View Full Version : hot pixels update

03-03-2005, 09:15
Hi all, sorry no posts yet, probably the weekend, what with lousy weather, and work (sigh)

on the pixels, I have only looked at jpgs, as I've only just installed photo raw and will start with that tonight..
still, I have on very bax hot pixel on the LCD, and 1 BIG (ie at least 2x2 pixels on the jpg) and 4 small ones on the chip. I've only used CMOS chips before, so perhaps this is something endemic to CCDs?

Anyway, Robert White, bless their cotton socks, are arranging a new body, fingers crossed. More news soon...

03-03-2005, 09:20
I see no hot pixels on my R-D1., either on the LCD or on the sensor.

03-03-2005, 09:25
I've got about four that show up at EI 1600 only. They're always in the same places, so it's easy (although tedious) to spot them out on critical images.

03-03-2005, 10:44
seems I got a bad one. I shall hold out for a replacement


Sean Reid
03-03-2005, 13:12
There are some "off" bodies out there it seems.


03-03-2005, 14:50
Mine has three or so hot pixels at > 400 ISO, even sometimes at 200 ISO. Also a mis-aligned vertical rangefinder adjustment. Based on these issues, if Epson is willing to swap me one (send one in the mail as a replacement and have me mail mine once receieved), I'd get a replacement.

But I'm not willing to part with the camera for more than a day or two, so I think I'll live with it. The vertical alignment issue is slight, so although annoying it's still better than a DSLR by yards for me. And the hot pixels aren't all that annoying and unless I look for 'em I can't see 'em in a print.


Jim Watts
03-04-2005, 02:47
I have three stuck (as against hot pixels, you may want to see the earlier threads here on hot pixels) on the sensor, but they only really show up in prints at the higher iso ratings and are easy to clone out. I also see a few more hot pixels but only at 1600 iso and full magnification on the R-D1' screen. As the consensus seems to be that the sensor does not deteriorate further I have decided not to worry about it.

Of the three R-D1's I have handled all have at least 1 hot/stuck pixel so I could end up with a camera as bad, or worst in another aspect such as incorrectly adjusted rangefinder which seems to be a common fault reported here.

I do wish the quality control was higher though, for what is an expensive camera body at 2K in the U.K.

03-08-2005, 05:20
Quick update...

Robert White, the retailer of my R-D1, has been very responsive about the hot pixels concern, and is exchanging the body for a new one. I'm sending mine in today, and the new one should come tomorrow. I would have liked to be able to compare them before swapping, but that's life...

03-10-2005, 02:00
And, guess what, TWO big hickeys!

I tried the dead/hot pixel test, (http://www.starzen.com/imaging/deadpixeltest.htm) and got very ambiguous results. Yes the two big ones showed up, but some frames (shot raw) had masses of noise in the green channel. It would come and go with conversions, so I think it's something funny in photo raw. Has anyone else seen this? It's only on lenscap exposures; when there's an image there it looks normal. Noise reduction doesn't help, but I think it only clicks in on exposures of 2secs up.

At least this one has no stuck pixels on the LCD. I think I'll keep this one anyway, and just clone out the hotspot when required. Changing it again seems too much bother. It sort of p's me off, though, that there is so much variation, or does Nikon simply map them out?


Jim Watts
03-10-2005, 03:48

Yes I think as Brian pointed out in an earlier post most other digital cameras use pixel mapping. I certainly have no problems on my 8mp Canon 20D even at iso 3200 and not even on my Coolpix 990.

Did you enable the cameras long exposure noise reduction for the lenscap shots?

03-10-2005, 06:19
Jim... I also have a 20D and have never had a problem like this with any other digicam. The new one I've got not only has bad pixels, but a misaligned rangefinder window, and even framelines that aren't parallel to the sensor!

If Epson don't change it quicksmart, I'd advise prospective buyers to avoid this camera, unless they can do a hands-on check. After all, this is all well-known technology, it's just the packaging that's new.

