7D Ghost Images
/forum/topic/828739/0

1
   2   end

Alex Edwards
Registered: Jun 07, 2007
Total Posts: 57
Country: Australia

HI there, Any one have any examples of this:

Link to Canon Australia Site

Is it a real issue? A Halloween joke?



Daan B
Registered: Aug 16, 2007
Total Posts: 7157
Country: Netherlands

Look real to me... Cr@p



rscheffler
Registered: Aug 23, 2005
Total Posts: 2840
Country: Canada

It's included, with a sample, in this thread of known 7D problems: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/828760



cbfabbri
Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Total Posts: 240
Country: Brazil

Canon USA also reporting a service note.

I REALLY want to believe it's about a "firmware only" fix.

Sorry guys, but it's a shame.
Just cancelled my BH order. I am too far away for a return/recall if needed.
Let's wait to see if it's just about a firmware fix, if ok, I'll get one near future.



A.Y.
Registered: Oct 11, 2005
Total Posts: 784
Country: United States

I "ALMOST" ordered it last night. Will wait and see what this is all about now!



jeremy_clay
Registered: Jan 14, 2008
Total Posts: 9093
Country: Canada

Canowned



ciprian.trofin
Registered: Oct 18, 2009
Total Posts: 229
Country: Romania

cbfabbri wrote:
Canon USA also reporting a service note.


Could you provide a link ?



cbfabbri
Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Total Posts: 240
Country: Brazil

Yes, sure.



http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=19356&keycode=2112&id=60427



Sibilant
Registered: Feb 12, 2004
Total Posts: 150
Country: United States

I just noticed this on one image I took this weekend. High speed burst of a crow attacking a white-tailed kite and there was dark silhouette of the crow still visible on the blue sky of the following frame. Annoying but easy to clone out.



ciprian.trofin
Registered: Oct 18, 2009
Total Posts: 229
Country: Romania

cbfabbri wrote:
Yes, sure.


http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=19356&keycode=2112&id=60427


Thank you.



molson
Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Total Posts: 8134
Country: Canada

Let me guess... you have to push the exposure at least two stops in DPP in order to see it...



Sibilant
Registered: Feb 12, 2004
Total Posts: 150
Country: United States

I'm surprised Canon isn't blaming it on Adobe's Beta converter... lol



Ralph Wagner
Registered: Feb 10, 2002
Total Posts: 487
Country: United States

Glad I have trained myself to wait until the dust settles before purchasing a new body



alundeb
Registered: Nov 06, 2005
Total Posts: 2741
Country: Norway

molson wrote:
Let me guess... you have to push the exposure at least two stops in DPP in order to see it...


Plus max out contrast and crush the levels controls.

I regularly abuse my files, but didn't see this ghosting until I heard about it, and really trid to find it.

It will be of academic interest to me (since I am an engineer) to see what Canon eventually does to fix it.

These are two consecutive frames, so you can see what we are talking about in terms of contrast enhancement to get the ghost out in daylight



AGeoJO
Registered: Jul 08, 2003
Total Posts: 10517
Country: United States

alundeb wrote:
I regularly abuse my files, but didn't see this ghosting until I heard about it, and really trid to find it.

It will be of academic interest to me (since I am an engineer) to see what Canon eventually does to fix it.

These are two consecutive frames, so you can see what we are talking about in terms of contrast enhancement to get the ghost out in daylight


- if you look hard enough you will all kind of weird things. Thanks for posting the images that really put the problem in better perspective . It just shows that this can easily be blown our of proportion . Again, I am not downplaying the problem and Canon better get this taken care of this issue with the next firmware update.



Access
Registered: Jun 07, 2004
Total Posts: 366
Country: United States

Is the firmware mod going to be a true fix or just some code to cover it up?
B'cos maybe it is some kind of hardware defect that can't be truly fixed. I'm a firmware engineer and a big part of the job is covering up for deficiences in the hardware that arise after the product is designed and built, and/or shipped.

When I say code to cover it up, an example would be a 'feature' that blocks you from taking another picture until the hardware goes back to normal, or a fix that ends up degrading the quality of shots that would be otherwise affected, etc.



AGeoJO
Registered: Jul 08, 2003
Total Posts: 10517
Country: United States

Access wrote:
Is the firmware mod going to be a true fix or just some code to cover it up?
B'cos maybe it is some kind of hardware defect that can't be truly fixed. I'm a firmware engineer and a big part of the job is covering up for deficiences in the hardware that arise after the product is designed and built, and/or shipped.

When I say code to cover it up, an example would be a 'feature' that blocks you from taking another picture until the hardware goes back to normal, or a fix that ends up degrading the quality of shots that would be otherwise affected, etc.


Only Canon can answer your question, of course. If Canon would disable the continuous shooting function on that camera, then they would deserve a class action lawsuit.

Now, where do you work again ?



alundeb
Registered: Nov 06, 2005
Total Posts: 2741
Country: Norway

Access wrote:
Is the firmware mod going to be a true fix or just some code to cover it up?
B'cos maybe it is some kind of hardware defect that can't be truly fixed. I'm a firmware engineer and a big part of the job is covering up for deficiences in the hardware that arise after the product is designed and built, and/or shipped.

When I say code to cover it up, an example would be a 'feature' that blocks you from taking another picture until the hardware goes back to normal, or a fix that ends up degrading the quality of shots that would be otherwise affected, etc.


Hard to tell.
Since the ghosting appears only at shutters speeds faster than 1/500, it makes me guess that it has something to do with too short discharge times between exposures for the sensor, and the discharge time is programmable and linked to the exposure time somehow. In that case a firmware fix could be a true fix.



Marc C
Registered: Oct 26, 2009
Total Posts: 12
Country: Belgium

Hard to tell how they are going to solve it.
Anyway i did a test indoor. Just shot multiple fotos from a light with manually exposure. So I have a high contrast between the light and the background.
I put it at iso 1600 with f/4 and a shutter of 1/4000. I set the noise reduction of, as also the highlight priority. So I could obtain the 8 frames per second and I didn't countered any problems so far. I shot both in jpeg and raw and dit some extreme editing in LR. Anyway I found nothing. No ghost images, just lot of noise in the blacks

Here is a set of 5 images.

http://users.telenet.be/marc_photography/7D-ghosts/

So it must be in some circumstances

EDIT : I did another test with ISO 200 and so I found no issues regarding these ghost images. I don't know if it matters, I have firmware 1.0.9



Access
Registered: Jun 07, 2004
Total Posts: 366
Country: United States

AGeoJO wrote:
Only Canon can answer your question, of course. If Canon would disable the continuous shooting function on that camera, then they would deserve a class action lawsuit.

Not disable it all together, just slow it (continuous shooting) down enough in circumstances where it could occur such that it doesn't occur anymore. For example, it may go from a true 8fps (frames / second) camera to a true 7fps or 6fps camera.



1
   2   end