# Puzzling 1DX Mark II Sensor Issue?



## R1-7D (Jul 21, 2016)

I saw a thread on DPReview where a user was reporting dust issues with his new 1DX Mark II: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4022765

I noticed these strange "brush-like" marks in the DPReview user's image in certain places. When I checked my camera, it is also exhibiting this phenomenon too. I took a sensor loop and peered inside, but there appears to be nothing on the sensor other than dust and oil splatter -- no scratches whatsoever. 

What do you all make of this? The picture is a screen grab of a section of the frame from the DPReview user's image. I turned up DeHaze to 100% in Lightroom to emphasize what I'm talking about. 


I should state that these marks appear at narrow apertures on my sensor, and this picture below the OP said was taken at f/32.

EDIT: Please see images below.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 22, 2016)

Someone on DPReview suggested that these might be oil smears and recommended using Smear Away by Visible Dust.

I've looked very carefully at my sensor using a Visible Dust loop and can't see any signs of smears or, worse, scratches (my main concern). If these were smears, how would they appear from normal use? I have not touched the sensor.

The other fellow on DPReview also has similar marks/smears too. 

I feel a little deflated with this issue now. 

Here are two screen shots of a portion of an image I took at f/32 with DeHaze maxed and without any modification to show the smears/marks.


----------



## pwp (Jul 22, 2016)

Sure you're not applying too much scrutiny? You'd possibly find as much to criticize apply the same scrutiny and dehaze to just about any sensor on the planet. 

If it's not showing up in your work then it's a non-issue. If it is interfering, then it's definitely something to follow up with Canon. 

-pw


----------



## IglooEater (Jul 22, 2016)

I'm assuming you actually got your sensor professionally cleaned before posting this, of course.

If it's affecting your work, I'd get canon to have a look at it. This is a 1D, not a t3. If not... who really cares. Any sensor will show some dirt if you look closely enough, like pwp says. I agree that this looks like it would show up in anything monotone like a sky or a white sheet or dress or something...


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 22, 2016)

Gentlemen, it's not the spots that concern me on the sensor. It's the "brush-like" marks on the sensor that I am worried about, as I have never seen anything like that before. 

It's an $8000 camera here in Canada, and I have had it a month. I'm concerned there's damage that was not caused by me. 

The lines also do appear in my photographs. I noticed this from macro shots at f/20. It's just at f/32 they are more prounced, and I used the Dehaze function to show what I'm talking about as it exaggerates every spot. Dehaze is only to draw attention to the area.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 22, 2016)

Send it in. 

I had a problem with dust spots. Sent it in for a cleaning. Unfortunately, even after cleaning when I shot more outdoor scenes, I could see at least one huge dust spot. After much apprehension, I ended up using a Giottos to blow the sensor off. Seems to have taken care of the problem, except for some very tiny spots in a corner that won't be nearly as difficult to correct. 

I'm going to monitor it and see it it continues. 

Those lines don't look good to me. I wouldn't hesitate to contact Canon. 

I'm not a believer in using anything that actually touches the sensor, so if it is oil or something, I'd rather have Canon do the cleaning.

I'm reading that this is a common problem with the 1D series. I hope not. I'd be curious about the experience of others and what they do about it. I don't care so much about dust in blue sky scenes, but don't want it showing up in other pictures.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 22, 2016)

unfocused said:


> Send it in.
> 
> I had a problem with dust spots. Sent it in for a cleaning. Unfortunately, even after cleaning when I shot more outdoor scenes, I could see at least one huge dust spot. After much apprehension, I ended up using a Giottos to blow the sensor off. Seems to have taken care of the problem, except for some very tiny spots in a corner that won't be nearly as difficult to correct.
> 
> ...



I just had the sensor cleaned this morning. Most of the spots are gone but the lines remain. The technician at Vistek didn't know what to make of the lines as he could see nothing on the sensor itself. 

I'm wondering if this is a production issue with the AA filter or something. 

As Pwp said, maybe I'm being overly critical, but it's a strange phenomenon that is a bit disconcerting IMO. I might send it to Canon, but I have had a bad experience with their repair centre in the past. Plus, I can practically hear them already telling me I have done something to the sensor. 

It would be nice if other 1DX Mark II owners could do an expiermental shot at f/22 or f/32 to see if theirs' exhibit the same thing.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 23, 2016)

Like I said above, I had the sensor cleaned today. The oil spots were largely removed, although new ones are already appearing (a fact of life with this series of camera). The brush-like marks remain, which is what I am upset over. 

Here's a series of screenshots at different apertures. Notice how the sharpness and definition of the lines/brush-marks/smears do not change, but the dust and oil spots become more and more defined as I stop down. This leads me to believe it's a sensor defect, or something going on with the AA filter.

I'm also happy to provide RAW files too.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

I'll be sending in it Monday. I don't have much confidence in Canon, but I don't know what else I can do.


----------



## tpatana (Jul 24, 2016)

pwp said:


> Sure you're not applying too much scrutiny? You'd possibly find as much to criticize apply the same scrutiny and dehaze to just about any sensor on the planet.
> 
> If it's not showing up in your work then it's a non-issue. If it is interfering, then it's definitely something to follow up with Canon.
> 
> -pw



This.

First time I had sensor dust, I freaked out. Spend time reading about it and cleaned my sensor for hours.

Now if I see too much sensor dust and I get tired of photoshopping them out, I'll take my swab and 2 minutes later ~50% of the dust is out. Keep shooting until it really affects your photos. Shooting blank wall at F32 and using 100% dehaze is sure to bring out all sort of things. Almost certain if you send it in, you'll get exactly same or worse back.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

tpatana said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > Sure you're not applying too much scrutiny? You'd possibly find as much to criticize apply the same scrutiny and dehaze to just about any sensor on the planet.
> ...



My friend, it's not the dust. It's the brush-like smears that are there that bother me. 

I used Dehaze only to draw attention to them for those that are unfamiliar where to look. The lines are still visible without Dehaze applied too, but are faint; I can still make them out. It's not normal. 

The sensor was cleaned, with now only 3 or 4 dust particles remaining at f/32, which I don't care about. The lines remain.


----------



## tpatana (Jul 24, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > pwp said:
> ...



I didn't say those were dust, I was just giving example.

To be clear, you see those lines at F32 on a solid color wall? Any "normal" condition where you'd see those?


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

tpatana said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > tpatana said:
> ...




Tpatana,

I posted a few above examples starting at f/13. The lines don't really increase in definition going through the aperture range; they are just 'there', which I find somewhat strange. If you look at the dust in the images they become more defined and sharp, but the lines do not. 

To answer your question: I saw the lines first in a macro flower shot I took at f/18 with my Twin Lite MT-24EX attached and firing. 

Would I notice the lines in most normal every-day shooting type scenarios? Probably not. This is still disconcerting, however, for an $6000 ($8000 CAD) camera that I've only been enjoying for a month.


----------



## tpatana (Jul 24, 2016)

If you see them in normal pictures, then for sure contact Canon and ask for repair. Could be feature though.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

tpatana said:


> If you see them in normal pictures, then for sure contact Canon and ask for repair. Could be feature though.




If it is a feature, I hope it's one that's removed later in the production line or in future models. I don't care for it.


----------



## tpatana (Jul 24, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > If you see them in normal pictures, then for sure contact Canon and ask for repair. Could be feature though.
> ...





My 7D had the noise banding feature too. Some of the "features" are there for reason we don't know, it could be there to mask or fix something worse.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

tpatana said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > tpatana said:
> ...



Unfortunately, I genuinely feel like these streaks or smears are not supposed to be there or hide anything.


----------



## jrista (Jul 24, 2016)

The streaks are actually probably a part of the sensor itself. Sensors are cut from a crystal, and those crystals often have concentric radial patterns that occur as the crystal is grown. Usually the patterns are invisible, however with very deep cooling (-35C or colder) and long exposures, the patterns can sometimes become visible due to a phenomena called Resibual Back Image or RBI. This is when electrons are freed into the substrate of the sensor, and bleed back into the pixels during longer exposures. 

