5D4 Sensor Defect Discovered

[3kramd5]

Nice catch

Alternatively people could learn to use their cameras better, but no, wildly unrealistic expectations of 14 bit capabilities shouldn't get in the way of a rant, should it?

This from yesterday..........

Nicely exposed. Situations like that always bother me (when the primary subject is level, but the ultimate horizon is not).

 

[tr573]

I thought it was obvious that I exaggerated to lighten to show no banding but the most thick strips ....

file raw dowload :

raw no banding for 5+ exposure:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/71964196/prove/_H9A3916.CR2

https://we.tl/hgowbpTy9V ( 1gb download)

Sorry man, I didn't realize that file wasn't actually in the archive - there's so many similar That one appears to have a stop less exposure given than even the darkest of the other bed shots in the archive, so yeah I'm not surprised it showed banding even sooner - on some of the others with a natural looking conversion there wasn't any, but if I pushed them super bright it showed up.

Wasn't trying to accuse you of anything nefarious, just saying that it wasn't showing up when making normal looking pictures out of most of these so people probably shouldn't worry too much about the results of experiments vs actual picture making.

 

[privatebydesign]

Nice catch

Alternatively people could learn to use their cameras better, but no, wildly unrealistic expectations of 14 bit capabilities shouldn't get in the way of a rant, should it?

This from yesterday..........

Nicely exposed. Situations like that always bother me (when the primary subject is level, but the ultimate horizon is not).

It's just a rough edit not a delivery file. I can straighten everything up but it was impossible to get leveled as the tripod was on the bed and it moved as I did to adjust it, and the house is not set square on the hill looking out. I'll pull it all around to make it 'square' before I deliver it. I triggered it when I was off the bed via a CamRanger, best real estate/architecture tool ever!

 

[LSXPhotog]

I would like to update this thread with the fact Canon has now has my images for 3 days and hasn't responded back. I called them yesterday and got a new technician because mine had already left for the day. Nothing has been resolved yet. They also brought up that I was using Adobe software and I told them I included images from both DPP and Lightroom and the phenomena exists in both.

 

[privatebydesign]

you may also learn how to better look at the pictures I posted ... instead of putting a completely different situation with low contrast ... and with lights on inside the room !!

before you say to those who make the tests to learn to use the SLR !!!!!!!!

We can all test anything to failure and we rarely learn anything from it. With skill and application we can also use whatever equipment we have to get the result we need in any conditions that we are confronted with.

Your 'test' images made it appear that it was impossible to take a well balanced image of a room showing an extremely high dr view outside. I put my image up to show that scenario is not only perfectly possible but it is possible to a more than acceptable standard with the equipment we have.

To be honest I find images that demonstrate what is possible far more instructive and helpful than images, even tests, that show what isn't.

Now there are many 'real world' situations where I can get my camera to not cover the scene dynamic range, but there are few instances where I can't create the image I actually want or need because of it.

Current camera sensor DR capabilities are within a stop or less at base iso from all manufacturers. As has been discussed many times, lifted shadows are incapable of giving an acceptable tonal range when they cover large or important areas of the frame. In actual fact the camera with the RAW files with the largest DR seems to be the dual pixel RAW files from the 5D MkIV as they give a stop more in the high tonal range where it can be used.

 

[privatebydesign]

you may also learn how to better look at the pictures I posted ... instead of putting a completely different situation with low contrast ... and with lights on inside the room !!

before you say to those who make the tests to learn to use the SLR !!!!!!!!

To be sure, my image contains over 17 stops of dynamic range so I don't understand why you'd say it is low contrast! Maybe it is because I am good at what I do and I don't live my life seeing issues but working around them?

 

[privatebydesign]

you may also learn how to better look at the pictures I posted ... instead of putting a completely different situation with low contrast ... and with lights on inside the room !!

before you say to those who make the tests to learn to use the SLR !!!!!!!!

To be sure, my image contains over 17 stops of dynamic range so I don't understand why you'd say it is low contrast! Maybe it is because I am good at what I do and I don't live my life seeing issues but working around them?

ahahahhahaha !!
you're good to say hogwash! even the blind realize that you have the lights on in that picture and it is less contrasty than the posted still remains of your idea GENIUS,you are very good!ahahahahah

over 17 stops

;D ;D ;D ;D : : : :

If you write a coherent answer I will be able to address it :

 

[Loswr]

you may also learn how to better look at the pictures I posted ... instead of putting a completely different situation with low contrast ... and with lights on inside the room !!

before you say to those who make the tests to learn to use the SLR !!!!!!!!

