Timelapse showing extent of D600 dust issues

Hogzy

Im absolutely shocked at this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cY30lEMv8o

pete4130

This is a video posted by a guy who still shoots Jpeg on his old D70.

He's obviously shooting the D70 for years and still shoots jpeg which doesn't make much sense. If he's still stupid enough to shoot jpeg after so many years then I don't really give him credit for changing the lens in the safest way possible to avoid dust getting onto the sensor.

He's smart enough to make a time lapse video of 1000+ shots to check for dust on his brand new camera and able to push the levels and curves of 1000+ photos to exagerate the effect of any dust but stupid enough to still shoot jpeg after so many years yet still be concerned about the affect of dust on image quality? It doesn't make sense. Who knows where and how he put on the "50mm 1.8 G lens" (why do we even need to know this unless he's trying to convey his experience and knowledge about photography?).
It's not the kit lens so he has changed the lens at least once to put the 50mm lens on, despite saying he hadn't changed the lens. God knows how many time he's changed it since pulling the camera out of the box and playing with it. I know I don't do a 1000+ shot "dust on the sensor" test when I buy a new camera. I like to take pictures with it.
Given the camera took 1000 shots, its ample time for ANY dust to settle on the sensor in that time, especially if was on time lapse mode, the sensor getting hot, building up some static and some may even be hot pixels!?

Some cameras can be dust magnets when they are new. I know my D3 was when it was new 5 years ago and after about 3 sensor cleans it was fine.
It's not a fair and reasonable test at all.

The test is BS in my opinion.

Hogzy

pete4130 wrote: »

This is a video posted by a guy who still shoots Jpeg on his old D70.

He's obviously shooting the D70 for years and still shoots jpeg which doesn't make much sense. If he's still stupid enough to shoot jpeg after so many years then I don't really give him credit for changing the lens in the safest way possible to avoid dust getting onto the sensor.

He's smart enough to make a time lapse video of 1000+ shots to check for dust on his brand new camera and able to push the levels and curves of 1000+ photos to exagerate the effect of any dust but stupid enough to still shoot jpeg after so many years yet still be concerned about the affect of dust on image quality? It doesn't make sense. Who knows where and how he put on the "50mm 1.8 G lens" (why do we even need to know this unless he's trying to convey his experience and knowledge about photography?).
It's not the kit lens so he has changed the lens at least once to put the 50mm lens on, despite saying he hadn't changed the lens. God knows how many time he's changed it since pulling the camera out of the box and playing with it. I know I don't do a 1000+ shot "dust on the sensor" test when I buy a new camera. I like to take pictures with it.
Given the camera took 1000 shots, its ample time for ANY dust to settle on the sensor in that time, especially if was on time lapse mode, the sensor getting hot, building up some static and some may even be hot pixels!?

Some cameras can be dust magnets when they are new. I know my D3 was when it was new 5 years ago and after about 3 sensor cleans it was fine.
It's not a fair and reasonable test at all.

The test is BS in my opinion.

WTF has the fact he shoots JPEG got to do with anything?

I think you will find that alot of people will shoot JPEG for a timelapse because of storage issues (especially on high megapixel cameras). And if you actually bothered to watch the video in its entirety, the guy didnt change lenses will the camera carried out the time lapse. This dust has snuck in somehow.

Effects

Sneaky dust has got to be the worst kind.

Hogzy

Techradar article on the video

TheVerge Article on the same video

brokenarms

I did know it was stupid to use jpeg.

pete4130

The guy said he shot photos on his D70 for years (about 3 seconds into his video he says this) , I doubt he was shooting timelapses all that time. He obviously changed lenses to put the 50mm on at some point as they don't come standard with cameras. So there was a lens changed. He could have been sloppy changing and dust got in.

For someone to shoot jpeg for years and to not realise the benefits of shooting in RAW format, with the availability of larger CF cards to go into the D70, with their meagre 11-12MB RAW output size and still chooses to shoot in jpeg. I just doesn't inspire me to believe they really know what they are doing.

After 1000 shots the sensor will get hot and any dust on the mirror or pentaprism will get moved around by the shutter motion and vibration and find its way onto the sensor.