It is entirely possible that the technological design of the 1D X II is allowing such RBI and bleedback to occur without the deep cooling, and for much shorter exposures. It would be rather odd, however a lot of new per-pixel technologies are being used in sensors these days, and all the implications of those technologies are not necessarily known. 

Outside of RBI, I do not know of any other known phenomena that would cause such streaking.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

jrista said:


> The streaks are actually probably a part of the sensor itself. Sensors are cut from a crystal, and those crystals often have concentric radial patterns that occur as the crystal is grown. Usually the patterns are invisible, however with very deep cooling (-35C or colder) and long exposures, the patterns can sometimes become visible due to a phenomena called Resibual Back Image or RBI. This is when electrons are freed into the substrate of the sensor, and bleed back into the pixels during longer exposures.
> 
> It is entirely possible that the technological design of the 1D X II is allowing such RBI and bleedback to occur without the deep cooling, and for much shorter exposures. It would be rather odd, however a lot of new per-pixel technologies are being used in sensors these days, and all the implications of those technologies are not necessarily known.
> 
> Outside of RBI, I do not know of any other known phenomena that would cause such streaking.



Jrista,

Thank you for your post. That's extremely interesting. As an experiment, if I were to take a shorter exposure, say like 1/400, would that potentially have an effect on whether these patterns appear or not? Might be an interesting experiment for tomorrow. 


Your explanation could also explain why I saw these similar patterns on MacNeutal's sensor-dust image he posted on DPReview. Theoretically, it could also mean that while there are similar patterns shown on other 1DX II sensors, the patterns could manifest themselves in different locations too, correct?

I wish other people who have this camera would take some small aperture photos and see if they can replicate this. I've been unable to find anyone else who have posted f/13+ full resolution pictures. 

Again, thank you for taking the time to post.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

Just doing a bit of reading on RBI -- isn't it a bit like an image burn in, to some extent like what you'd get on an older plasma tv? I'm seeing examples of silhouettes of images for RBI if I google. 

At the moment I'm not completely convinced what I am experiencing is RBI, but I do suspect it is indeed a property of the sensor. 

I was just reconfirming tonight that my macro shots from the other day, before I even had the sensor looked at (let alone touched) did exhibit the same patterns. The cleanings should have at least smeared the lines if it were oil on the top glass. Therefore, it's either the top glass which has defects, or the sensor itself, or something akin to RBI like what Jrista suggests. 

What's interesting is the Dehaze tool lets me over-hence the problem, and I can see these markings stretch across the Center of the sensor, although it's not nearly as pronounced in the Center as it is along the left edge of the image. It's the only left edge where I can make the markings out without any adjustments; the Center smears are non existent without Dehaze. 

I can post a raw file in the morning.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 24, 2016)

Might be way overthinking this. Looks like brush marks in oil from a sensor cleaning brush.

Still not clear from your posts if you or Vistek have attempted using a wipe?

While I understand some of the comments here that suggest not worrying about it, that you didn't notice until it was pointed out by another post on DPR, Canon has an absolute responsibility to provide a reasonably spotless sensor, and one that doesn't have defects.

DPR? I gave up on them years ago. So much hysterical ranting, anxiety, nonsense.

Regarding cleaning: I would never hand over a camera under warranty to anybody but Canon to clean, repair, modify, inspect, or test. 

But I hope you follow through on your post. Maybe you've prompted others to check their new babies too, and we'll hear more, good or bad.


----------



## Gert Arijs (Jul 24, 2016)

Hi,
Something I didn't read while reading almost all of this thread:
It might be lines that are on the lens instead of the sensor. It's very unlikely, but some spots on the lens are visible at small apertures. Is the result the same with another lens or not?
I hope your issues will be solved soon...
Best regards from Belgium,
Gert


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> Might be way overthinking this. Looks like brush marks in oil from a sensor cleaning brush.
> 
> Still not clear from your posts if you or Vistek have attempted using a wipe?
> 
> ...



YeungLinger,

The sensor was never touched by a brush -- it was air (rocket blower) and wet cleaned though. I inspected the sensor immediately afterwards and it was spotless. The marks were there before the cleaning, and remained. 

Normally I would agree with you about sending it to Canon first, but honestly, as a few on this board know from a few years ago, CPS and I aren't the best of friends, and I've got more reason to trust the technician at Vistek than Canon's. Unfortunately, it's come down to no other alternatives at this point. 

My hope is that it's just oil that Eclipse solution won't remove, but something else will. I'm not holding my breath though, as it's strange for marks like this to just be on a sensor without anything first touching the sensor, as well as not having them smear further when cleaned later.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

Gert Arijs said:


> Hi,
> Something I didn't read while reading almost all of this thread:
> It might be lines that are on the lens instead of the sensor. It's very unlikely, but some spots on the lens are visible at small apertures. Is the result the same with another lens or not?
> I hope your issues will be solved soon...
> ...



Gert,

I thought that initially too and tired my 24-70 f/2.8 II, 70-200 f/2.8 II, and 100 f/2.8L. The streaks are there on all. It's definitely something to do with the sensor.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Jul 24, 2016)

Whats puzzling to me is that they seem to disappear toward the right half of the image. My initial thought is that its an oil smear. Lines are not parallel and somewhat curved. However it could be a defect. I havent noticed this on mine but ill run some tests and report back. Sometimes oil smears are not visible even with a loupe. May be more visible if you look at it through a polarizer and rotate while observing.

Are these crops or full frame? Just want to know from a scale perspective what to look for.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Jul 24, 2016)

I just checked mine at F32 against a whitw wall and found no lines as you see. I did find more dust than i thought i had but thats another issue.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

East Wind Photography said:


> I just checked mine at F32 against a whitw wall and found no lines as you see. I did find more dust than i thought i had but thats another issue.



East Wind,

Thank you for test. Would it be possible to send me the raw file from your camera? 

The screen shots I took are from a crop of the left side of the image where it's at its worse. The right side and middle of the frame have some of the marks too, but they aren't half as bad. 

Thanks again for checking.


----------



## Mario (Jul 24, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> ...
> It would be nice if other 1DX Mark II owners could do an expiermental shot at f/22 or f/32 to see if theirs' exhibit the same thing.



After reading this post, I decided to give my 1DXII a wet clean today (the second time since I have it) and see whether or not I have these line too. I took a test shot at f/32 and did the dehaze thing in Photoshopp CC (I guess it's the same as in LR). I can see any line, but I am happy to send you the raw file so you can use your method on it.

On a side note: I struggled with these pre-assembled swaps (+ Eclipe liquid) to get the sides and corners of the sensor clean so I switched over to pec*pads wrapped around the swap (and Eclips liquid ofcourse). Hardly any dust spots left now on the sensor. 

Mario


----------



## unfocused (Jul 24, 2016)

You can add me to the list of those not reporting this problem. After blowing out dust with the Giottos, I shot some blue sky pictures to see if I had gotten the dust off. So, I took one of those shots and enlarged it to 100% and 200% and used the DeHaze filter in Camera Raw. No lines like you are showing. (Still dust on the sensor though, but not nearly as bad as before.)

You say you aren't on good terms with CPS. I don't know what that means, but honestly, only Canon is going to be able to give a definitive answer to your question. Unless you've been blacklisted for something, just send it to them with samples of what you are seeing. 

Why risk voiding the warranty with third-party or home-brew solutions?


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

Mario said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Mario,

Thank you for testing and for offering a RAW file. I'll send you a PM.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

unfocused said:


> You can add me to the list of those not reporting this problem. After blowing out dust with the Giottos, I shot some blue sky pictures to see if I had gotten the dust off. So, I took one of those shots and enlarged it to 100% and 200% and used the DeHaze filter in Camera Raw. No lines like you are showing. (Still dust on the sensor though, but not nearly as bad as before.)
> 
> You say you aren't on good terms with CPS. I don't know what that means, but honestly, only Canon is going to be able to give a definitive answer to your question. Unless you've been blacklisted for something, just send it to them with samples of what you are seeing.
> 
> Why risk voiding the warranty with third-party or home-brew solutions?



Unfocused,

Thank you for trying. It seems my theory of a sensor problem is not looking good. Here's hoping it is in fact something streaked across the sensor. 

