Slashdot Mirror
Digital Camera Failures
An anonymous reader writes "In the past week, four
major
camera
makers
have quietly published service advisories admitting their digital cameras are
dying. In each case, the flaw appears to involve Sony CCD sensors using epoxy
packaging that eventually lets in moisture. Sony's own cameras are among those
affected, and the company also has dozens of affected camcorder models. Sony is
believed to be picking
up the tab for the repairs for the other camera makers as well, regardless
of warranty status. (If true, a laudable approach.) Given the large numbers of
cameras that are potentially involved, this can't be good news for Sony, who apparently
already is expecting
losses, and who has also recently announced major
layoffs."
Digital cameras are very complex. Of course they'll run into problems now and then. At least they're usually not used for mission-critical applications.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
The Canon announcement is only for Asia and it only offers to fix the camera if and when it starts showing symptoms of the problems. As far as I'm concerned, that's bogus. They should offer a general recall and repair/replacement of all models affected so people don't lose the once-in-a-lifetime events they bought these cameras to capture.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
...no really, everything Sony I've ever had broke, and I take good care of my stuff.
My 10D's might CMOS sensor will dance on the scattered bones of your useless moisture-letting-in-CCDs!
Boy, am I glad I've procrastinated on buying a camera and continue to do so.
While I'm here, anybody have a reccommendation for an amateur-enthusiast-level mini-DV camcorder between $500 and $1000?
And now, for a sig that's a complete copout.
For all the Sony-bashing I've done, I have to salute Sony for stepping up to this one, no matter their motivation, though it looks mostly to be customer service and satisfaction. There are probably many of these defectives far out of warranty. Good for Sony!
Maybe I'm the only one, but I've vowed to stop buying Sony products after the last two things I've bought from them have been total pieces of S#!t. I had a Vaio laptop that lasted a year, and a camcorder that didn't last much longer. The name Sony use to be one I related to quality but anymore I steer clear.
I have an S200 that died last week with the same exact symptoms
Guess i'm SOL regardless because that model isn't on Canon's list
I think the way this is titled is kinda funny. Canon, Fuji, KM, are victims of 1 company having a failure. Its one failure, not failures at 4 companies. Then again trusting sony is a form of a failure.
Now to just keep hoping the sony CCD in my KM 7D doesn't have issue. Which would be real bad since it would be bad to have a leak in something that gets cleaned with liquid from time to time.
Amusingly I got in a debate not long ago in a camera forum about Sony Quality, I think I have officially won that debate now.
... that I bought a Nikon Coolpix 5700 rather than a sony or a minolta! Yay!
My DV cam is on the list though, grmbl. Hopefully they fix it if/when it breaks. Haven't used it in like, oh, six months, so no idea if its working or not, either.
-- dieman - Scott Dier
My school was badly hit by this - our Film and Video department was largely made of Sony digital cameras, and they all died over time. We have since switched to Panasonic, and they have never had to be replaced.
Anonymous Coward
Sony usually makes pretty reliable hardware, too. Although I guess they have been falling back lately. Panasonic seems to be stealing most of their thunder, especially in the TV market.
google.slashdot
affect
tr.v. affected, affecting, affects
1. To have an influence on or effect a change in: Inflation affects the buying power of the dollar.
2. To act on the emotions of; touch or move.
3. To attack or infect, as a disease: Rheumatic fever can affect the heart.
effect
tr.v. effected, effecting, effects
1. To bring into existence.
2. To produce as a result.
3. To bring about. See Usage Note at affect1.
...he speaks the truth! I haven't bought Sony products in years, but my girlfriend's family has, and so far two PS2s (an old big one and a newer small one) have been broken, apparently without cause.
Moreover, Sony isn't crap just because it makes poor-quality products, it's also crap because all its products are infested with DRM and proprietary technology.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
You may well get somewhere. Remember, a paper waranty is only an attempt to limit your common law rights - and rarely is it a successful one. (This does depend on how ancient you camera is, of course.)
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
I was pleasently surprised to see that while the DCF-F717 is affected, the DCS-F828 is NOT ... which I own. While the advisory states "October 2002 through March 2004" I've owned this camera for almost 2 years now ... so it doesn't sound like this is affecting any recent vintage digicams (?)
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
Every Sony product since a walkman in the early 90's has broken completely within 2 years, I don't know if it just me or Sony have laid off their entire testing and quality management dept. but it really is crap, VAIO notebooks just one example, horrible failure rate, Playstation? i don't know of many that dont have problems.
No, it's "affected"
Effect is a noun, affect is a verb. How do you put a noun in the past tense?
Gee folks. Substitute "Hard drive" for "image sensor" and we all could make a trip down memory lane. So who's up for implimenting "software liability"?
How do you put a noun in the past tense?
