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."
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
My 10D's might CMOS sensor will dance on the scattered bones of your useless moisture-letting-in-CCDs!
At least they're usually not used for mission-critical applications.
Try telling that to a bride on her wedding day. It's obvious you've never taken pictures for hire.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
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.
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
About half of the photographers I know (a good number) use digital exclusively. Now that Digital SLRs are good AND cheap, the others are all planning to move that way. And it isn't just the people I know, here's an outside link.
While photography isn't usually a life or death industry, it is 'mission critical' to tons of photographers, magazines, ad agencies, etc. etc. So I would say that your statement is incorrect.
I know I haven't touched a film camera in years, and neither have any of the other photographers at my place of work. In fact, we just made a big deal out of putting our last remaining film camera in a little glass case for posterity.
No reason to lie.
No, it's "affected"
Effect is a noun, affect is a verb. How do you put a noun in the past tense?
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.
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)
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
Not so. These defects are such as to make the products unmerchantable, which gives the buyer (in this case the manufacturers) a bunch of rights that would cost Sony a lot more if they were exercised. Doing the repairs free will cost Sony a lot less than paying the value of replacement products or repairs by a third party, which is what they would be up for (plus costs) if they were sued.
There is nothing remotely attributable to honourable conduct here (and if you have dealt with Sony recently you would be aware of how thoroughly dishonourable that behemoth has become). It is self preservation, pure and simple, that has led them down this path.
Slashdot article description ... FREE ... FREE ... PRICELESS
Grammar nazi correcting something that isn't wrong with something that is
Having that post moderated +1 Informative
what you say is correct, but none of the canon models affected are in their professional line of cameras, i.e. the 20D or the 350D.
the ones affected are the powershot line, which are intended for the lower end, high quality consumer use cameras.
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
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.
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.
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.
At least they're usually not used for mission-critical applications.
Digital cameras are used for pr0n!!!!! You don't get more misson-critical than that!
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.
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.
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
Actually, I don't consider the 20D or the 350D to be professional line cameras. That's what the 1-series is for...
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
How many wedding photographers turn up with a single camera body? You can't stop a wedding to wait for the photographer. The Pros I know take three - a digital SLR, a standard SLR loaded with colour film and a standard SLR with black and white print film.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
Any professional photographer will bring a backup camera to a shoot. A wedding, s/he should probably have multiple backup cameras.
I was shooting a wedding a few weeks ago and the lens mount on my D2X just broke while I was shooting the bride getting ready. No warning or anything. Lens falls to the floor (lens didn't break, thank goodness, but the plastic hood just shattered- very dramatic). Bride goes "Oh shit!", convinced her wedding pictures were ruined. I just reached into my bag and pulled out my spare, swapped the CF card, and kept shooting. If that camera had failed for whatever reason, I've got a Hasselblad and film in the van.
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
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."
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
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!
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.
Yes they're complex. Yes they'll run into problems. But Sony has had similar problems for ATLEAST 20 years, and don't try telling me that people haven't noticed and bitched about it either.
Consumer digital cameras may be new on the block, but Sony has been making both consumer and professional video cameras for ages now. They have pretty much given the cold shoulder to consumers for the past 20 years, and only preferred customers have gotten free replacements on professional models. I admit I haven't RTFA, but Sony+CCD+Epoxy+Humidity gets me thinking that this is the same issue that has plagued their imaging equipment as far back as I've worked with their products. (Which is about 18 years.)
Most professionals are very careful with their equipment and use very nice cases to store the cameras, but I for one am EXTRA careful with my Sony cameras. I have a VX1000 and VX2000 that I use on location for documentaries, and so far my care has paid off. I'll keep knocing on wood though, since I had one of my older Sony (professional, not prosumer) cameras die of a similar (if not same) problem just 6 months ago. Since it was old and almost EOL, it wasn't worth the price Sony would charge me, so into the dumpster it went.
I have no sympathy for Sony on this matter. They've know for eons that they have a problem on hand. More than I wish they replace everything for free, is that I wish they don't make the same mistake from now on. Like it or not, I'll still probably need to buy Sony equipment, hence better reliability is really wanted in this area.
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.
Imagine this happening to the Hubble.
I'm trying, but I just can't imagine where the moisture is going to come from.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
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.
The Big Dipper, obviously.
Digital cameras are used for pr0n!!!!! You don't get more misson-critical than that!
Well, I suppose here on slashdot it can be a "once in a lifetime" opportunity ro record that...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Exactly.
Then think about all the other components of Hubble. What if someone had ground the lens incorrectly and.... oh. Nevermind
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
Not so. These defects are such as to make the products unmerchantable*, which gives the buyer (in this case the manufacturers) a bunch of rights that would cost Sony a lot more if they were exercised.
Which was my exact first thought. Here under UK law, they would still have to fix them for you even if the camera was up to 5 or 6 years old. It's all about how long you would "reasonably" expect something to last. The whole "manufacturers one year warranty" thing exists to confuse consumers as to how much of a legal warranty they already get for free. Many a time have they tried to hit me with the "out of warranty" excuse on expensive items that have died after just over a year.
* the equivalent magic phrase here in the UK is "fit for purpose".
We don't use film because we have taken film development, negative handling, and scanning completely out of the process.
When we need something on a very quick turn-around, and then find that the shot we really want is on film...we're screwed.
Take film out of the equation, and we can ALWAYS manage a quick turn-around.
No reason to lie.
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?That's "emission" critical.
I don't get it.
Maybe the digicams aren't typically used for "mission-critical" shoots.. but the DV cams listed ARE, ie. DSR-PD150, DSR-PD150P, DSR-PD170, DSR-PD170P, DSR-PDX10, DSR-PDX10P. Many of these cams are used for news gathering, weddings, and documentaries.
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.
From UK Trading Standards
The above is UK law, and there are several other laws covering this area. See here. Trading Standards are a good bunch of people, I've had some great advice from them over the years, very helpful. They will take up the case for you and contact the shop/manufacturer on behalf of you (no charge). This is really useful as they have way more clout than any consumer would have. However, saying terms like "Sale of Goods Act" or "Fit for Purpose" will normally make the sales droid stop trying to fob you off.
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
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.