I've not been blacklisted or anything like that, and I'm on good terms with CPS still. Unfortunately, I was less than impressed with their workmanship in the past regarding a previous professional camera, which is why I've not been enthusiastic about sending anything in for repairs. Like you say in this case, however, it might be my only option.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

Thank you Mario for a RAW file to look at. 

Mario's file shows similar streaking, although not nearly the same intensity. I'm attaching a screen shot, with Mario's permission. The file is obviously manipulated to show that the streaks are there, and in Mario's case, wouldn't show up in his photos under regular/normal conditions. 

My sensor has streaking in roughly the same area as Mario's too, beginning near the left-centre of the frame. 

I'm leaning more now on the belief that these are oil streaks. I still wonder why Eclipse and swaps wouldn't smear them further or remove them, however.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2016)

I love you guys sometimes.

So we have "an issue" that is barely visible at 100% view generally only if you apply Dehaze in large quantities and if that area is an area with even tonality and no detail?

Having said that I have RAW files from three 1DX MkII's and can't see anything untoward on them, but maybe I'm not trying hard enough.....................


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 24, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> I love you guys sometimes.
> 
> So we have "an issue" that is barely visible at 100% view generally only if you apply Dehaze in large quantities and if that area is an area with even tonality and no detail?
> 
> Having said that I have RAW files from three 1DX MkII's and can't see anything untoward on them, but maybe I'm not trying hard enough.....................



Well, you prolly jus have lowwwww standurds.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 24, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> I love you guys sometimes.
> 
> So we have "an issue" that is barely visible at 100% view generally only if you apply Dehaze in large quantities and if that area is an area with even tonality and no detail?
> 
> Having said that I have RAW files from three 1DX MkII's and can't see anything untoward on them, but maybe I'm not trying hard enough.....................



Privatebydesign,

Yes, yes... I'm sure this does look overly critical to most; that's fine. However, I can see these marks in 'normal' images I've taken at a macro level. I'm sorry, but I just spent another fortune on a piece of Canon equipment, and I want to make sure it's operating correctly and without defect. 

I've done overzealous post-processing to solely show the forum what I'm talking about -- the streaks are there! No, I'm not concerned about the 90% invisible ones that don't show in my images; the same goes for oil and dust spots. But I do have several streaks that I can see without a single adjustment to the RAW file. In a high contrast scene with lots of detail they won't be noticeable, but images with bokeh or a plainer background they will be, a la my macro shots.


I get the attitude 'just get out there and shoot' and I try to subscribe to that myself; but when it's new equipment I do feel like I'm not wrong to be a picky.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 24, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> I'm sorry, but I just spent another fortune on a piece of Canon equipment, and I want to make sure it's operating correctly and without defect.



Allow me to think aloud and ask a few questions.

First of all, I'm not too keen on jrista's argument about crystal defects and RBI. Sure, the Silicon ingots (from which the wafer at cut & polished from) are produced under rotation (using either the Czochralski or the float-zone technique link), but the crystal defect density is extremely low and the lines that R1-7D are show seem to be on the mm scale, not the um or nm scale.

Secondly, when we do a clean of the 'sensor' (wetclean of just blowing air to remove dust), I assume that we really aren't cleaning the _real_ sensor, but rather the outer surface of the 'sensor stack' in front of it.

I guess the stack is made up of multiple layers (IR filter, AA filter etc). This makes be wonder if R1-7D's camera has a smear between one of these layers, which no amounts of cleaning can remove.

R1-7D, I would deliver the 1DX2 including the real-world macro pictures and the dehazed demo pictures to the CPS center.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 24, 2016)

As for the streaks existing before any "known" cleaning, I wonder if Canon has an industrious inspector brushing away dust somewhere along the assembly line? Either off the glass filter protecting the sensor or somewhere else in the "sandwich?" If there were even a smidgen of oil on that dust, it might produce what we are seeing at your (somewhat) extreme levels of examination.

And don't worry about PBD saying you are a worry wart: Note that he immediately checked his own sensors! :


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 25, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > I love you guys sometimes.
> ...



OK maybe my point didn't come across well. It is your purchase, own it. If you are not happy with it send it back. Simple.

However asking people you have never met for an opinion that is utterly irrelevant to your happiness or Canon's willingness to replace is an exercise in futility. It doesn't matter if every other 1DX MkII has it or no others have it, if you are not happy send it back.

What I personally dislike in threads like this is when terms like _"It's definitely something to do with the sensor."_ or _"I'm wondering if this is a production issue with the AA filter or something."_ when you have absolutely zero technical knowledge or evidence to make such assertions, which inevitably lead in to fanciful suggestions like RBI. Which actually stands for Residual Bulk Image, our internet experts can't even get the name of the phenomena right! Now I know nothing about RBI (other than the correct name) but on every page I see explaining it they also refer to CCD sensors, not one mention I can see of CMOS sensors exhibiting the phenomena.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 25, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > I love you guys sometimes.
> ...





You are right! It's funny that this forum is the only place I have ever been told I have low standards for image quality, the rest of them meant it too.......


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 25, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Privatebydesign,

I see this sort of thing a lot in threads lately: "Why ask the internet...blah blah blah...Just send it in and have the experts look at it." It's like the go-to argument for users who don't want to help others out. 


There's a reason I'm asking peoples' opinion on the matter, though, and it is because however ignorant you think all of us forum users to be, my own experience with Canon certified technicians is that they're on a level of ignorance all on their own. I want to hear what people on here have to say so that if I do go to Canon I can clearly articulate what the problem might be and then be able to direct the Canon technician to the problem rather than have them diddle-daddle around and completely miss what I want addressed. 

I'll give you an example: a previous professional camera I owned had misaligned focus points; I sent the camera in wanting them to be adjusted and aligned. The 'professional' Canon technician sent the camera back to me saying "electrical adjustments made. Camera focusing accurately." Needless to say, the AF points still were not aligned. It wasn't until I asked other forum users what was going on that I was able to reply to Canon and say "No, you need to do XYZ ... to fix my problem". 

Also, despite people not having "technical knowledge", sometimes through the process of elimination things can be ruled out by the "laymen". I'm open to peoples' input whether they're an electrical engineer or a ballerina dancer; at least people are trying to help, which is what online communities are partially for. I honestly appreciate anyone who has taken the time to respond to me and tried to offer some advice or suggestions.

All I can say is trust me, I've dealt with Canon on QC issues before, and getting them to even just acknowledge what is wrong is like taking a stroll through the seventh circle of hell. Despite this being an $8000 CAD camera, I'm debating just leaving it because of that. It just eats me that the problem is there on a piece of equipment of this caliber, and that the issue will be occasionally visible if I shoot at a narrow apertures. Since it's only an occasional occurrence where I'll notice the few lines appearing, I might just chalk it up to one of those *sigh "Oh well, such is life!" situations. But you're right: it's my decision, and I'll 'own it' in the end. 

I'm sorry my thread with my issue has bothered you so much. Thank you for your time anyway.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 25, 2016)

Uneducated guesses? Is somebody forgetting this is a rumors site???

I haven't detected anything but the usual good natured chiding and grumbling in this thread!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 25, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> users who don't want to help others out[/b].



I'll just point out that's a completely inaccurate characterization of PBD.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 25, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > users who don't want to help others out[/b].
> ...


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 25, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > R1-7D said:
> ...


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 25, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> Just doing a bit of reading on RBI -- isn't it a bit like an image burn in, to some extent like what you'd get on an older plasma tv? I'm seeing examples of silhouettes of images for RBI if I google.
> 
> At the moment I'm not completely convinced what I am experiencing is RBI, but I do suspect it is indeed a property of the sensor.
> 
> ...



The sensor substrate accumulates electrons when deeply cooled, including those that sometimes leak from the photodiodes. So yes, that does result in a ghost image. However in a lot of cases, the ghost image is actually the least of the problem...the larger problem is often the radial pattern of the crystal itself as preserved in the sensor substrate, which will occur regardless of whether the sensor is exposed to light or not (i.e. it will show up in dark and bias frames.) 