I'm sure some dolt will find a way.
Ok. So... Sony posts losses for one quarter, and they lay off a bunch of people... It's now my responsibility as a Nintendo Fanboy to jump up and down and praise this as the death of my archnemesis right?
Ehh. Who am I kidding. Apathy is too much damned work.
Deja Vu
n. 1. The sensation that you've read this very article before.
Effect can be a noun or a verb. You can effect an effect.
My Canon Powershot A70 just started to exhibit this problem 3 days ago!
I have found out that Canon USA and Canon Canada will both fix the camera, regardless of the warranty status.
This is the 2nd time that I've had to send my camera back for service. The first time was soon after I bought the camera because of a different CCD problem. Despite all of these problems, I still really like the camera and think it was a good purchase. I probably wouldn't think this if they didn't fix this problem for free.
Has Netcraft confirmed this?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Yeah!
SHould have bought an HP camera....
When I just recently bought my camera from Amazon, I read reviews on a few of the Canon cameras which were explicitly mentioning that some of the models were very sensitive to high temperature and after failures you couldn't get them fixed because the warranty specifies that it won't cover any damage due to Arizona-like temperatures and high temperature fluctuations. I followed the reviewer's advise and finally decided on the SD400 which doesn't have that problem. It's a good thing that they are now admitting to be at fault. They probably noticed the sales on those models taking a big dip and this is the only way to eliminate the cameras which are stuck in inventory.
CR says that Sony, Panasonic, Canon, and Olympus have the *fewest* problems. Pentax (sounds like a tampon brand), Konica/Minolta, and Toshiba are the least reliable, with Vivitar being the absolute least reliable. In absolute numbers, about 2.5% of Sony digicams needed repairs, about 10% of Vivitar cameras did. From the survery: "Based on 186,900 reader responses to our 2005 Annual Questionnaire about digital cameras bought new between 2002 and 2005. Data have been standardized to eliminate differences linked to age and usage. Differences of less than 4 points aren't meaningful." For autos, CR's surveys have been dead on, at least for me....every car I have had has aged and been as reliable as they predicted it would be, even down to individual systems (cooling, electrical, etc....) But, yes, for all you statisticians out there, I know that is completely anecdotal, as "n" is very small in my case....I keep my cars a long time....
I'm in Malaysia and I own a Canon Powershot A70...
And I had the CCD problem, it started about 6 months ago...first the backgrounds went slightly pink on bright shots, then it went a little fuzzy, then it went totally mangled and I couldn't see anything at all.
So I paid to get it fixed, it wasn't cheap...now they are saying they will pick the tab?
I wonder if I can get a refund...
Share your Knowlege - Kung-Fu Geekery
Slashdot article description ... FREE ... FREE ... PRICELESS
Grammar nazi correcting something that isn't wrong with something that is
Having that post moderated +1 Informative
I just had a Kodak digital camera die. In the middle of my vacation in Mexico, of all places. Basically, it had an intemittent problem where it would only take a picture of blackness or of distorted colors; I could temporarily resolve this problem by pressing on the lens. I did this until the thing holding the lens broke; at which point I was still able to take pictures for a day or so until the camera finally gave up its ghost.
My solution? I got a cheap 35mm camera for $10 to take pictures my last few days in Mexico. Once I came back to the US, I bought, for $100, Kodak's newer camera with the exact same design, more megapixels, more convenient self-timer and 3-picture burst, and one more mode for taking pictures.
I may even be able to repair the old camera; it acted like as though a connection was giving out.
No it ain't.
Instead of product recalls, they went right on shipping cameras with serious flaws in their retractible lenses. The result? A class action lawsuit: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/canon_c lass.html
Apart from the fact that film loses quality as it ages, is expensive to process, offers far lower resolution than current top-of-the-line digicams, is generally far noisier (particularly at similar ISO sensitivities) than a digital SLR, and - well, a bunch of other reasons I can't even be bothered to point out.
Wonder if you can do a photoshop plug-in to do that. And glad I bought a Nikon, after many years of holding off.
Sometimes ya win.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
I recall when it was considered a feature that certain SLRs would still take pictures if the batteries were dead. This was considered a must have for photographers in tough conditions such as war zone. Now batteries are like crack for digital cameras, they freakin need it all the time.
what kind of out of date rant is this? my 350D has no such problem of "delay", sounds more like the action of a point and shoot style consumer camera more than a digital SLR, or maybe based on early experience with the very first DSLR's
but, yea... i like digital photography because it's allowed me an improved learning curve. ive learned things with my digital that would've taken me years with film and probably saved me alot of time/money/effort in developing costs.
so... i like digital.
Were these SONY or SORNY products? Perhaps people should be buying Magnetbox digital cameras and TV's. /obscure, simpons.
Sony says that if you've already paid, to contact one of the listed service centers.