Re noise reduction, I understand it doesn't click in until 2+ secs exposure time, which is outside my range. I did try using NR in photoraw, and it made some difference, though it didn't eliminate the spots.

03-10-2005, 07:08
I don't think any of the rest of us have had QUITE as many problems as you've had! This makes me doubt that it's anything to do with Epson. Maybe yours got dropped on the loading dock or fell off a truck or something...

03-10-2005, 07:12
jlw - you may be right, but here in UK if something 'fell off a truck' it means something a bit different :D

Actually, Epson are being pretty good about it. They did the last exchange within a day, and they seem concerned to get it right.

So don't let me put you off if you're keen ;)

David Kieltyka
03-10-2005, 08:02
I wonder if Epson isn't being diligent enough about mapping out hot pixels before they ship R-D1s. I'm happy to say mine has no consistent hot or dead pixels. But this is something they should be catching at the QC stage.


Jim Watts
03-10-2005, 08:47
I'm really sorry to hear about all the problems you have had with your R-D1 samples. I hope it has not put you off the camera, but it must be very annoying. I toyed with changing mine at first because of the Hot/Stuck Pixels, as I mentioned before, so I'm glad I didn't.

I am not sure that Epson have any mapping for bad pixels on this sensor? I'm hoping that at some point there will be a firmware upgrade to solve the problem. I expect that the digital side is down to Epson and they still don't have enough expertise in other than the most basic digital cameras, as this does not seem to be much of a problem with most other 'serious' digital cameras.

The other issues are probably down to poor quality control at Voigtlander /Cosina who are handeling the mechanical side. Maybe Epson have not enforced high enough standards on them and are suffering for it. Again probably because Epson don't really no what they should be looking for in what basically is a mainly mechanical rangefinder camera. It seems Zeiss have demanded much higher standards from Cosina and thats what's caused delays in the delivery dates of their rangefinder model and lenses.

I haven't really checked out what the Bessa users on this site think of the reliability of their Voigtlander models but a friend of mine had the shutter go on his R3A after just 2 films and has been wating over 2 months for a replacement. The one bonus of this is I now have his 40mm Nokton on loan until he gets a new camera. :) I'm not trying to knock Cosina as again its a fine camera but built to a price point, but when the R3A is translated into the R-D1 that price point falls into an entirely different league where much higher standards are expected and demanded.

Its good that Epson are not quibbling about replacements then, but these quality control issues are not doing much for their reputation with what I think they saw as a prestige camera to enhance their image. It will also give fuel to some of the knocking commentators that seem to be hanging out in the Put's thread.

I still love this camera even with the known problems.

03-10-2005, 09:24
jlw - you may be right, but here in UK if something 'fell off a truck' it means something a bit different :D

Actually, Epson are being pretty good about it. They did the last exchange within a day, and they seem concerned to get it right.

So don't let me put you off if you're keen ;)

Oh, "fell off a truck" means the same thing here! But in your case I wonder if it really DID fall off a truck!?

I've already got an R-D 1 and like it so much that I'm thinking seriously of dumping my Nikon D100 system. The only problem I've had with mine is a couple of hot pixels that show up at EI 1600, and I'm not too worried about that.

It just seems like you're having unusually bad luck with yours, so it's a good thing that Epson is being so responsive for you.

03-10-2005, 09:43
the good thing about machines is, if they work, they usually work well. There are always duds in every batch; it's picking them up that needs doing well for a primium product.

though, I can't remember the last time I heard of a dud M6 ;-)

anyway, don't let this little drama spoil your fun! It's still a babe.


Brian Sweeney
04-07-2005, 02:54
Hot Pixels over time.

Well, I've broken my rule and used a Digital Camera at home. And it's an SLR. But It's MY DSLR. Literally, I had to talk to Kodak about making it. That was back in 1993, and I needed the IR filter left off. It was being surplussed and I rescued it and got it working again.

Anyway: after 12 years and a hard life including being strapped to a wing strut, here are the results. I notice a Handful of Hot Pixels on what was originally a zero-defect array. Hey, you get what you pay for when you spend $16,400 on a camera.