Again, I've only heard of crystal pattern appearing with RBI in the case of extreme cooling. I have not known it to appear at warmer temps. It could be an entirely different problem...if it is, I don't know the cause.


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2016)

Well, good to see the loving, friendly, welcoming atmosphere of CR Forums is alive and well. Christ!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 25, 2016)

It's the Internet, Jon...didn't anyone tell you to leave your copy of Emily Post at the door?


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 25, 2016)

jrista said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > Just doing a bit of reading on RBI -- isn't it a bit like an image burn in, to some extent like what you'd get on an older plasma tv? I'm seeing examples of silhouettes of images for RBI if I google.
> ...



Well, that's interesting information nonetheless. Thank you for taking the time to post and offering up a suggestion as to the problem. 

There definitely hasn't been any extreme cooling -- The coldest it's been is about 20 degree celsius (68 F). 


Upon process of elimination, and much to Privatebydesign's chagrin, I think the two most plausible situations are: 1) dust/oil streaks between one of the sensor stack layers, or 2) just really badly stuck on oil (but after a thorough sensor clean without further smudging or streaking, the less likely of the two). 

From my experience, these don't look like scratches on the sensor to me. Scratches, or at the least the ones I've seen in person, have always been visible when looking through a loupe, and also appear dark like a piece of dust on an image. These streaks don't really change definition while stopping down either. 


Anyways, thanks again Jrista.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 25, 2016)

jrista said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > Just doing a bit of reading on RBI -- isn't it a bit like an image burn in, to some extent like what you'd get on an older plasma tv? I'm seeing examples of silhouettes of images for RBI if I google.
> ...



"Ghost image"? He is seeing brush marks, for goodness sakes, not a Japanese child weeping in a dark attic--unless I'm missing something in the images.


----------



## tpatana (Jul 25, 2016)

Now THAT would be a camera I wouldn't clean ever.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 25, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > R1-7D said:
> ...



Hmm, chagrin?



> cha·grin
> SHəˈɡrin/
> noun: chagrin
> 1. distress or embarrassment at having failed or been humiliated.



I said
asking the internet about your happiness was pointless
asking the internet about Canon's willingness to deal with your worries was pointless
you have absolutely zero technical knowledge or evidence to make specific technical assertions
asking the internet would lead to farcical and fanciful theoretical bullshit

Now could you tell me exactly which of those has been proven wrong that has resulted in my failure, embarrassment and humiliation?

You are still not happy (and seem to want to take that frustration out on me).
You still don't know what Canon's opinion of your worries is.
You are absolutely no closer to knowing what has caused the streaks, despite your assertions to a _'process of elimination'_ you haven't eliminated anything other than a phenomena that only seems to affect CCD's and only when they are being artificially cooled (though I did find out the correct name for that phenomena). 
Talk of RBI is farcical and fanciful bullshit. Talk about chagrin!

Now you might have taken exception to the way I wrote, but you can't take exception to the meaning.

Only you know how happy or not you are and only you know if you are going to ask Canon to do something about it. Until you make that decision and if you decide to get Canon to look at it you won't know if they acknowledge it and are prepared to do anything about it.

As for getting the fullest background to pass on to them. My experience with Canon is it is irrelevant, they test the body to their specs, if it passes they don't do anything, if it doesn't they do, simple as that. I have sent in CD's full of images that they never look at, they don't care, they put the equipment on their test benches and draw their own conclusions as to whether it is in spec or not.

As for not asking the internet for help, thanks to those who pointed out I am not one of the ones _"who don't want to help others out"_. I have a long posting history here based on helping others out, I haven't treated the forum like an ego trip and I have never taken to self promotion, I have posted hundreds of relevant and illustrative images that often show me in a bad light purely for the help of others. I have done this consistently for years. But what the heck, you are pissed and don't like how I show your inquiry for the pointless excercise it is.

I have posted thousands of answers on technical and equipment questions, queries and opinions where they are relevant. Nobody can help you with your issue other than Canon.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 25, 2016)

Well, this took a predictable, but not necessarily helpful turn.

1) I agree with those who say to "send it to Canon." I said that from the start.

2) I took the original post to be a plea to have other 1DX II users repeat the same experiment to see if they could reproduce the same results. Several did that (including me. I couldn't).

Still, just because someone else has similar results, that doesn't mean it *isn't* defective or damaged. It just means someone else has the same problem. No solution there.

That said, this does raise a question for me. 

What do others do about sensor cleaning?

1) I've always sent my cameras in to CPS for an annual cleaning. In fact that's probably the number one reason why I joined CPS.

2) Now I'm reading (and experiencing) that this may not do all that much good. (After all, when I sent my new 1DX II to have sensor dust cleaned, it came back with dust on it. 

So, what do others do?

Regular blowing with a Giottos seems like the safest technique. But, it can also just mean moving dust around. (I understand this is the only cleaning Canon sanctions).

Wet cleaning seems a bit scary to me. Do others regularly do a wet cleaning of their sensors? And, if so, how effective is that? What brands do people use? I read some things that say the Arctic Butterfly system is not recommended and can damage the sensor. Do others agree.

What about oil? From what I've been reading, oil is a problem with cameras like the 1DX (possibly because of the high frame rate). Cleaning off dust seems fairly straightforward. Cleaning off oil smears not so much.

I'd like to turn this lemon of a thread into lemonade. Anyone willing to help with actual experience and knowledge?


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 25, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



Privatebydesign,

I did not disparage you wholly if you look at my reply to Neuro above. I've seen many of your posts and almost always enjoy reading your contributions. You're a far more valuable and knowledgable poster on this forum than I am; I'm completely happy to admit that, and my intention was not to take anything away from your contributions elsewhere. 

As far as the definition of "chagrin" goes, well it can also mean vexation and disappointment, which is what I anticipated your response to my post to be. I don't feel like I'm off the mark, as I think you are finding my posts vexing! http://www.dictionary.com/browse/chagrin

With regards to my issue I have contacted Canon this morning. They've asked me to send photos -- I did. We will see what they say and if they want me to send it in; they probably will want it to come in (again, speculation on my part). I'm prepared to send it in now if it comes to that. 


You're right and you're wrong about whether or not help can be had with my issue. Perhaps in this case there is nothing anyone can for sure say is the cause of the problem; but that certainly does not mean that's always the case. As you're quick to defend yourself and your contributions on this forum, people do seek help and answers for questions all the time. Sometimes these questions are technique related, and sometimes they are hardware/technical questions. There are people from all sorts of walks of life on here, and some are able to get right into the nitty gritty of the most technical aspects. Neuro, for one, often has posts that are an extremely technical nature, and I've even seen him speculate on a few things in reply to a question! 

Forums give people a chance to ask a question and have things explained to them, as you know. Often times sending photography equipment in for repair only amounts to a bill with no explanation at the end of why something was carried out. Canon is not always right, and it's forums like these that allow a community to help each other and, in some cases, do present exacting answers to issues. I want to know what I'm in store for with an issue and whether it's my fault or a manufacturing defect before I get billed, if at all possible. I'm simply trying every avenue available, and I'm sorry if I have stepped on your toes in the process. I'd like to move past this, and please know that no disrespect was intended.


----------



## tpatana (Jul 25, 2016)

I thought there were several good comments/suggestions, but you (R1-7D) seemed to take offence on them because they didn't align with your view good enough. Did you come here to ask (honest) comments about your situation, or you just wanted to be patted on your back because you feel sad?

Yes, it sucks if your expensive new toy doesn't perform 100%. I'm sure I'd almost cry, especially after my wife would spank me for spending so much money and then it doesn't perform.

But people here truly tried to give you different views on the situation too, but your responses made it look like you didn't accept the responses.

More pictures, less sadness.

Ps. can you post couple of those flower macro pics too where you said you can see the traces?


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 25, 2016)

unfocused said:


> Well, this took a predictable, but not necessarily helpful turn.
> 
> 1) I agree with those who say to "send it to Canon." I said that from the start.
> 
> ...



I'm interested in this too.