I noticed my DV cam is on the list, DCR-HC15E, the question is, what sort of deterioration should I be looking for? Maybe it's just me but I could swear that the quality of the video I get out of the unit these days appears less than what I originally was getting when I first bought it and that was /before/ I read about this story. Perhaps there's a way to accellerate the process of failure (if the weakness is there).
Incidently, living in a hot humid environment here too (North Eastern Australia)
So anyone who posts saying sony's product quality is crap is a troll??? I think there is some validity though...
Of course its sensor comes in the form of Fuji Velvia 100, Agfa RSX II 100 and Fuji NPZ 800 film that I load in it according to the circumstances.
Three words for you: rechargable lithium-ion batteries. Admittedly, digital cameras still treat them like crack, but at least it's a hell of a lot cheaper.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
A $250 digital camera, for all practical purposes, is the equivalent of a $50 35mm film camera (technically the $50 film camera has a higher resolution, but that's another discussion). These low end digitals replace the snapshot cameras of yore, but shouldn't be confused with actual professional quality cameras. If you know that you're going to be shooting a "once in a lifetime" event like a wedding, first birthday, or something along those lines, you should either be shooting it in higher quality (and more reliable) film, or invest in a higher end digital.
If you lose that once in a lifetime shot because you trusted it to a cheap snapshot camera, that's as much your fault as the vendors.
There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
My Canon a70 started going glitchy a few months ago.. purple lines and what have you.. talking about moisture.. oh yeah, I live in Vancouver.
It's great they've admitted it and are fixing them.
Maybe apple should follow suit and fix the scratched nanos.. I don't own one but I've witnessed the problems with those things first hand.
Better than a class action lawsuit I guess.
I own the Olympus E1 and all I can say I never wanna buy another camera that is not this well made and made with quite the quality control. This also goes for the better Zuiko lenses. Now my Canon D30 was also pretty well made but the regulral Canon lenses where platic toy like in quality and feel. My 50mm f/1.8 shattered into several pices when my camera fell of a step. That was maybe 5 inches of the ground. The front element went off like a rocket.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Yes, it is.
"We were able to effect repairs before the water got too high."
A link is worth a thousand quotes
A friend of mine took a picture of his ass, and the entire middle was all messed up due to bad pixels, as if somebody put TNT up his ass. We complained to Sony, but all they did was post it online to scare off further complainers. It worked pretty damned well.
Table-ized A.I.
>> How do you put a noun in the past tense?
> I'm sure some dolt will find a way.
I'd have penned more of my thoughts on this, but I'm sure I'd just get grammar nazied.
Touche...
How do you put a noun in the past tense?
Say it with an American accent...
A cannon A 60, and I had some of the same problems described in the article. IE when I took a picture all I saw was black(some gray lines). However, I seemed to have "fixed" the problem by giving my camera a good, hard smack on the side. That was about a month ago, and while I don't use my camer everyday, it seems to be working fine, just took it to Prague and got some amazing shots from the castle.
Monstar L
However, lately the camera has developed strange circles in some of its images, especially in certain lighting conditions, or certain atmospheric conditions that we have not been able to really pin down. Most of the time, the images are clear.
The circles or rings seem similar to what you might get with dust somewhere in the lens system near the focal plane; the each circle covers perhaps up to 1/10th of the image area, but many of them are smaller, and some dimmer than others. The next time we use the camera, they don't appear at all!
Could thse perhaps be explained by condensation on the inside of the CCD's window, which only appears in certain temperature or atmospheric pressure situations?
-- -pjk Perry Kundert perry@kundert.ca http://kundert.2y.net
Digital still cameras
Digital video cameras
Professional camcorders
Other products
I subscribe to exactly three online services. One is my NNTP provider, another is my mail provider (nice to not be tied to one ISP), and the last is Consumer Reports. We can buy a huge variety of goods today, but the one thing that's hard to obtain amidst the deluge of marketing is greliable, trustworthy information about products, and Consumer Reports does a pretty good job of (a) providing product class overviews and recommending what to look for, and (b) providing objective evaluations of large numbers of products.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Agreed. I know that the 10D/20D, and probably the comparable Nikons (D70/D100) have shutter response of between 8 and 24 milliseconds, and the 20D can be shooting within 0.2seconds of power on.
My powershot A60 just started doing this, and here I thought it was because of the years of travel with it. Now I just have to fine my local canon rep and get it fixed. Of course, I shoot with a rebel XT now, but atleast I can have my point and shoot working again also.
Here is a demonstration
The solution to that nowadays is digitization of your slides or print negatives. A decent quality film scanned through a quality scanner can yield 9-11 megapixels of effective resolution. When printed using the same equipment used for digital photography printing, there is zero effective difference between them.