To be sure, my image contains over 17 stops of dynamic range so I don't understand why you'd say it is low contrast! Maybe it is because I am good at what I do and I don't live my life seeing issues but working around them?

ahahahhahaha !!
you're good to say hogwash! even the blind realize that you have the lights on in that picture and it is less contrasty than the posted still remains of your idea GENIUS,you are very good!ahahahahah

over 17 stops

;D ;D ;D ;D : : : :

Privatebydesign has long history of accurate and helpful posts, and demonstrated experience as a photographer. I'm certain he can determine the DR of a scene he's shooting.

You have an extremely short history, which wouldn't be a detriment except that you've already managed to demonstrate your ineptitude by posting an underexpose-push comparison of two different images.

All the derisive laughter in the world won't make you correct. It does effectively make you look foolish, however...

 

[unfocused]

I'm not sure why, but reading this thread reminds me of this book: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/11/how-satan-came-to-salem/407866/

It's amazing what people can believe when they get caught up in mass hysteria.

I'm not saying that people aren't sincere, I'm just wondering how much can be attributed to the power of suggestion. And how much is attributable to exceeding the normal tolerances that the sensor has been designed for.

 

[zim]

#179 from jakdaniel1975 shows me that the 5d4 has more dr than I'd ever need without going to blending to avoid flat horrible toneless images

 

[d]

I'm not sure why, but reading this thread reminds me of this book: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/11/how-satan-came-to-salem/407866/

It's amazing what people can believe when they get caught up in mass hysteria.

I'm not saying that people aren't sincere, I'm just wondering how much can be attributed to the power of suggestion. And how much is attributable to exceeding the normal tolerances that the sensor has been designed for.

Seems we need a separate thread titled, '5D4 Owner Defects Discovered' for some of the "photographers" here.

 

[privatebydesign]

If you write a coherent answer I will be able to address it :

sorry i use translate !

do the same step by turning off lights and with the sun high and expose the exterior.

over 17 stops

;D ;D ;D ;D : : : :

What did the translation get wrong? What is coherent?

As for your images, they are all bad to the point if unusable, we know that, now show me comparison images from other manufacturers sensors that are usable in the same shooting situations. As I said, the differences between Sony/Nikon/Canon sensors DR is less than 1 stop, are we still arguing about this now the differences have been halved?

My image was taken with a 12 stop DR sensor, the image contains over 17 stops of DR, if you think a 60w bulb is reducing the contrast against midday Caribbean sun you are a fool!

 

[Loswr]

My image was taken with a 12 stop DR sensor, the image contains over 17 stops of DR, if you think a 60w bulb is reducing the contrast against midday Caribbean sun you are a fool!

Please, you can explain how can a sensor with 12 stops dr represent a 17-stop scene dr? perhaps because they are less than 12 stops the scene you've got ?!

I knew a guy who bought a Porsche 911, and every time he drove it, he ground the gears of the manual transmission, lurched the car forward and back while trying to accelerate, and couldn't manage to stay in his lane because he was concentrating so hard on shifting.

You and your 5DIV remind me of him.

 

[privatebydesign]

Privatebydesign ha lunga storia di messaggi precisi e disponibile, e l'esperienza ha dimostrato come fotografo. Sono certo che può determinare il DR di una scena che sta sparando.

17 stops ?!?!?!?!?!!?

room with artificial lights on !

ah ok !

However, we did not discuss the beauty of the shots was only verify that in some situations it was not present in the normal noise (exaggerating well beyond normal with recoveries) I am sorry that some of you do not understand this simple thing!


the pictures I posted are taking with my 5d mk4! no sony!

We understand, what I am asking you for is to show me any camera (with 14bit RAW files) that is noticeably better in the same situation. As far as I am concerned if a file isn't usable it isn't usable, be that banding, noise, lack of tonality etc etc, it doesn't matter what disqualifies an image. But show me a camera that you can buy today that is markedly better than the one you have.

As for my image. Here is an unworked version from the shoot, so how much light is that 60w bulb giving?