----------



## tpatana (Jul 25, 2016)

unfocused said:


> Wet cleaning seems a bit scary to me. Do others regularly do a wet cleaning of their sensors? And, if so, how effective is that? What brands do people use? I read some things that say the Arctic Butterfly system is not recommended and can damage the sensor. Do others agree.
> 
> What about oil? From what I've been reading, oil is a problem with cameras like the 1DX (possibly because of the high frame rate). Cleaning off dust seems fairly straightforward. Cleaning off oil smears not so much.



I wet clean my 1DX about every 2-3 months. First few times were scary, now it's just one routine in the maintenance.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 25, 2016)

tpatana said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Wet cleaning seems a bit scary to me. Do others regularly do a wet cleaning of their sensors? And, if so, how effective is that? What brands do people use? I read some things that say the Arctic Butterfly system is not recommended and can damage the sensor. Do others agree.
> ...



What do you use?


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 25, 2016)

tpatana said:


> I thought there were several good comments/suggestions, but you (R1-7D) seemed to take offence on them because they didn't align with your view good enough. Did you come here to ask (honest) comments about your situation, or you just wanted to be patted on your back because you feel sad?
> 
> Yes, it sucks if your expensive new toy doesn't perform 100%. I'm sure I'd almost cry, especially after my wife would spank me for spending so much money and then it doesn't perform.
> 
> ...



Tpatana,

I'm sorry, but I've followed the suggestions given in this thread -- even by Privatebydesign. I don't feel as if I've taken offence to anything because they didn't "align" with my views. If people are getting that impression from my posts, well, then I have not articulated myself clearly and I apologize. I did take issue with the suggestion that no one on here could be helpful or offer an explanation. However, as it looks like there is no clear-cut explanation, well, I'll be dealing with Canon as it's the only thing to do. Thank you for your posts and contributions to the thread, however. 

I thought perhaps people might have some idea what causes this, or what could potentially be done to fix it. As I said in a previous post, I've had a rough experience with CPS in the past, which is why I like to have some information when I go in and speak with them. Privatebydesign is not wrong -- at this point it's all speculation. Since it could be a number of issues, Canon is the final say on it now.


----------



## Mario (Jul 25, 2016)

unfocused said:


> 2) I took the original post to be a plea to have other 1DX II users repeat the same experiment to see if they could reproduce the same results. Several did that (including me. I couldn't).
> 
> Still, just because someone else has similar results, that doesn't mean it *isn't* defective or damaged. It just means someone else has the same problem. No solution there.
> 
> ...



I was one of the persons who did the test and sent a raw file to R1-7D since I couldn't see the problem myself. However, I had another look at my dust pic, and after a 100 % dehaze I can indeed see the stripes, I just wasn't looking at actual pixels in the beginning.

Since I had severe dust and oil problems with my 1DX, the first thing I did was taking a dust picture when I got the 1DXII (the first picture I took with it for future reference). I gave that dust picture the same dehaze treatment, and it has the same stripes. So based on this I'd say it's not related to sensor cleaning.

I then took a look at the dust pictures of the 2 1DX's I had, and although is less pronounced, there seems to be stripes as well after the dehaze treatment. So I am not too sure it's a real issue. 

Anyway, I don't care too much about it since I don't see it on my actual real life pictures .

But it is/was an interesting discussion .

Mario


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 25, 2016)

Waiting for Canon.
IN the meantime...Maybe it's a DEHAZE artifact.

I'd also like to see the real world images where this is showing up. 

When somebody gets whiny and defensive, I start to think a thread was a stunt to begin with. Just sayin'.

We won't learn anything until we have an answer that is clearly, certainly from Canon. 

I'm sticking with the over enthusiastic QC girl with a brush somewhere along the assembly line theory.


----------



## rdalrt (Jul 25, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> I'd also like to see the real world images where this is showing up.



This.

If it doesn't show up in a real image. Why worry?

Myself, I just got my 1DX II back from Canon with a new sensor for an issue that DID show up in real world photos.

If you can't show that it produces reproducible effects in actual photos, I doubt any camera company would show much concern.


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > R1-7D said:
> ...



You know, Canon has taken to gluing the back side of the lower LPF layer to the sensor. It eliminates an air gap, and they can control the refractive index of the glue. I wonder if they did that with the 1D X II, as if they did, these streaks could be from the glue. 

If that is the case...then I would say it's in poor form for Canon's flagship camera. All these talking heads here trying to make it sound like a non-issue, ignore them. This is a die hard Canon fanboy forum, and there is rabid intolerance of anything that puts Canon in a negative light, even if it may be a legitimate concern. *If you are seeing the issue in your work and it bugs you, it's a problem.* Simple as that. The notion that it is bad to use some processing to make it easier to see is bull. We all process our images...if processing enhances the issue, that makes it even more of a problem!

I would get on Canon's ass, send them examples of the issue, and see if they can help you figure out what the deal is and get it fixed. Personally, for what, $7000...no way in hell I'd deal with an issue like this if it was affecting my work.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 26, 2016)

jrista said:


> ...All these talking heads here trying to make it sound like a non-issue, ignore them. This is a die hard Canon fanboy forum, and there is rabid intolerance of anything that puts Canon in a negative light, even if it may be a legitimate concern...



Most of the people responding are not "trying to make it sound like a non-issue." People are simply saying that seeking answers from pseudo-experts on a forum is not going to be particularly satisfying or effective. Virtually everyone who has expressed an opinion has said the same thing: send it to Canon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2016)

jrista said:


> This is a die hard Canon fanboy forum, and there is rabid intolerance of anything that puts Canon in a negative light, even if it may be a legitimate concern.



Careful, Jon...your prejudices are showing. :-[ Plenty of us are critical of Canon when warranted, (e.g., in my case launch delays, a firmware but that prevented applying AFMA on my then-new 1D X, etc.). On the other hand, when some of us make egregiously asinine statements – such as when you stated that Canon sensors deliver, "...poor, sub-par, unacceptable IQ," – they can expect to take some flak. Some respond to that flak by acknowledging they may have overstated things...others just delete a bunch of their posts in a fit of pique (as I recall, you chose the latter approach). 




jrista said:


> The notion that it is bad to use some processing to make it easier to see is bull. We all process our images...if processing enhances the issue, that makes it even more of a problem!



Do you routinely apply 100% dehaze? Just curious...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2016)

*@R1-7D* – as others have advised, send it to Canon. That's really your only option. Still, don't be surprised if they do nothing. 

With the aforementioned 1D X AFMA bug, they said 'send it in' (I didn't). I declined, sent a video – they reviewed it, agreed it was a bug but indicated they couldn't reproduce, and again said 'send it in' (I still didn't). With the help of another forum member, we identified the unrelated setting causing the bug, and I communicated that to Canon, who then _could_ reproduce the issue. They cascaded it up to the engineers in Japan, and a subsequent firmware update fixed it. 

So, while consulting the Internet can help, it only goes so far. In cases where there's actual hardware or firmware problem, only Canon can actually fix it.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Jul 26, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> *@R1-7D* – as others have advised, send it to Canon. That's really your only option. Still, don't be surprised if they do nothing.
> 
> With the aforementioned 1D X AFMA bug, they said 'send it in' (I didn't). I declined, sent a video – they reviewed it, agreed it was a bug but indicated they couldn't reproduce, and again said 'send it in' (I still didn't). With the help of another forum member, we identified the unrelated setting causing the bug, and I communicated that to Canon, who then _could_ reproduce the issue. They cascaded it up to the engineers in Japan, and a subsequent firmware update fixed it.
> 
> So, while consulting the Internet can help, it only goes so far. In cases where there's actual hardware or firmware problem, only Canon can actually fix it.



CR forum usually bad for advice. Marginally good to see if anyone else is having similar issues. The rest just seems to be a personality p1ss1ng contest.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 26, 2016)

East Wind Photography said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > *@R1-7D* – as others have advised, send it to Canon. That's really your only option. Still, don't be surprised if they do nothing.
> ...



JRista's latest speculation about glue at least sticks to the facts. 

As for advice, EWP, I've gotten my share of very good advice here, and I've done my best to share.