There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
I have a PowerShot A70, and after gradually introducing noise to images it finally "died" a couple of weeks ago. This actually looks rather amazing -- I've documented this in a short Flickr set at http://flickr.com/photos/dekstop/sets/1026874/ and I'll post some more information at http://dekstop.de/weblog/ as soon as I find some time... I even have some video clips made with the camera.
To quote from the Flickr page: "my only digital camera has finally degraded into a first-class piece of alien surveillance equipment. instant live show, one-button entertainment, subjective electronics."
'Machine' is a noun.
If it happens to be a time machine, then putting it in past tense is easy.
Just push the big red button on the dashboard.
I just recently bought a 35mm camera for $10 that will take pictures fine w/o a battery. Of course, the camera can't take pictures w/o expensive 35mm film in it. It costs about 25 cents to hit the shutter on a 35mm camera; this is the #1 reason I prefer digital.
- Sam
> decent quality film scanned through a quality scanner can yield 9-11 megapixels
How many people do you know who put decent film in their $50 camera? It would seem silly, you'd get about 5 rolls of film tops before the film cost more than the camera. Or one roll, if you had it scanned using a decent scanner.
More likely you're looking at a cheap point and shoot with cheap film that sits in the camera for a year before it's developed. That's the real competition to cheap digital cameras. And it really is no contest - it's not megapixels, it's live preview and instant review. People learn a lot faster when they get immediate feedback. So cheap POS digital still gives better results (I have watched this too many times to doubt the outcome, if not the causes)
and fuck their shotty equipment, I refuse to buy anything made by Sony. My Vaio, my car CD player, and my PS2 have all been worthless crap that failed at exactly $Warranty+1 days.
For instance, I have an Elura 60 camcorder. Is that definitely not affected?
Friends of mine have Canon cameras, A75 and A310 I think. We are not in Asia; should we be worried anyway?
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
are doomed to repeat it. This sounds very much like what 15 years ago we called ROM-rot, as it afflicted certain Casio brand musical keyboard synthesisers. I guess it's just part of the general trend of dumbing down manufacture. Penny pinch with plastic. By the time the suck^H^H^H^H our clients find out, we'll have some cheaper ceramic chips. Designed by computers, built by robots, not fixable by humans...
3 weeks ago, I have seen a broken Minolta Dimage X20 (one of the cheaper cameras in the list) and images that were taken with it. Its owner wanted me to take a look at it to see what was wrong (of course, I did not have a clue).
/., I'll be the hero of the day ;-)
Highly exposed areas (like highlights on metallic objects) of the pictures had highly distorted colors (fluorescent green or pink). Moreover, if you would point the camera to a bright light source (for example a tube light), the cameras LCD would start displaying all kinds of weirdly distorted colors.
I'll have this guy know that his camera can be fixed for free... Thanks to
--Use ant to make
film is very sensitive to moisture and extreme temperatures. (It's also noisier, has lower resolution, and has lower ISO than modern digital sensors.)
Just give it a good whack, seriously, that is what I did to fix my powershot. Haven't had the problem since..
I had a DSC-P1. Turns out that camera line bad a problem with the charger that would eventually kill the battery. Sony replaced the battery, charger and on-board hardware to rectify the problem, no questions asked. The camera was out of warrenty. Well done Sony!
wait.......... doesn't that merely mean that the problem with panasonic digicams hasn't been identified yet? :(
:D
oh well.
However, the real point I'd like to make is this. By their nature, consumer satisfaction reports tend to be way out of date. This is because the records relate to models that have been around for a while, which in a rapidly moving industry means they may not relate to what is on the shelves at all. A case in point from another industry was Volvo, which at one time enjoyed a totally unwarranted reputation for reliability based on the longevity and reliability of one of its post-war models which shared very few parts with later models. (I know this is true because the girlfriend of a friend had one of the reliable Volvos, and side by side you could easily see it was built to a totally different standard from the later ones. It was wrecked by collision with a truck at 132000 miles, at which point the seats were just getting slightly tatty.)
Nowadays it is indeed possible to predict how long a car will last because so much effort has been put into reliability engineering, and it is relatively easy to see what is under the hood and make an evaluation. But for things like digital cameras this is virtually impossible because the technology is changing fast.It's possible to evaluate things like the robustness of doors, the protection of the lens, scratch resistance of LCD covers etc., but you know nothing about the internal mechanisms or the reliability of the electronics. I suspect that it is not even necessarily true that you get what you pay for because in electronics cost is so volume sensitive.
