ggreene wrote:
The entire 1D series has sensor crap accumulation over time. Where have you been? Do you typically buy other expensive items blindly? Hopefully you got your money back. I would think ML would be the way to go. An A9 is only $4500. No mirror and electronic shutter. Sounds perfect for you.
Why stick with a camera that is not doing what you want?
If I were doing research today and listened to you people on this forum I'd be hearing there's no issue at all, and that I should go ahead and make my purchase. These forums are filled with fanboys that defend lemon products to the ends of the earth. It's only just in the last little while of this thread that people have switched their line of argument from "there's no issue" to "well, what do you expect; it's a 1D. You should research!!!". Ha!
Yeah, sure....switch brands and lose thousands in the process. Great idea!
Since the beginning of the thread, people have either stated that they personally don't have issues, or that they have had this issue on various 1D series? In fact, at least the first 2 pages have zero passionate 'fanboy' comments. Since you were involved in this since the beginning, I am sure surprised you forget this. There are fanboys, and there are hateboys, and one of these seem more prevalent than the other.
Chimping wrote:
If I were doing research today and listened to you people on this forum I'd be hearing there's no issue at all, and that I should go ahead and make my purchase.
I have 1D bodies because I shoot sports/equestrian predominantly. I can't imagine anyone recommending a 1DX2 as a general use body. The 5D series has been that jack of all trades for a while now. It would surprise me if anyone on the Canon forums would recommend that.
Chimping wrote:
These forums are filled with fanboys that defend lemon products to the ends of the earth. It's only just in the last little while of this thread that people have switched their line of argument from "there's no issue" to "well, what do you expect; it's a 1D. You should research!!!". Ha!
Yeah, sure....switch brands and lose thousands in the process. Great idea!
Are you calling me a fanboy?
You just made my day!
If you knew me personally, you would know that I have 99 reasons to hate Canon but the dust issue ain't one
Not sure if this adds much as a data point but here goes:
I mostly shoot the 1DXII with lenses at or near wide open for sports, etc. Today I had a day-long session of 27 portraits, all shot at f/8. Last night I did some test shots to see how dirty the sensor was. There were a few larger dust specs and a few smaller ones. The larger ones were mostly blown away with a blower bulb. Those that remained I removed with a sensor pen. No wet cleaning. There were still a few much smaller, fainter spots around the edges/corners, but deemed by me as not worth the hassle. Fast forward to near the end of the day, after about 2400 frames and I did a quick check of some of the portraits against a plain background for evidence of dust build up. I didn't see anything new or significant.
Prior to yesterday's quick sensor cleaning, I can't recall the last time I did one. Meanwhile I've shot a ton of youth sports, probably around 20-30K high fps frames shooting NFL, as well as a lot of wedding work and the sensor remained acceptably clean, for me.
Not to say it was always spic and span but it seems to have moderated over time. The camera is now at about 540K actuations and had the mirror box assembly replaced back in May just at the end of the warranty period. It came back from that repair with a very well cleaned sensor and seems to have held up pretty well since.
In context, I have way more problems with dust getting on the sensors of my Leica M cameras. Lack of a mirror might be one reason, as well as frequent lens changes...
I think one of the reasons the Canon sensor gets so dirty in the 1 series is the race for ever more fps. This means that internal components need to move ever faster thus increasing the movement of lubricant which clearly isn't confined to just bearings etc, it seems free to spray all over the sensors. Needs a rethink. Totally unacceptable to expect owners to either not go narrower than f8, or spend valuable time cloning out spots on skies etc, or to have frequent camera downtime whilst bodies are sent back to Canon for sensor cleaning.
When I had my 1Dx, some of the best results I got from it was when the sensor had been recently cleaned and I used it between f11 and f16 with my EF 24mm ts/e for landscapes. That combination yielded some great images, they had a quality just that bit above what my 5Diii was capable of (menu settings the same in both cameras). I also had some ruined images where there were more oil and dust spots visible than sky. That was when I got fed up and p/exed the 1Dx for a Fuji GFX 50S. 5k frames on that and rarely a dust spot to be seen, usually a couple of electronic sensor cleans sorts out the few which appear. Several GFX owners I've spoken to reckon the GFX electronic sensor cleaner is very good, I'd agree. Much slower fps rate of course but, even stopped down to f32, clean skies.
I agree, with higher fps, more momentum and velocity creates a situation where lubricants can be freed up more and relocate all over inside the mirror box and sensor/shutter area.
I lived in the film era but never enjoyed the mechanics so I never got into photography then. Did the Canon F1 ever spray lubricants onto the film back in those days?
So the answer is probably yes, just not noticeable or at least as noticeable. We just need somebody to come up with a small contraption that can be laid over the sensor assembly and it cleans the top surface without manual swabs and liquids. I would think a proven design would sell very, very well for DSLRs and MILC.
TeamSpeed wrote:
... We just need somebody to come up with a small contraption that can be laid over the sensor assembly and it cleans the top surface without manual swabs and liquids. I would think a proven design would sell very, very well for DSLRs and MILC.
Good idea. Perhaps also a re-engineered mirror assembly with sealed lubrication which contains the oil droplets from spraying all over the sensor. Not as if this is something new to Canon, the problem has been going on for years and if, in a few years time, the 1Dx iii has a faster fps speed that will likely be worse (if built using current technology).
We could hope that Canon's R & D dept read these type of threads and note that potential customers are walking away from their 1 series due to the problems described above. In their position, that would worry me.
I don't buy the FPS argument because other cameras with similar FPS including the 1-series' primary competitors do not have this issue. Also, Canon has long had this issue with the 1-series at least all the way back to the 1DS MK III (advisory released) which was a slow camera. The 1DX had a mirror box advisory, but ironically it was for a separate problem regarding insufficient lubrication causing debris, VF issues, and AF failure rather than the oil spatter problems that so many other people complained about. Based on the repeated issues over multiple models, it looks to me like there could possibly be an underlying problem with either their mirror box design or how they are lubricated.
