It's been
released,
unboxed, and adored by many. But, like
other eagerly anticipated bodies from Canon, the
5D Mark II hasn't been entirely trouble-free for the early adopters. The company is at least stepping forward and confirming that the new model's two most commonly reported problems do indeed exist -- but isn't going so far as to fix them just yet. The first issue is called the "Black dot" phenomenon, where bright point light sources (like streetlights at a distance) result in a grouping of dark pixels immediately to their right, as seen above. The second issue is ugly vertical banding, apparently appearing only in sRAW1 mode. Canon has no advice on the first problem, but says you can avoid the other one simply by not shooting in sRAW1. Surely millions of photogs are wondering why they didn't think of that.
[Via
Digital Photography Review, image courtesy of
Stephan Hörold]
posted Dec 19th 2008 9:51AM
hassie for the win
Ouch, that doesn't look good. Is the consensus that this is an artifact of the CMOS that can be fixed in software, or a problem in the software processing side that they will fix later?
I work with CCDs on a daily basis (lapping, thinning, making substrates, etc) but generally when a row or something fails you get a solid black/white band, not dark pixels next to over saturation. The black implies leakage back into the adjacent pixel, but again, they're probably using a CMOS and that's entirely different.
It's an old flaw with the CMOS chip I'm guessing, it might be fixable by manipulation of the hardware but that would perhaps reduce sensitivity and increase general noise?
I guess it's the inverse effect of what TFT makers use to improve their display, the overdrive thing, except this time the overdrive of the cells due to the bright pixel negatively impacts the next pixel.
Doesn't canon use 3rd party sensors? then they can nicely pass the buck, unless they use/drive the sensor out of specs of the manufacturer of course.
@Wwhat
Canon designs and produces the CMOS sensors for their DSLRs themselves. It's the CCDs that they use in their point-and-shoots that they purchase from third parties (usually Sony).
I'd guess that this is a result of the low-light processing of the DIGIC 4 processor and the high ISO capabilities of this new sensor. The 50D uses the same processor and a smaller, 15.1MP Canon-sourced CMOS sensor and so far no reports of similar problems. This should be correctable with an updated firmware, although how long that will take is the question.
Ouch - is it really that common?
Some contend that EVERY unit has this flaw, while many owners have been unable to reproduce the behavior.
Well it's common enough that even Canon's samples have them:
http://www.usa.canon.com/uploadedimages/FCK/Image/REVERIE%20Still%20Photos/Vincent_Laforet_5D_MKII_MG_0403.jpg
Look at the bridge lights on the right hand side. And contrary to the wishes of many people here, they're visible at 100% and probably less. Things like this are no big deal to amateurs but to pro's who want to sell their work to stock photography sites it is.
It is a phenomenon?
Here I thought that darkness next to a light was a natural effect called a shadow.
Look at the picture. Its a bug, not a shadow.
A bug? Must be a moth. And a pretty big one. Neat how all those giant moths lined up like that.
I guess I should have put /sarcasm at the end.
The joke is the grainieness of the picture makes it look like the dots could be anything.
Writing /sarcasm next to a shitty joke won't make it any better.
I really don't think that "millions of photogs" already have "the new model" from Canon...
Thousands is a better word, IMO.
Nikon D3 here I come!
Given the fact that most people that actually buy a cam in this class already own good glass, that remark ist just so short-sighted, it's ridiculous.
@Alex: unfortunately every Canon- or Nikon-related news post on Engadget lately has become a flamefest between warring factions on each side of the fanboy aisle. People who actually use these prosumer or professional cameras have better things to do than run around trumpeting their love for the brand.
What is the point of this camera if you cannot shoot in RAW?
The camera has more than one RAW mode. It sounds like the 5D mkII's true, 24MP RAW is unaffected by this defect. sRAW1 is a "small" RAW format, where the camera reduces the resolution of the file but keeps the increased per-pixel bitrate so that it still offers the improved post-production controls. It's a hugely useful feature on these new many-megapixel cameras; I use it all the time on my 50D for parties and such where I don't need 15MP, and instead stick with 7MP, which is what I get with my camera's sRAW1 mode and is just fine.
It's not an error, it's ghostly orbs of dark spirits.
Either that, or it's all of the space ships that have been hiding next to the sun finally made it to earth.
Apparently this only happens at a really high ISO.
you make it sound like Canon isn't going to do anything with your story - they clearly state a new release of the firmware is coming...