My conclusion? Don't worry. Choose on the basis of your preferred mix of features, compatibility, optical quality and weight, and be sure you get a reasonable warranty. But my own preference would always be to buy from a manufacturer who really understands small cameras and short focus lenses. That means Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Leitz (acquired Minox), Pentax and Minolta. Fuji's camera superiority is in medium format. Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba are electronics manufacturers and dependent on the optical people for lenses and expertise in areas like ergonomics.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
I just got a Canon A60 passed to me because of no picture on the screen... They had taken it to a repair centre and told its just busted, will cost too much to fix so buy another. I offered to take a look first, thinking oh... i wonder if the chip has come loose... My father also has a -still working- Dimage Xt (another one listed...)
/.
Thanks
A lot of people here seem to dislike Sony products. I bought the DSC-F505V digital camera in 2000 and have taken over 3000 pictures. It still works perfectly.
It's been exposed to very cold conditions (Colorado Springs) and very hot and humid conditions (South Africa).
The only minor flaw I found is that the battery clip broke off after the 3rd year of use. I carry two batteries and changing batteries all the time must have worn out the clip. I'm still able to close the battery cover so the clip was not really crucial to it's operation.
I propose that we end this unnecessary confusion and spell both words "uhffect" thereby eliminating this meaningless rule.
To effect is to bring about; therefore you can say "I effected a change" or similar.
Other that that you're right though, in this context, the word should have been "affected".
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Having someone not get the supposed "Grammar nazi"'s joke
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
Sure, but film is like crack to film cameras. You may be able to get thousands of frames from a battery in a film camera, but good luck going more than 40 frames without changing film!
I can stick a 2GB card and a couple LiIon batteries into my Canon 10D DSLR and take a couple thousand frames over the course of a day without having to open up the camera. Even if I had a film camera that didn't need batteries, I would still need to carry around 60 rolls of film and spend 10% of my time changing film instead of taking pictures.
And after paying hundreds of dollars for all of that film, I would have to make sure that it doesn't get too hot or too cold up until it's developed. Plus I have to worry about it getting scratched and dirty or processed wrong.
dom
I'm sure the enemy would happily stop shooting and bombing for 2 hours
while the OP charges his camera batteries from a conveniently located
powerpoint on the front.
Idiot.
Apart from the fact that film [...] offers far lower resolution than current top-of-the-line digicams
Care to provide a citation for this? In general, film still provides a far higher resolution than digital at a given price-point (actually, this is meaningless; I can buy film and stick it in a $5 35mm-compact, and the film itself still has the same high resolution, although the camera will let it down).
I'm sure that prohibitively expensive specialist digital equipment will beat 35mm film, but then, you can always buy larger-format (and possibly better) film.
And I don't think that's what you meant by "top-of-the-line digicams"; for *anything* like the purposes we're discussing here, the fact is that film will offer higher resolution for a comparable price point than digital. Digital has come down a lot in price, and when you factor in the processing cost and convenience, is now starting to threaten 35mm film for serious SLR work. But in like-for-like, price-for-price, raw resolution, it's not there yet.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
OK - was it really necessary to put links into four separate words in a phrase so we had to click on each of them to spin off to another site to find out that it was Konica, Fuji, Canon and Sony - I mean it's cute and techy and all but ... huh?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Right during a close encounter I had in the Canadian mountains last weekend, my Sony failed miserably.
My digital camera conked out right at the point that the UFO crossed over the horizon, I was soooo mad!
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I have a Cyber-shot DSC-P7 that did this over a year ago. Had no warrant left so I took it apart and it works even less now :(
That joke is dying.
Or perhaps you just knocked the lens cap off.
Just this week, I ditched my computer keyboard because it was giving weird responses to some keypresses. Thoroughly cleaned it out, checked the inside, contacts etc., conclusion: problem was with the (single) controller IC, one of the very few electronic components. Killed by a static discharge? Who knows. I can't remember ever having needed to replace a keyboard, it was always a matter of cleaning or replacing with a nicer looking model.
Now this keyboard was 3 or 4 years old, only used by me, and damnit, it's the fscking electronics that die instead of contacts or pieces breaking off. I'm now using an older one that's probably seen 3 or more owners, twice as old (and doesn't look as nice), but it still works. I've had similar experiences with other equipment.
The root cause? I suspect it's simply first-to-market and pricing pressures that forces manufacturers to strip down Quality Control to the lowest level the market will bear. Manufacturing processes may be optimised to make single components very cheap, and very likely to outlast the warranty period, but that's about it. When something is 3+ years old, you're expected to look for a replacement.
Like it or not, that's the way things are. But what pisses me off mostly, is that there's little you can do to seek out quality. Brand names say nothing about their latest products. Extensive customer reviews give hints about features and support, but say nothing about how durable a product is built. And price bears little relation with quality either.