 

[Loswr]

blablablablabla

Interesting. When I plug that into Google Translate, it returns, "I'm clueless."

 

[M_S]

you may also learn how to better look at the pictures I posted ... instead of putting a completely different situation with low contrast ... and with lights on inside the room !!

before you say to those who make the tests to learn to use the SLR !!!!!!!!

To be sure, my image contains over 17 stops of dynamic range so I don't understand why you'd say it is low contrast! Maybe it is because I am good at what I do and I don't live my life seeing issues but working around them?

ahahahhahaha !!
you're good to say hogwash! even the blind realize that you have the lights on in that picture and it is less contrasty than the posted still remains of your idea GENIUS,you are very good!ahahahahah

over 17 stops

;D ;D ;D ;D : : : :

Privatebydesign has long history of accurate and helpful posts, and demonstrated experience as a photographer. I'm certain he can determine the DR of a scene he's shooting.

You have an extremely short history, which wouldn't be a detriment except that you've already managed to demonstrate your ineptitude by posting an underexpose-push comparison of two different images.

All the derisive laughter in the world won't make you correct. It does effectively make you look foolish, however...

I don't see that 19805 posts of bs are better in that case and make the writer any more reliable. Bitching on peoples post make the count high but is not a factor of useful interaction. The inability to abstract and concentrating on small errors instead is well known and can be treated.

 

[Loswr]

Bitching on peoples post make the count high but is not a factor of useful interaction. The inability to abstract and concentrating on small errors instead is well known and can be treated.

Strange that I saw way more SUVs on my trip to the US than small cars then.
This says also otherwise:
http://www.businessinsider.de/us-small-car-market-is-a-disaster-2016-8?r=US&IR=T

So. Again some of those neuro bullS___ comments.

Indeed. Even if the 'errors' aren't errors at all. I suggest you seek treatment immediately.

 

[LSXPhotog]

***UPDATE***Canon Service Requests My Camera For Further Testing***

After almost a week of dragging their feet, Canon reached out to me yesterday. I was told initially that everything was normal. "Banding" is what they called it. They were trying to get me to just concede and move on with my life. They claimed they didn't see anything that I was talking about in the RAW files and the JPEGS "were stripped of information so they threw them out." (Not true on my end, all shooting information is still intact within the EXIF)

The issue he "couldn't see" he said was from Lightroom... So I explained to him to push the histogram since DPP only allows 3 stops. Then he could see it...said it was because there wasn't any information there and all Canon cameras do this - they don't. I said banding is one thing, but this is "streaking highlights from the left side of the image to the right and it's only horizontally. Never vertically."

Finally, I had him look at the key areas I was speaking about and he actually admitted to me that it was strange, but there wasn't anything he could do about it there. He emailed me a Next Day Air UPS label and it's going to Canon service to be looked at.

****
To the critics of this post topic:

I would like to apologize for some of the wording in my original post. I admit some of it may be considered a little too harsh or critical, but it was in an effort to drive the point home.

Once again, this is something I'm personally experiencing with MY 5D4 and not with a rented 5D4 I had last month. Judging from other posts within this thread, some cameras seem to have it and others don't. This leads me to believe that there is a variance in the sensors for each camera to respond to pushing/pulling shadows this differently.

Again, I know what I'm doing. I'm a very seasoned professional who makes 100% of my living using my cameras and have been doing so for close to 12 years. If you're personally incapable to understanding how discovering a camera you just spent $3500 on a camera waited 4+ years for has a weird anomaly not all other 5D4 cameras have is upsetting, just move on with your life and stop posting in this thread. 'When will this be a problem?' If you also don't know how this could possibly have any impact on your photos 'if you're taking photos correctly,' you're clearly not someone who has ever run into a situation in your work that a moment you captured and absolutely need is a little off...you're either lucky or inexperienced.

If you have something to contribute where we can figure out what causes the issue to appear, please speak up. I'm learning it's any overexposed area on the left side of the frame.

Thank you,
Kevin

 

[Jack Douglas]

Where's Dilbert on this subject? Seems strange without him!

Jack

 

[ExodistPhotography]

We have met the enemy and he is us. Having to boost a photo 5 stops is not a sensor defect, something else is defective.

SO SO TRUE.. LOL