However, when we've gotten to the point in any discussion where the obvious solution (in this case, send it to Canon with sample images) has been given, and the crowd that wants to just keep criticism and complaining going, sure, some chiding and exasperation will take occur.

I think if you go to anybody, any forum with the attitude that they are "usually bad for advice," you are going to get what you expect.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 26, 2016)

Thanks everyone for your help. I appreciate all the contributions. I really don't want to get into it with any other members, as it's just not worth it. I'll see what Canon says and go from there.

Thanks!


----------



## retroreflection (Jul 26, 2016)

R1-7D
You have had a previous experience with CPS that has left you convinced that their technicians are stupid. That is one interpretation, another is that they conform to the procedures of their employer even if it leaves you frustrated.
Given the subtlety of the condition that you find objectionable, I think the odds are good that they will find nothing wrong (in truth, nothing outside of the corporately determined test parameters). I think the odds are also good that you will be upset by that.

For the health of your stomach lining, I suggest you then simply return this body and get a different one. There seems to be evidence that not all 1DX IIs have this condition. Chances are you can find one of those and be happier.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 26, 2016)

retroreflection said:


> For the health of your stomach lining, I suggest you then simply return this body and get a different one. There seems to be evidence that not all 1DX IIs have this condition. Chances are you can find one of those and be happier.


+1 sounds like the most pragmatic solution.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 26, 2016)

kaihp said:


> retroreflection said:
> 
> 
> > For the health of your stomach lining, I suggest you then simply return this body and get a different one. There seems to be evidence that not all 1DX IIs have this condition. Chances are you can find one of those and be happier.
> ...



Here's the OP's problem with this:

"It's an $8000 camera here in Canada, *and I have had it a month*. I'm concerned there's damage that was not caused by me."

Some retailers might offer a little wiggle room.

A lot has been said in this thread about attitude, ignorance, and the outlaw nature of the internet. I admire the steadfast regulars here who post sincere advice all the while KNOWING that a percentage of complaints are completely fabricated or echoes of complaints seen elsewhere. For every X number of genuine issues, there are Y numbers of phony scenarios posted by people who have no better sport in their lives. And then there are Z number of posts, fewer than Y is my guess, posted by people who have an agenda, paid or otherwise.

So, please, let us be grateful for the truly good advice shared so freely here, while being understanding of the cynicism that crops up.

Cheers! 8)


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 26, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> kaihp said:
> 
> 
> > retroreflection said:
> ...



I tried going back to my retailer, The Camera Store. They are the best photography equipment retailer I've ever dealt with and they've helped me a lot in the past. They couldn't in this particular case, as I've purchased the camera via a CPS discount, though. I was informed I'd have to deal with Canon on the issue. I'm still now waiting to hear from Canon after sending my images yesterday. 

As far as the authenticity of my complaint goes: I've got quite a few posts now here on the forum, and I've been around for quite a few years. I'm not a huge poster, but I do post a couple times a month and a few on here know me. I also am not one for wasting time fabricating complaints or problems. I have a busy life, and I'm not that juvenile. I've had legitimate issues before with my 1DX and the forum was a huge help to me then. Take this for what you will. 

I have appreciated your posts, though. Again, thank you to anyone who has had a suggestion or made a comment about these streaks. I'll report back if Canon says anything to me. Thankfully I got busy again yesterday afternoon and haven't had the same time to dwell on it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2016)

No animosity or stress from me, and I hope you get it sorted out to your satisfaction.

I'll be very interested to see what Canon say about it.

I took a very close look at some of the 1DX MkII RAW files I have and did find this, but only after 100% Dehaze and excessive sharpening and viewing at 200%. There are lines but it looks more like processing induced artifacts to me.


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 27, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> No animosity or stress from me, and I hope you get it sorted out to your satisfaction.
> 
> I'll be very interested to see what Canon say about it.
> 
> I took a very close look at some of the 1DX MkII RAW files I have and did find this, but only after 100% Dehaze and excessive sharpening and viewing at 200%. There are lines but it looks more like processing induced artifacts to me.



Privatebydesign,

Thanks for checking your camera for me. The pictures you've attached indeed just look like pixelation and artifacts from the post-processing, so alls good there!  

I heard back from Canon this afternoon. The guy requested more photos and said he was sending them further up the chain. So, time will tell what happens...

Cheers!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 27, 2016)

This thread like many others was good for a laugh for someone (me) with a distorted sense of humour! 

A prerequisite for frequenting CR has to be a thick skin! 

I am though truly interested in the outcome of this issue.

Jack


----------



## Valvebounce (Jul 27, 2016)

Hi R1-7D. 
This at least looks promising, not rejected at the first level. 

Cheers, Graham. 



R1-7D said:


> I heard back from Canon this afternoon. The guy requested more photos and said he was sending them further up the chain. So, time will tell what happens...
> 
> Cheers!


----------



## R1-7D (Jul 28, 2016)

Canon requested I send the camera in. I'm going on a trip next week and need some of my equipment, so I think I'll just send it in when I'm home again. They are aware of the issue now though.


----------



## driandsouza (Aug 7, 2016)

Hi. 
I recently got myself the IDX 2 and am facing the same sensor dust issues.

What is surprising is that I found a dust spot suddenly appearing in my images in the middle of taking a series of blue sky shots at f22...even without my having changed the lens!

This was after I got my sensor cleaned by Canon (India) a week ago.

(1DXii, 7D, 7Dii, 500mmf4ISii, 1.4xiii, 2xiii, 100mmf2.8IS, 17-40f4)


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 7, 2016)

driandsouza said:


> Hi.
> I recently got myself the IDX 2 and am facing the same sensor dust issues.
> 
> What is surprising is that I found a dust spot suddenly appearing in my images in the middle of taking a series of blue sky shots at f22...even without my having changed the lens!
> ...



Hi,

Just to clarify, I'm not experiencing a sensor dust issue. I am experiencing lines that look like brush strokes in two areas of my sensor. These lines appear at f13, and are visible throughout the rest of the aperture range. 

Do you have an image you can post up to show what you're experiencing? If you're still seeing only dust it might just be you need to have the sensor cleaned yet again. It's hard to get it spotless, and might not be worth the effort. 


I'm out of my country right now, but I'll be home tomorrow night and on Monday I'm sending my camera in. I'll report back what Canon Canada says or does.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Aug 7, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> driandsouza said:
> 
> 
> > Hi.
> ...



I see you are in Canada but for the others here in the US, i just sent mine off to CPS in Virginia for cleaning and it came back spotless, all hot pixels were mapped out, and no streaks. I know this isnt helpful to you in canada but for others with dust and hot pixels, i can say canon did a great job at that facility.

Just a note that Canon does do a factory reset to map out bad pixels. So please save your settings to your memory card before returning it for cleaning so you can restore your settings. AFMA settings are not cleared.


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 7, 2016)

East Wind Photography said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > driandsouza said:
> ...



East Wind,

That's good to know. I'll make sure I save my settings. I had not thought of that. Cheers!


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 11, 2016)

Just want to give a quick update on the situation, for those that are interested:

I sent my camera to CPS this morning. I was still a bit apprehensive about sending it, and I hummed and hawed about it most of the week and couldn't make up my mind after going through about a 1000 images I'd just taken last weekend from a trip I was on. 

Anyways, I called CPS, had them send me a loaner and I packaged my camera up and sent it off. Here's hoping for the best, but I'm not sure what they'll do. 


Just to note, the CPS loaner 1DX II also exhibits the problem, although not with the same frequency throughout the frame as mine. The loaner has one big long line towards the bottom of the frame. I've called CPS and told them about it, and they asked for sample images from it too, which I've provided. 

Anyways, I'm not sure what will be done/what can be done -- they might chalk it up to a non-issue *Shrugs. Anyways, Canon is looking into it and the people I've dealt with on the phone have been extremely pleasant to deal with. 


Here's a screen shot of the line on the loaner at f/13. It obviously becomes more pronounced at smaller apertures:


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 22, 2016)

I received my camera back today. Canon Canada replaced the whole sensor. They acknowledged that there was a problem in the production of my sensor, and the CPS agent insinuated that they've now seen it on a few others, especially now that I have alerted them to it. 