As for these 'low-end' digital camera's: own a Canon Powershot A70 myself (and happy with it sofar). It may be considered low-end in the digital camera market, but it cost me somewhere around $400 when I bought it. Nothing low-end about that, I consider that a lot of money for a photo-making device. Am I wrong to expect a product in return that keeps working for more than just 2 or 3 years?`Certain SLRs' don't *have* batteries, so they have really no problem at all if they run out. Even my humble Pentax MX only uses its battery to drive the meter, so you can use it without one if you can judge exposure. Of course, you don't get fancy exposure control, autofocus, motor drive &c &c...
Seriously: I wonder how many people realise how bad the problems with batteries can be? For instance: what's the life of a typical camera battery in the arctic? Not very long I guess, if it willl work at all. I once worked on a bit of hand-held battery-powered military equipment, where they took things like this seriously - long storage life, working in extreme conditions and so on. The batteries were *very* expensive...
--tim
Sony = Boners?!?!?
I have been exclusively using Canon digital (Axx line) cameras, and I can say that they are the most durable and reliable electronic products (and cameras) that I have owned. Despite being dopped, getting wet, getting scratched and in other ways abused, they have always pulled through.
Just putting this in perspective.
Ummm.... will they replace my Sony camera that I threw out because the CCD stopped working? Huh?
Lousy defects.
The other day I was at the camera store behind some lady who had a corrupted memory card, which caused her to loose all her pictures ...
But hey, I agree - digital photography makes a lot of sense, that's why I prefer digital cameras from companies that originally made film cameras. At least they have learned a few things over the years.
My Canon zr60 had these symptoms, and I had lost all the paperwork on the bugger. I was looking to eat the cost of replacement/repair when I saw the article this morning. Reading Slashdot pays for itself!
whuppy enjoys smelling like diesel fuel
Dunno about you, but my browser shows the link at the bottom of the window when the mouse is over it. Just read it down there!
You have nothing to worry about until Netcraft confirms it...
This is off topic about another page on your blog, but I tried posting a comment and got permission denied. Regarding http://dekstop.de/weblog/2005/10/irc_bots_on_web_s ervices/ :
I recognize the channels listed. Those channels are on irc.cwru.edu, composed (as you might guess) mainly of former and current Case Western Reserve University students. As the name #geeks suggests, Comp Sci and Engineering sorts, mostly. I was never much of a regular there, but I knew a decent number of the ones who did. Notacon is a fairly new but continuing annual event started by Froggy, a former Case student and now a Case employee.
Yeah, dawg! You just schooled them!
My question: when is Sony going to own up to the three-year-old and counting issue with their LCDs that are also used in most major digital cameras and camcorders? The crystal substrate spontaneously cracks, and presto! unusable LCD.
Sony has sucked for years, and this is no surprise. Their TVs also have, by far, the highest failure rate in the industry (speaking as someone who did repairs and installations for years). Boycott them. They're going down the tubes and they deserve to, they've been living off their reputation for two decades.
Those symptoms are exactly what happened with my Canon A-70. About 9 months ago the camera starting taking weird black and purplish streaked pictures. The slapping thing would set it straight for a little bit, but it would inevitably go back to the streaking.
I ended up shelving the camera (no point in taking unrecognizable pictures) since it was out of warranty. A couple months later I took it off the shelf to play with (a rainy day afternoon) and discovered it wouldn't power on (too much slapping?). Just for kicks (remember, I had nothing to do) I called customer support to see how much a full repair would be. They wanted $120, let alone I could get the upgraded A-75 for about $40 more. I respectfully declined and figured I had a new electronics project/doorstop.
After reading the Service Notice this morning I contacted Customer Service (again) and explained the issues. After a little bit of irk--I don't think the guy believed me that the issue related to the CCD, he thought it was a focusing problem--I at least convinced them to send me a mailer for them to "check it out."
Of course, because the camera won't power on (maybe because of the slapping), I'm a little suspicious that they won't even look at the problem.
Anybody know of the regulations on product recalls? If something else breaks in addition to the recalled defect, do they have to repair that too? Or will I get a brick back with a shiny new CCD?
The page can be found here: http://esupport.sony.com/perl/news-item.pl?mdl=DCR TRV38&news_id=95
Twenty minutes of nauseating fact-checking pleasantries later, I get resolution. Free shipping, and a working camera "in 10-14 business days."
Gotta give it up for the right way to take care of this before the old class-action suit sets in.
How do you like the SD400?
I've been thinking of upgrading from my old reliable S200...I've definately taken some nice looking shots...
Specifically, though, sometimes there's an aggravatingly long delay when you first press the button to when it finally focuses and fires...enough so that a friendly stranger using my camera to take a picture of me starts to wonder if its going to work at all...how is the SD400 in that department?
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
I thought that way about film for a long time.... Until I used a 5MP camera on a trip. It was so much easier to manage many pictures that I took a lot more and was able to select a few good ones without expense of lots of prints or hassles in getting them reprinted.