"We are currently investigating and analysing the causes, and examining measures to reduce or eliminate these phenomena by providing correction firmware. An announcement will be made on www.canon-europe.com as soon as measures have been determined."
I've only had my 5d mk ii for 4 days, but I'm not experiencing any problems - already several hundred great photos with maybe 40 short movies. These are not stopping people from making great photos/movies with this wonderful camera.
Read more and see lots of samples on the 5d wiki - http://planet5d.com
Damn it, Canon... The 1D Mark II had a similar issue, IIRC. (I never experienced it on my bodies, but the worthless autofocus was enough to make me ditch them.)
At least they are acknowledging it this time.
Gotta love the dripping sarcasm in the last line.
I love Canon to death, but they have to get their stuff in order. Hopefully they actually do something about this and don't just talk a good talk.
It would be interesting to find out what causes this.
Engadget the photo experts ! I'll stick to pro photography site for my camera news as you never know what you're talking about.
sRAW1 is a type of compressed RAW file, so where do you think the dots are coming from ? the compressing ? WOW try googling what sRAW1 is before writing a very poorly researched article.
Wow... you really are as smug and unhappy as your avatar suggests. Lighten up - this is a tech blog, not a "researched article". If you don't like it, stick to your "pro" sites.
Maybe you are too stupid to read engadget. Where in the article does it say that the dots are the result of using sRAW? Very typical Canon "pro" here...
@primetime4: Please don't bunch allow Major4Play to represent all Canon people. He does not.
Relax. Don't get so upset. We have comments so we can enlighten each other. You don't have to be such a downer about it.
Canon Pro ? I'm not even a photographer I'm just a poorly researched Gadget blog commenter LOL
Wow, I wish I could read your comment but it's just so faint...
Canon Complacency! A new feature in camera design philosophy. They make good stuff, but they forgot that they had to keep innovating and producing quality products to stay in top. Good thing their competitors haven't stood still.
How exactly does a bug in a brand-new camera represent complacency?
Are we talking about the same camera? Or maybe you expected perfection. I think you need to take a deep breath and give them a chance to fix it.
This is pretty misleading. That "sample" image is zoomed in to 400 or 800%. If you print the photo or look at it at anything under 100% on a monitor, these black spots are pretty much invisible.
The vast majority of people complaining about this are people who do not have, and will never have this camera. The very few who have this camera and complain about this problem are retired engineers who have nothing better to do than criticize cameras.
I hope Canon fixes it soon just to shut these people up.
Actually, if you follow the threads on dpreview.com and other photography sites, you'll see that it's affecting a whole lot of 5D2 owners and at ISOs as low as 200. Moreover the black spots are visible even at 50% magnification. It's not as limited as most people want it to be. Also, stock photography sites would never accept an image with these defects so it's definitely hurting professional photographers.
The other point I want to make is that if you're buying a 21MP camera it's probably because a) you want to print large or b) you do a lot of cropping. Either way you're screwed.
Is it too much to ask that $2700 camera not produce such glaring artifacts? Having said all that, most buyers of the 5D2 are non-professionals for whom such small artifacs are no big deal.
I for One am getting really tired of companies Pushing out The hot new product, only to have quality/Service be very poor.
This (if i was a professional Photographer) would be unacceptable in my work, and i demand some explanation for my investment in said product, and Company.
This is very True with the Xbox360 with its disc scratching, and red ring of death. Seriously, to have a rapiar rate over even 5-10% is a waste of money time and producyivity(or in this case trash talking on Xbox Live). How are peole getting away with this?
Even the PSPs with their stuck/ broken pixels,
Or releasing a game too quick, and then having it patched every other week.
I for one am sick and tired of paying a premium price for a product that only has Premium hype.
Its one thing to acknowledge a problem, and say. Yeah we have a problem, we're sorry, lets work on it, or heres a little rebate for your trouble, thanks for still believing in us and our product company. Its a whole nother story when you as a company knew about problems from the get go, but decided eh screw em.
Just my rant~ 1043
It makes me question Canon's Q/A and testing programs. I have the original 5D and it hasn't let me down in two+ years. I wonder if these artifacts in the MkII are some kind of hardware problem between the Digic IV chip and the sensor? If that is the case there isn't an easy fix.
I love the "If I were a professional photographer, this would really bother me.” comments. No, if you were a professional photographer, you wouldn't be taking the kind of crap images that produce the black dots, or at least if you did, you sure as heck wouldn't be showing them to anybody.