Like I said, my D3 was prone to dust when new and it got better. It's no big deal with dust, it's so easy to clean yourself that it isn't a big deal. The biggest problem with dust is for all the HDR shooters out there.

amdgilmore

pete4130 wrote: »

For someone to shoot jpeg for years and to not realise the benefits of shooting in RAW format, with the availability of larger CF cards to go into the D70, with their meagre 11-12MB RAW output size and still chooses to shoot in jpeg. I just doesn't inspire me to believe they really know what they are doing.

There is nothing in that video to support the claim that he was only shooting jpeg and doesn't shoot RAW or know the benefits of it. All he says is that it was sending corrupted jpegs to the sd "every once in a while".

He might have been shooting JPEG + RAW. Or, as suggested, he might have been making a lot of timelapses (yes, some people love timelapses and shoot them all the time).

And even if he was only shooting jpeg, it wouldn't say anything about his ability as a photographer. Maybe he likes it better like that. Maybe he doesn't do a lot of post-processing and trusts his ability to get it right in-camera. Maybe he does always get it right in-camera. Maybe his heart was broken by a girl called Rachael Allen-West and now he can't look at those initials without freaking out.

All of those assumptions are as valid as yours. ie Not at all valid.

pete4130

My assumptions are valid. He mentions shooting in jpeg so to me this suggests he only shoots on jpeg. The fact he mentions jpeg. He doesn't mention RAW so I can assume he doesn't shoot RAW.

You're entitled to your opinion and your opinion is great, for you. I'll stick with my opinion and we can both be happy.

amdgilmore

haha

Wow.

Splinters

Thats quite a leap. He didnt mention that he owns a Nikon D4, or a kettle, or a Citroen either. Ive no idea whether or not he does, but the fact he didnt mention doesnt them really doesnt have any bearing on whether or not he does.

Thats some pretty out there logic to assume that the mention of one image format explicity rules out the use of another. Also in this context hes doing a timelapse which are more often then not shot using jpeg anyway.

ciaranr

pete4130 wrote: »

If he's still stupid enough to shoot jpeg

That's offensive man, what exactly is so stupid about shooting JPEG? Can you give me your views on what makes RAW so much superior, as I am clearly too stupid to figure it out.

Effects

pete4130 wrote: »

My assumptions are valid. He mentions shooting in jpeg so to me this suggests he only shoots on jpeg. The fact he mentions jpeg. He doesn't mention RAW so I can assume he doesn't shoot RAW.

You're entitled to your opinion and your opinion is great, for you. I'll stick with my opinion and we can both be happy.

Why would you bother shooting a time lapse in anything other that jpeg? SUrely having to convert that many raw images is a wasted step, even if you batch process them.

DaireQuinlan

WAIT. STOP DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE. KEN ROCKWELL HAS SOMETHING TO SAY ON THE MATTER.

Ken Rockwell wrote:

The Sensor Dust Rumor

My D600's sensor is clean.

I wouldn't worry about what you may have read over the Internet from people you've never met. These things always happen for every new camera: one guy of many sees it, and the Internet spreads it like wildfire.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d600.htm

THAT IS ALL.

/thread

dirtyghettokid

ciaranr wrote: »

That's offensive man, what exactly is so stupid about shooting JPEG? Can you give me your views on what makes RAW so much superior, as I am clearly too stupid to figure it out.

RAW is superior for shooting generally... as it's not processed by the camera, so you get to choose and change settings before software compresses it.
http://photographyconcentrate.com/10-reasons-why-you-should-be-shooting-raw/

but jpeg is more useful for timelapses, as they require thousands of images. the smaller file sizes make for quicker processing.

here's a link discussing both for timelapse
http://timelapseblog.com/2012/05/21/raw-vs-jpeg-in-time-lapse/

brokenarms

ciaranr wrote: »

That's offensive man, what exactly is so stupid about shooting JPEG? Can you give me your views on what makes RAW so much superior, as I am clearly too stupid to figure it out.

Raw is the better way as every pixel the sensor records goes straight to the SD card without the camera trying to improve it and then compress it. You get to work with the image as opposed to the software on your cameras version .

Raw gives a better bit depth allowing you to push the editing process further

Shooting raw will Not give you better sharpness or better colors, You wont see a better dynamic range in the shot you just took , it simple gives you some better editing features and a good photo taken in JPEG can be every bit as good. Some peeps can get a bit snobby about their taste..As I guess you see here. Dont take it to seriously . Just go out and take pictures. But do try the raw format and try to work with your results in adobe camera raw. Its good fun if you like to spend time post processing.