Granted my negative scanner isn't super, but it was so much easier to get better pictures in the vast majority of cases that I put the film camera on ebay right when I got back.
If you're using large format or something maybe life is different, but....
I just picked up a DSC-P31 on eBay. It was cheap ($70 CAD including shipping) so I bought it. Haven't even done the paypal payment for it yet, and I already know it's got faulty hardware. Yeesh.
Oh well, if it acts up, I can send it in and get it repaired.
We have moved on, and are in 21st century. Its nice here, actually.
Where did you get the idea the affected cameras cost $250? Mine originally retailed for $1100. Gee, you're smug. I print 8x11 photo quality, far and away crisper and cleaner than a comparable film camera.
Does anyone know if Kodak digital cameras are affected?
I owned a Kodak DX3600 for 3 years until Sept 2004. I took the camera on vacation with me to Europe (from Canada) summer of 2004 and it was working fine until one hot day in Paris, the camera stopped taking pictures reliably.
There were images that seemed corrupted with colour bars through them and others that were just black. Other times, nothing would happen.
Luckily that camera was the only thing I had ever bought an extended warranty for and I managed to use its pro-rated value to replace it with a Canon A95, which has been problem-free so far. Hoping it doesn't have the CCD problem.
The CCD went out on my Dimage X20 several months ago. I was pretty sure it was either the CCD because all of the menu functions worked fine and displayed fine. I was even sure it wasn't the image processor because using the digital zoom still embiggened the black pixelation. Anyway, the images came out straight black. I bought a new camera (upgraded significantly to a DSLR) and chucked the x20 in a drawer with the thought "maybe someday i'll track down a cheap CCD replacement or get an otherwise busted x20 online." I really liked this little shirt-pocket camera and plan on having it shipped to minolta this very week!
Sony will pay for the fix? Sony is famous for denying problems exist with their flaky products, even when 50% of customers experience the problems. My DVD player overheated and shut off within seconds of use after a year, as it did for about half the other people who reviewed it online (google DVP-S530D heatsink problem) but Sony denied ever hearing about the problem (most revies said thet called Sony) they would not let me send them proof, and they wanted $180 to LOOK at the problem, plus labor and parts and shipping. Same with my Sony reciever which randomly crashes and needs to be rebooted.
You missed my point. I didn't say that in practice digital wasn't worth a slight reduction in resolution or increase in cost; I was arguing your point that digital was higher resolution. For the kinds of uses 35mm film gets used for, it's not. You can buy pretty impressive digital cameras for about twice the price of an entry-level film SLR, but they're still not as high resolution as film.
As I said, it's a trade off, and of course, if you stick that film in a crappy camera, the results are still going to suck. But the same would apply if you stuck a massively expensive sensor behind a dirt-cheap lens.
Anyway digital *will* probably surpass film in the next few years...
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
When strangers take pictures they always don't get the idea that they don't just press but have to hold the button all the way down. In that department the SD400 (IXUS 50 in Europe) is pretty fast but I'm using a fast memory card also. For example there's a fast picture option that I use for sports that goes off one after the other while holding the button and I get about 10 pictures at full resolution per bowling ball throw. I think that is pretty fast. I would have gotten the SD450 which just got released and has a bigger screen, and is supposedly even faster. It is the upgrade of the SD400 but I needed it for my Europe trip and the SD450 would have been released the month I was on my trip so I couldn't wait.
The camera has all kind of cool features. For example you can take pitch black night pictures which end up looking pretty bright and colorful after just 15 seconds of exposure. I really recommend that you should RTFM after getting the camera.
Shop around online for the model since there are a few places online where you can get the camera about 25% cheaper than in any local stores. The memory I got was 2 GB and the transfer rate is ~ 140 MB/sec.
Thanks for the response.
As an amateur with pretensions of mediocrity, your RTFM recommendation is right on. I think I limped by with a half-understanding of even the limited manual settings on my S200. (Couldn't directly control the shutter speed I think)
And the S200 delay was noticeable even when I was taking the photo, sometimes it was awkwared where I'd have to go wait for it...wait for it... but it sounds as if they've dealt with that and have some nifty rapid-fire modes...and for the first time I'll start looking into the speed of memory. (Also, I wonder if I should consider sticking with ~2megapixel modes...I guess you never know what you might want to blow up, but I'm not much of an image quality queen...given that these images are higher resolution than my 19" screen, that seems pretty good to me!)
I see it for $300 on Amazon vs $350 at the local places. I wonder if local retailers would pricematch something like that...I'd use Froogle (they really need a sanity check for "sort by price"...I hate wading through pages of lowcost accesrories 'til I finally find the product itself) though I'm worried about the reputations of some of those independent store front shops.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
This happened to my Sony DSC-P71 digital camera. It was purchased in December 2002, and when I got back from my vacation in Montreal (condensation in the plane, high humidity in Montreal), the LCD was just dead. Took it in, Sony claimed there was nothing wrong. Took it in a again, Sony "cleaned" the camera. Third time, they finally got a message and changed a part--I don't have the warranty receipt with me at work, but I'm willing to bet they changed the CCD. Haven't had a problem since (though I got scared and bought "extra" warranty).