I've seen two or three images out of hundreds of black-dot-containing images that I would classify as "keepers," and even then, if you're not looking for the black dots, you'd never see them. And I've seen no black dots on my Mark II, despite trying to reproduce the problem.
Yeah, it might be a problem in rare instances, but I'm betting Canon finds a way to fix the problem. As for the banding, this is the first I've heard of it, but I don't get the point of shooting SRaw anyway. Memory is too cheap to bother.
If i was a Lightbender
i guess i too would be a condecending jerk
But im not... and somehow, some way, you are?
See what i did there?
2 or 3 out of hundreds? Sure. Would you consider Canon's sample pictures keepers???
http://www.usa.canon.com/uploadedimages/FCK/Image/REVERIE%20Still%20Photos/Vincent_Laforet_5D_MKII_MG_0403.jpg
The problem is actually more common than you think. And many people on the photography forums said things like "I'm not getting black spots" only to be proven wrong once they were asked to post samples.
Memory is cheap; what kind of CF cards do you buy?
Of course since it's next to the brightest pixels it should be easy to run a filter over it in photoshop and such that reduces the brightness of dark spots next to bright spots.
I'm assuming a professional would try to rescue a picture that way.
Alistair Loveless,
Sorry, not trying to be a condescending jerk - although I admit it does happen. It's just that I've seen so many really, really bad photographs that are trying to reproduce the problem that it's getting old, fast. And, yes, the image that was used as a sample for this post is one of those bad images - and the sample has been magnified a lot.
The LaForet image that vqro linked to above is one of the few decent images I've seen that exhibit the problem, and you have blow up the image and hunt for the black dots to find them.
I don't really care about a "problem" that is noticeable only in poorly exposed images shot at high ISO. The point is, it isn't black dots that are going to keep anyone from buying the image - it's the bad photo.
I don't think any company has produced a product as complicated as this camera, or computers or cell phones or cars, that is perfect, especially when first produced - not Canon, not Apple, not BMW, not Nokia. There are just too many variables in electronics this complex to test everything, and anyone expecting perfection from these devices is just setting themselves up for disappointment. Yes, real problems need to be fixed, and reputable companies will do their best to solve a problem, as i believe Canon will with this one - despite what the headline of the post says.
@LightBender: Where did Alistair and vqro say that the camera has to be perfect? You're diminishing the problem, and as a 5D M II owner myself, I understand the concern. When does anyone get a pass when a $2700 rig has a problem? It's good that people are making a stink about this. Canon's track record isn't stellar when it comes to fixing problems on even their top of the line cameras.
This problem seems to be more common than you are implying. Check out this discussion on photo.net for a good rundown of the issue:
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00RewZ
The real concern is that this may be a problem with the DIGIC chip. If so, a firmware patch may diminish the problem, but the only way to truly fix it is to replace the chip. I can understand Canon treading lightly here, as warrantying a camera that was only just released will be no fun for anyone.
I really hope that it's a problem that can be fixed in firmware.
Lots of attention from sites like Engadget will motivate Canon to sort this out. If no one said anything, you can bet your ass they wouldn't be addressing it in a press release.
Ok. Upon re-reading Alistair's comments, I can see where you would draw that conclusion. He was projecting his frustrations with other companies at Canon, but I understand where he's coming from.
@Alistar: It's not a poor quality product. In fact, it's quite nice. Scratch that, it's an awesome rig.
But it's got a problem, and that problem should be fixed or people will avoid this camera.
So… this bug appears in one of the RAW modes when taking ambient images of tungsten bulbs in low-light conditions with high ISOs?
Wake me up when this matters, mmkay?
ran @ Dec 19th 2008 1:03PM
Memory is cheap; what kind of CF cards do you buy?
SanDisk Extreme III. Just paid $170 for 24 Gigs worth, or $10 after rebate, or about $0.42/Gigabyte. That's pretty cheap if you ask me, especially considering I could easily spend much more than that in a week on film (not including processing).
Been using this camera for over a week and had to make a considerable effort to find the perfect situation to cause these black dots. Also eventhough i was really interested in the sraws after trying to use them a few times the novelty of them kind of wore off... If i'm going to be shooting + working in raw with a 21 mp camera... i kind of want all 21 mp or wouldn't have gotten this camera.
Anyways its not like Canon is going to say. We aren't going to fix this! it's more likely they are in the process of figuring out what to do