As far as what the actual cause is - ie, something wrong with the sensor stack?? - they didn't specifically say. 


The camera was sent back to me in better condition than I sent it in. They must have cleaned the viewfinder of the little dust spots showing up, because they are gone, and the camera is focusing extremely well with barely any misses. The weird lines are completely gone, even if I boost Dehaze too 100%. 


So, all in all, it's a stark contrast from what I exerperienced before with CPS. Thank you Canon Canada!!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 22, 2016)

Thanks for the follow up info, glad they got it sorted!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 22, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> I received my camera back today. Canon Canada replaced the whole sensor. They acknowledged that there was a problem in the production of my sensor, and the CPS agent insinuated that they've now seen it on a few others, especially now that I have alerted them to it.
> 
> As far as what the actual cause is - ie, something wrong with the sensor stack?? - they didn't specifically say.
> 
> ...



Thanks for this. As I recall, you were taking a little heat on this one and it must have been a little disconcerting not knowing what to do. I've had good interactions with Canon Canada myself so I'm glad your issue is resolved.

Jack


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 23, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > I received my camera back today. Canon Canada replaced the whole sensor. They acknowledged that there was a problem in the production of my sensor, and the CPS agent insinuated that they've now seen it on a few others, especially now that I have alerted them to it.
> ...



Thank you, it's a good feeling knowing I'm not crazy and that there was an issue. It's also a good feeling knowing that the camera is operating as it should now too. 

The only disappointment I have now is not knowing for sure what caused the issue, but I guess that's inconsequential at this point. 



Thanks for everyones' support and suggestions!


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 23, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Thanks for the follow up info, glad they got it sorted!



I'm always happy to report a good experience, and this case definitely warrants a mention. I can't tell you how pleased I am that camera is in better shape than when it left. To be honest, I was expecting the opposite, such as scratched paint or body panels misaligned, etc. 

Canon Canada did a great job, and I'm really happy!!


----------



## ANDRXW (Aug 23, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> I received my camera back today. Canon Canada replaced the whole sensor. They acknowledged that there was a problem in the production of my sensor, and the CPS agent insinuated that they've now seen it on a few others, especially now that I have alerted them to it.
> 
> As far as what the actual cause is - ie, something wrong with the sensor stack?? - they didn't specifically say.
> 
> ...




Glad to see/hear of a successful experience with CPS. Enjoy the freshened up camera!


----------



## Click (Aug 23, 2016)

Glad it got it sorted.


----------



## tpatana (Aug 23, 2016)

I love happy endings!


----------



## Valvebounce (Aug 23, 2016)

Hi R1. 
So pleased to hear that this experience with CPS was a complete contrast to your last interaction and that they acknowledged that your lines were a real issue. 

Cheers, Graham. 



R1-7D said:


> I received my camera back today. Canon Canada replaced the whole sensor. They acknowledged that there was a problem in the production of my sensor, and the CPS agent insinuated that they've now seen it on a few others, especially now that I have alerted them to it.
> 
> As far as what the actual cause is - ie, something wrong with the sensor stack?? - they didn't specifically say.
> 
> ...


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 23, 2016)

tpatana said:


> I love happy endings!



Me too!


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 23, 2016)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi R1.
> So pleased to hear that this experience with CPS was a complete contrast to your last interaction and that they acknowledged that your lines were a real issue.
> 
> Cheers, Graham.
> ...



Thanks! It's a massive relief. 

Just finished dropping off the loaner at Purolator.


----------



## Raptors (Aug 23, 2016)

Hi R1
I am also very pleased that this issue was resolved. I also live in Canada, and so far all my interactions with CPS Canon Canada have all been positive. 
I do own a 1DX, but have waited to purchase the markII. Do you mind me asking, what are the first numbers of the serial number of your 1DXII?

Sue


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 23, 2016)

Raptors said:


> Hi R1
> I am also very pleased that this issue was resolved. I also live in Canada, and so far all my interactions with CPS Canon Canada have all been positive.
> I do own a 1DX, but have waited to purchase the markII. Do you mind me asking, what are the first numbers of the serial number of your 1DXII?
> 
> Sue



Hi Sue,

The first three digits are 042. Hope that helps.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 24, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> Gentlemen, it's not the spots that concern me on the sensor. It's the "brush-like" marks on the sensor that I am worried about, as I have never seen anything like that before.
> 
> It's an $8000 camera here in Canada, and I have had it a month. I'm concerned there's damage that was not caused by me.
> 
> The lines also do appear in my photographs. I noticed this from macro shots at f/20. It's just at f/32 they are more prounced, and I used the Dehaze function to show what I'm talking about as it exaggerates every spot. Dehaze is only to draw attention to the area.



I agree with others, if it's bothering you, contact Canon for possible cleaning/repairs/replacement. I should read to the end before replying!

As for the general question on sensor cleaning, I'm intrigued too. I have never cleaned my sensors, nor had them cleaned. I used a blower very occasionally, or even blow on them with my mouth (very bad form, I know). I've had the odd dust spot that showed up at narrow apertures at macro distances on plain bright backgrounds, but I either clone them out in PP or they're removed by the camera's sensor self-cleaning or my aforementioned blowing 

Mind if I ask though, why macro at f/20? The diffraction softness must be pretty punishing at that point.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 24, 2016)

Perhaps it's like this. If there is a mosquito in your tent you go to great lengths to find it. And kill it. 

Jack


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 24, 2016)

scyrene said:


> R1-7D said:
> 
> 
> > Gentlemen, it's not the spots that concern me on the sensor. It's the "brush-like" marks on the sensor that I am worried about, as I have never seen anything like that before.
> ...



scyrene,

I did send it to Canon; they replaced the whole sensor and acknowledged there was an issue. I had also seen the same markings on several other 1DX Mark II units, including the one Canon sent me as a loaner while mine was in for repair. 

In some situations, where I don't have a tripod, and can't later stack multiple shots, and I want as much depth of field as possible, a narrow aperture is the only way to go. Also, just to point out, if you read the whole thread, the issue was persistent even at f/11, which is quite a commonly used aperture.

Now the camera is back with a brand new sensor, it seems to be working very well, knock on wood.


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 24, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Perhaps it's like this. If there is a mosquito in your tent you go to great lengths to find it. And kill it.
> 
> Jack



That's a cute analogy, but in this case where it's a piece of new expensive equipment that produces images that I sell, I don't feel like I was going to great lengths to 'kill the mosquito.'


----------



## scyrene (Aug 24, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > R1-7D said:
> ...



I should have read to the end, sorry 

f/11 is more understandable. I'm a lot more averse to diffraction, perhaps, on the 5D3 I rarely went beyond f/10, and on the 5Ds I try to stick below f/8. Focus stacking is almost always better imho. Not to mention backgrounds.

Anyway it's good they sorted it


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 24, 2016)

Well, we have to be careful not to apply analogies too exactly or take them too seriously. Wouldn't be the first time I got in trouble for saying silly things. 

Jack


----------



## Raptors (Aug 24, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> Raptors said:
> 
> 
> > Hi R1
> ...



Hi R1

Thanks!!


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 30, 2016)

So went out yesterday and shot some landscape with my Mk2, I never shoot landscapes and would less so with a 1DX2, anyway.... get back, look at images and guess what, dust/oil!! Lots of dust, camera only shot 1000 or so shots and only swapped the lens a few times, not that it's me as my 5D3 has been used near daily for three years and same lens tested at f22 shows NONE and never been cleaned, now CPS want the supplier to exchange it! Will see what happens as they now want to question CPS on why they want it swapped. I'd not be bothered but some can be seen at f8 and I'd clean it but given that its brand new and after talking to CPS... Still CPS and supplier are great so far.

EDIT: Talked to CPS and supplier again, camera is being changed for a new one.


