM
K20d Hot Pixel on v1.03 drndrw Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 03-10-2010 06:40 PM
K20D - Worth upgrading firmware if I have no hot pixel issues? NicholasN Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 01-07-2009 01:24 PM
Hot pixel issue duplicated BeerCan Pentax DSLR Discussion 1 05-26-2008 05:41 AM
Hot Pixels Issue of the K20D RiceHigh Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 05-09-2008 09:25 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:15 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top