Josh Bustos wrote:
what kind of problems are the D3's having..?

Its a Nikon.

Seriously, pix from D3 are fine. At least no shadows like I got from the 1D2N.

Does your 1D2N also have this shadow issue?

I'm kind of like you. Before my Canon bodies were giving me problems, when people used to speak the word "Nikon" I used to tell them "shhh dont talk"
Now I am seriously considering switching over, which really is horrible and I feel like a traitor.
I'm just waiting for a friend to pick up a D3 so I can test it out and potentially steal it

Josh Bustos wrote:
I'm kind of like you. Before my Canon bodies were giving me problems, when people used to speak the word "Nikon" I used to tell them "shhh dont talk"
Now I am seriously considering switching over, which really is horrible and I feel like a traitor.
I'm just waiting for a friend to pick up a D3 so I can test it out and potentially steal it

Yes, indeed. It is just sad. I am really disappointed by Canon these days.

I bought all the 1D3 and 2 1D2Ns together about 5 months ago. I expected some level of problems from 1D3 but not 1D2N though.

Did not even jump ship when Canon switched from FD to EF. The "Real Ability of 1D2N" statement did it.

I haven't really tested to see if I have this shadow issue or not. But since I haven't noticed I'm sure I don't. I have really bad banding across the first picture of every burst at ISOs higher than 400. I only have 4000 shots on it, but no original invoice. So I'm waiting til I get my 5D back then I am going to see what Canon will do for me. Worst comes to worst, Canon is gone and they will be losing all of my business.

That is interesting. It sure isn't blooming or moire in any definitions of which I'm aware. If that's a reflection issue, it's darn interesting one that causes a negative. I believe it's a post capture, in camera, processing issue. The one post on analog compensator circuitry going wonkers is interesting, but if that were the case I would not expect the spatial displacement of the shadows, and I would expect less consistency with the varied backgrounds. A compensator saturating doesn't act like that. My best guess is a digital filter "flaw" in the sensor readout.

My question is, as it is hard to tell from these low res screen shots, and all these mysterious shadows seem to be in details near the limit of the 35mm format, do these "defects" really stand out in large prints? I know that once you see them, you see them quickly, and it is not nice to see digital artifacts in your photos, but does anyone buying the pictures actually care? Are you seeing this, for instance affecting a main subject athlete in a brightly front lit shiny white uniform shot against a dark background?

It would be really interesting to know if the same model bodies that don't exhibit the effect have different firmware. (I.E.: is it caused by hard circuitry in the Digic, or is it due to parameters loaded into it by the firmware?)

christo™ wrote:
That is best guess is a digital filter "flaw" in the sensor readout.


Thank you very much christo. Excellent analysis. Flaw digital filter is also what engineers from Canon suspect. They would not call it a "flaw" though.

do these "defects" really stand out in large prints

Yup,in one shot the shadows are all over the pic. It is terrible.

It would be really interesting to know if the same model bodies that don't exhibit the effect have different firmware. (I.E.: is it caused by hard circuitry in the Digic, or is it due to parameters loaded into it by the firmware?)


I did not have the chance to try that. Since my 1D2Ns were bought brand new 5 months ago. They came with the latest firmware. I think maybe the last batch of 1D2Ns are more likely to have this issue.

What was the date of manufacture code (in the battery compartment). It does not follow that they are 5 months old just because you purchased them 5 months ago.

Gene

GeneO wrote:
What was the date of manufacture code (in the battery compartment). It does not follow that they are 5 months old just because you purchased them 5 months ago.

Gene

Sorry Gene, there is no way I can check the date of manufacture code. I do not have 1D2N any more.

ivanshusky wrote:
GeneO wrote:
What was the date of manufacture code (in the battery compartment). It does not follow that they are 5 months old just because you purchased them 5 months ago.

Gene

Sorry Gene, there is no way I can check the date of manufacture code. I do not have 1D2N any more.

Ah, yes

Bump

Fine piece of investigative reporting there, Hoff! Heh, maybe this problem is more widespread than we imagined.

I borrowed another 1D2N from a friend to test for this shadow thing again yesterday. The shot was taken with iso 100 and the shadow effect was obvious in the pic. I guess it is pointless to go back to Canon with this thing though since 1D2N is discontinued, they might just want to sleep on it until it goes away.

This may be a long shot, but have you tried disabling the in-camera NR? The 5D2 seems to have a similar issue.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/715521

Ariel Bravy wrote:
This may be a long shot, but have you tried disabling the in-camera NR? The 5D2 seems to have a similar issue.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/715521

Yes, I did. It did not help. Do not have no 1D2N no more.

I think it is most likely caused by in camera software, a firmware update might solve it. Since Canon did put a new CMOS and Image Engine in my 1D2N when they were trying to fix it but none helped.

Thanx anyway.

So how do the Nikon D3s perform ?

- Alan