My first Digital SLR is going to be 20 years old soon. It had a zero-defect Kodak KAF-1600 in it when brand new, in 1993. It has picked up 3 hot pixels, out of 1.6million.
Dear Brian,My first Digital SLR is going to be 20 years old soon. It had a zero-defect Kodak KAF-1600 in it when brand new, in 1993. It has picked up 3 hot pixels, out of 1.6million.
Leica CCD hot pixels aren't just dirty looking gobs. They are usually fully excited to 255 red or green or blue and a thin line of the negative color extends vertically through the pixel from top to bottom of the frame. I know how this progresses, I've had it happen twice so far to my cameras (now three times) and have watched it progressed with others' cameras. The pixel isn't the bad part as much as the line that dissects the image and is very hard to correct.
I know digital sensors get hot pixels. These days there are easy mapping utilities, yes. The price that I paid and that thousands of others have paid begs Leica to correct the issue once an for all. Leica CCD hot pixels aren't just dirty looking gobs. They are usually fully excited to 255 red or green or blue and a thin line of the negative color extends vertically through the pixel from top to bottom of the frame. I know how this progresses, I've had it happen twice so far to my cameras (now three times) and have watched it progressed with others' cameras. The pixel isn't the bad part as much as the line that dissects the image and is very hard to correct.
One thought: Leica provide Lightroom as part of the package, not just because its handy but also because LR uses Adobe Camera Raw which will process out the hot pixels. Pros wanting ultimate image quality will of course be shooting in RAW 🙂)) and if I process with the software provided, LR should take care of any hot pixels. I must confess I've never seen one in the Pentax files I process in Lightroom, and I'm sure the camera can generate a few!
I do. But then, all I use it for is part of earning my living. Nothing serious like pixel peeping.
Cheers,
R.
Well, at one point Roger you and I were similar beasts. Sadly my digital Leica experience was not tolerable and after a very long time using them, I said 'bugger them'. In my case it was not only camera reliability. Leica's response (and response time) was completely unacceptable. Combine that with the general consensus that I should feel 'privaleged' that Leica fixed my 1 week old, $5500 dollar, camera and it only took 2.5 months, numerous phone calls and finally a terse email to Leica... Well, you get the point.
I believe it is well established that I spend very little time pixel peeping.
Sure. I don't claim that Leicas are perfect. Nor do I claim that the only reason to reject them is pixel peeping. But for every person with a story like yours, there is another with unreasonable expectations, and there are quite a few who are happy enough using them. It's the extrapolation of 'My experience is the only experience' that I'm against (and of course, I'm not accusing you of that).
Ultimately, it's just a camera, and like any other camera, if it suits you, use it, and if it doesn't, don't. The fact that it's a very expensive camera tends to skew the debate a bit, but ultimately, as I say, that doesn't affect the simple truth that it's just a camera.
Cheers,
R.
Well I'd suggest a phone call should sort this out - I've been very impressed with Leica's responses and speed of repair so far. 7 months clearly means that something must have gone wrong which I'd suggest could be fixed with a 'phone call.I have been waiting for about 7 months for my application to be processed. But hey, the year isn‘t out yet.