(Tin foil hat on) I wouldn't be surprised if Canon is too scared to release any kind of advisory for oil after the D600 fiasco to avoid any comparisons.
I'm still waiting for any D5 owners to post an f/22 shot with Dehaze at 100. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1517512/0
Most of us (including myself) on this thread don't have a problem either until we were told to do the above crazy settings. At f/22 I only see a few spots on my 1DX2. You have to go to extreme Dehaze or contrast to see the tiny spots in the upper left.
My D500 ain't pretty either with those settings....(ignore the large blobs from the front element)...but it likely is all dust and not oil. The 1DX2 spots in the upper left are so tiny compared to these spots on the D500. I'm looking to get a D5 so just wanted to see with my own eyes that it doesn't have any similar issue that has gone unnoticed.
2slo wrote:
...That was when I got fed up and p/exed the 1Dx for a Fuji GFX 50S. 5k frames on that and rarely a dust spot to be seen, usually a couple of electronic sensor cleans sorts out the few which appear. Several GFX owners I've spoken to reckon the GFX electronic sensor cleaner is very good, I'd agree. Much slower fps rate of course but, even stopped down to f32, clean skies.
I've read the GFX sensor cover glass has a 9mm gap space to the sensor which aids in defocusing dust. I've been impressed by the lack of visible dust on mine as well.
I wonder how much Canon will really invest in any oil splatter solutions. ML tech and potential global shutters are going to largely do away with the issue. It still would be nice to have a better sensor cleaning mechanism as ML bodies still have dust accumulation.
Will be interesting to see what the 1DX3 is like. Will it be a ML body or will they go another round of DSLR? With the A9 already out and an mk2 version probably coming out in 2019 they are going to look way behind if it's another DSLR.
ggreene wrote:
I wonder how much Canon will really invest in any oil splatter solutions. ML tech and potential global shutters are going to largely do away with the issue. It still would be nice to have a better sensor cleaning mechanism as ML bodies still have dust accumulation.
Will be interesting to see what the 1DX3 is like. Will it be a ML body or will they go another round of DSLR? With the A9 already out and an mk2 version probably coming out in 2019 they are going to look way behind if it's another DSLR.
I would certainly bet that the 1DX3 still has a mirror. If anything it would still at least remain an option. Canon doesn't currently make a competitive MILC from a feature standpoint in any market, and immediately swapping out their highest end pro DSLR refined over many iterations for a first-try pro MILC with no transitional products would be way too risky IMHO. Also, some key issues are still potentially a long ways away from getting solved, such as extremely poor EVF quality and battery life (which are about 1/8 of a pro DSLR using CIPA numbers) - both things that might matter more to professionals than enthusiasts. I also think there are quite a few OVF holdouts, and that is one of the reasons every one of my colleagues who has tried to go mirrorless is back to a DSLR. If I were Canon (or any other brand) I would not be comfortable making a full switch unless *every* aspect of the DSLR was outperformed by the MILC counterpart, and we are a long ways away from that. Just my opinion & speculation, anyway - they may rip off the band-aid at some point and leave consumers with little choice.
ah you guys are koo koo
i highly doubt any high frame camera is going to escape the oil splatter, even the D5 because no one has proved differently and as Geoff proved with the D500
this is my D3S, mind you its been a few years since it was last cleaned
Looking at the pic first before I read what you wrote, I thought you were going to say you'd bought a new 1Dx ii and this was what it was like out of the box!
ggreene wrote:
I wonder how much Canon will really invest in any oil splatter solutions. ML tech and potential global shutters are going to largely do away with the issue. It still would be nice to have a better sensor cleaning mechanism as ML bodies still have dust accumulation.
Will be interesting to see what the 1DX3 is like. Will it be a ML body or will they go another round of DSLR? With the A9 already out and an mk2 version probably coming out in 2019 they are going to look way behind if it's another DSLR.
CanadaMark wrote:
I would certainly bet that the 1DX3 still has a mirror. If anything it would still at least remain an option. Canon doesn't currently make a competitive MILC from a feature standpoint in any market, and immediately swapping out their highest end pro DSLR refined over many iterations for a first-try pro MILC with no transitional products would be way too risky IMHO. Also, some key issues are still potentially a long ways away from getting solved, such as extremely poor EVF quality and battery life (which are about 1/8 of a pro DSLR using CIPA numbers) - both things that might matter more to professionals than enthusiasts. I also think there are quite a few OVF holdouts, and that is one of the reasons every one of my colleagues who has tried to go mirrorless is back to a DSLR. If I were Canon (or any other brand) I would not be comfortable making a full switch unless *every* aspect of the DSLR was outperformed by the MILC counterpart, and we are a long ways away from that. Just my opinion & speculation, anyway - they may rip off the band-aid at some point and leave consumers with little choice. ...Show more →
I would still like to have an OVF/EVF hybrid camera, despite seemingly being the only person interested in one...
As great as the a9 is on paper, from my side by side use of it against the 1DXII, I would not consider it a better camera. They are both very capable with each having some advantages over the other. If Canon can continue to improve performance in a DSLR package, whether it's fps or AF tracking capability, or release some sort of hybrid body, they will remain competitive with mirrorless for a few more years, IMO. But without doubt, eventually everyone is going to be mirrorless as it provides clear advantages once the underlying hardware and software matches and exceeds DSLR capabilities. I also doubt Canon will release their first 'pro' mirrorless as a 1DX replacement. I think they'd be better served releasing something in the 5D/5Ds categories first.