I didn't have to pay to fix it (apart from shipping it to the Sony warranty centre), but the people at the Sony Store gave me a very hard time, saying that there was nothing wrong with the camera (even with me turning it on right in front of them) and that I didn't know how to use it.
I hope the people at the Southgate Sony Store in Edmonton are reading this and eating their words.
The grandparent is out of date regarding shutter release time. However if you fill up your camera's cache, there will be a delay as the camera writes to the card.
Good luck to you. Google Canon and e18 if you are curious. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/canon_c lass.html
Since this particular CCD is vulnerable to high-heat and humidity (which sounds to me like most of the southern US, Mexico, the Carribean and South America), should the camera companies not make certain cameras particular to each country or Zip Codes?
True, my statement ignores travel and maybe this is just a defective part and not emblematic of all the cameras using this particular CCD. If certain camera retailers are doing this, what of on-line stores?
But using effect as a noun effects a different meaning. Or maybe it just affects the original meaning. I dunno...
Apart from the fact that film loses quality as it ages
Huh?
Properly processed film is good for a very long time. We can print negatives from the 19th century that have suffered no degradation at all. I've printed negatives myself from the 1950s. They look as good as new. Better, even, since my enlarger is of better optical quality than was common then, and printing materials are better too.
There are some aspects of digital that are indeed attractive (my Digital Rebel is fun, and takes decent pictures), but for real photography, not snapshots, film is awfully nice, and will be so for some time to come.
...laura
The Canon 50/1.8 is a bargain at $75; of course, you're not gonna get a sturdy lens at that price, but optically, it is very good.
The closest that Olympus has is the 35/3.5 for about $230, and with those specs, of course, it's going to be constructed better.
So people who can't afford high-end photography equipment shouldn't expect their camera to behave as advertised?
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
I have a 2 yr old A70 and the images have just gotten worse and worse over time: noise, streaks, and tiny blue spots all over. I guess since it hasn't failed completely yet I'm of luck.
Beware of these cameras on the used market.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
Just write the frigging names of the companies as link text. I cant mouse-over on my pda!!
Fuji FinePix S2 Pro has a problem with their CCD, it goes black and doesn't recover. Fuji, New York, fixed it, never batting an eye. The camera shoots BEA-utiful colour, top notch organization.
e SupportBrowse.jsp?prodcat=507205&sscucatid=664260
They recently (finally!) updated their shooting SW:
http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/Servic
~hylas
Also digital prints are the same price as film+printing. Regelur prints work during a power out, and I can get digital scans for free with devlopment. So, for the time being, I'm getting the best of both worlds.
Aneway, the camera you have is very nice, and I do want one, but I doubt it will ever be my primary.
We are the Borg...
I'm not going to lie to you, those are all superior machines.
But people should buy the Carnivale - unlike Sony's products it has a durable outer casing to prevent fallapart. Also featuring two pronged wall plug and pre-molded hand-grip well.
Read Pynchon.
I have a Pentax Optio 550 purchased in July 2003 that recently failed (at my wedding in June of this year) with exactly the same failure mode as others here. I've added photos to my flickr at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/salm/search/tags:Pent ax/
They compare well with failures from a Canon Powershot A70 that someone else has posted here:
http://flickr.com/photos/dekstop/sets/1026874/
The Pentax Optio 550 is not mentioned either on this site or on Pentax (UK)s website. Does anyone have any similar stories with regard to Pentax failures, or does anyone know if the Pentax has a similar Sony sensor.
The Pentax has performed well until this sudden failure.
no time, no sig
I try to tell people to stay away from Sony products now, but it's damned hard to convince them.
Hard to do when I'm walking around with an ultralight Vaio laptop. But hey, I got the Vaio for FREE. After someone chucked it out because the power connector came loose from the motherboard, I'll add.
There's NOTHING Sony does better these days, and lots of things they fuck up. These sensors are just one example of failing QC and a near-total lack of innovation. Samsung is the king of consumer electronics for now.
That wasnt supposed to break! Only the Sony " Schrodinger Timed Burnout After Warrany End" chip is supposed to determine When the product fails!
Digital pictures don't degrade at all, assuming care is taken with enough good backups etc.
I have negatives shot by my great-grandfather that seem to have lost very little quality (it's hard to tell, how would I know what they looked like 80 years ago ?) And I've got 30-40 year old negatives that are so degraded it's hard to even make out the motives.