----------



## R1-7D (Aug 30, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> So went out yesterday and shot some landscape with my Mk2, I never shoot landscapes and would less so with a 1DX2, anyway.... get back, look at images and guess what, dust/oil!! Lots of dust, camera only shot 1000 or so shots and only swapped the lens a few times, not that it's me as my 5D3 has been used near daily for three years and same lens tested at f22 shows NONE and never been cleaned, now CPS want the supplier to exchange it! Will see what happens as they now want to question CPS on why they want it swapped. I'd not be bothered but some can be seen at f8 and I'd clean it but given that its brand new and after talking to CPS... Still CPS and supplier are great so far.
> 
> EDIT: Talked to CPS and supplier again, camera is being changed for a new one.



Glad you were able to exchange the camera if it wasn't to your satisfaction. You are lucky, and wise to do so. I was told that because I used my CPS membership and got a discount on the camera I couldn't do an exchange and that I'd have to go through Canon for any repairs, which is what I did. Thankfully they did a nice job and I'm really happy with the results. 

Oil and dust seem to be a bigger problem on the 1D series, at least from what I have found from my own experiences. I've had three 1D cameras (two 1DX's and a 1DX II), and they've all developed dust and oil spots far faster than any other cameras I've ever had. It probably has something to do with the more violent shutter mechanism and the extra lubrication needed for it.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 30, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > So went out yesterday and shot some landscape with my Mk2, I never shoot landscapes and would less so with a 1DX2, anyway.... get back, look at images and guess what, dust/oil!! Lots of dust, camera only shot 1000 or so shots and only swapped the lens a few times, not that it's me as my 5D3 has been used near daily for three years and same lens tested at f22 shows NONE and never been cleaned, now CPS want the supplier to exchange it! Will see what happens as they now want to question CPS on why they want it swapped. I'd not be bothered but some can be seen at f8 and I'd clean it but given that its brand new and after talking to CPS... Still CPS and supplier are great so far.
> ...



Well put it this way service wise, I called this morning at 9am, the supplier called back at 10am, the camera was collected at 3pm, I'd have a new one tomorrow but they have no stock, thats no problem I will wait as anyone would have too, I am very happy with the service, when I talked to CPS I expected them to say "we can clean it", "they can clean it", "you can clean it" and so on, but nope, just exchange it, mind you its only 15 days old! Love the camera, even though for most of my needs I could argue that many other bodies would offer higher MP and so on the 1 series body is so nice to use, if they ever produced a high MP 1 series body I'd buy one, would even be tempted at the chit chat of a crop sensor like days gone by to go along side the FF body. 

I love Canon service.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

"I love Canon service." Good to hear but isn't that what every couple says a the alter? 

Jack


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> "I love Canon service." Good to hear but isn't that what every couple says a the alter?
> 
> Jack



Sure is Jack, but I don't want to upset the old girl before I get out the church


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 30, 2016)

You guys do make me laugh with your dust 'issues'.

Here is a 100% crop of my sensor this morning along with the full sized image.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

You have a point! 

So, I have the lenses and I'll have the second pro body soon and I think it would be wise of me to join CPS; that'll be Canada. Can you comment on the shipping situation, turn around times, do they send a UPS pick-up etc. What level is your CPS? I'm not pro. Thanks.

Jack


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 30, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> You guys do make me laugh with your dust 'issues'.
> 
> Here is a 100% crop of my sensor this morning along with the full sized image.



Lol, I know Private but the old girl is brand spanking new, as I say I kind of felt a little "noob" on the phone about it but CPS sounded a little concerned, or maybe its just my sweet sounding voice to the nice lady on the phone  I shal promise not to look at sensor dust again  funny thing is I never have given a monkeys for it as dust is part of the job, how can anyone avoid dust on a planet made of dust haha

But, I like your pics Sir 

P.s, is that a human hair, perhaps a pet hair, or small dog on the sensor :-* and that top one, thats defo a snail! lol


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 30, 2016)

From the same image here is the 'oil splatter issue' as seems common on 1 series cameras, it is the light rings at the top.

This is from a professional daily use 1 series camera.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

Hey Scott, that made me think of some issues between my wife and myself, LOL.

Until recently, having at least figured out how to use the DPP stamp tool, I was more troubled by my dust specks. So where exactly on the spectrum do you sit?

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Hey Scott, that made me think of some issues between my wife and myself, LOL.
> 
> Until recently, having at least figured out how to use the DPP stamp tool, I was more troubled by my dust specks. So where exactly on the spectrum do you sit?
> 
> Jack



I so don't care about dust it frightens most people. But you know what? I have never had a person say they see dust in my prints.

The point is when prepping a file for output the amount of time I spend editing out dust is negligible, don't forget in Lightroom you can copy and paste dust removal so if I set up a landscape image I spot one of them then copy that to all the others.

I grew up in the film and prints days when we used to spend a lot of time touching up prints with paint and a brush, now I can do a much more accurate job woth a click in a fraction of the time.

I bought a DSLR so I could change lenses, I am going to get dust in my camera.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

Actually I'm glad to hear such a brazen admission! ;D

Jack


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 30, 2016)

Well put...

I think they just wanted "my" camera, perhaps they fear a rerun of the Mk1, I won't speculate, perhaps they just want happy Canon shooters, like Honda, they say you meet the nicest people on a Honda 

I should not look at it like chip's on paintwork, Sir buys a new car, car has chips on paintwork, Sir says "oy it's got chips in the paintwork" yeah, and once you drive it a few miles it will have a few more haha


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

OH BOY, now that hits a nerve - with my wife at pick up time, I try to just not be present.  Not saying who's right of course, it's a personal thing.

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 30, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> Well put...
> 
> I think they just wanted "my" camera, perhaps they fear a rerun of the Mk1, I won't speculate, perhaps they just want happy Canon shooters, like Honda, they say you meet the nicest people on a Honda
> 
> I should not look at it like chip's on paintwork, Sir buys a new car, car has chips on paintwork, Sir says "oy it's got chips in the paintwork" yeah, and once you drive it a few miles it will have a few more haha



No, you are right, it is nothing like chips in paintwork and you shouldn't look at it like that. Chips are a defect in the finish, dust on the finish is not a defect, it is dust.

These cameras, and lenses, are not made in dust proof environments and they are not warrantied against dust!

Dust is everywhere and it is going to get on your sensor. Very occasionally I do get an actual dog or snail on my sensor, when i do I'll brush or blow it off, or throw a ball for it so it runs away by itself ;D 

I don't know how some of you dare to take your cameras out half the time, they are interchangeable lenses, when you change lenses there is a hole the size of a lens in the front of the camera! It lets in dust. Relax, as easily as it goes in it will come out if it bothers you that much. What I would suggest is not letting it bother you that much.......


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 30, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> Well put...
> 
> I think they just wanted "my" camera, perhaps they fear a rerun of the Mk1,



Before the 1DX dust recall there was the 1DS MkIII oil spot recall. I never sent mine in, I have better things to do than obsess about something that can't be seen in my output and will come back anyway. See my illustrative oil spots above


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 30, 2016)

Agree, you are very right 8)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 30, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> I don't know how some of you dare to take your cameras out half the time, they are interchangeable lenses, when you change lenses there is a hole the size of a lens in the front of the camera! It lets in dust. Relax, as easily as it goes in it will come out if it bothers you that much. What I would suggest is not letting it bother you that much.......



Egad, man...how can you be so cavalier about it? It's dust, for goodness sake...*dust!* Do you know what eats dust? *DUST MITES!* Would you put piranha bait in your swimming pool? Zika-infected-mosquito bait behind your ears? I didn't think so. Then why, oh why, would you allow dust mite bait to remain in your camera?


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 30, 2016)

;D

I wish I could take a picture of my viewfinder and focusing screen, you guys would shit a brick.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 30, 2016)

Haha, you guys are killing me, I knew when I posted you guys would flame me..haha Its ok, I can handle it...lol

My mate has the worst condition camera, I will see if I can get a pic, mud under the grips (whats left on), dirt, grass, dog hair the lot! Sensor is clean...hahaha

Ok so I admit it, I have OCD :-\ :-X


----------



## Act444 (Aug 30, 2016)

R1-7D said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > So went out yesterday and shot some landscape with my Mk2, I never shoot landscapes and would less so with a 1DX2, anyway.... get back, look at images and guess what, dust/oil!! Lots of dust, camera only shot 1000 or so shots and only swapped the lens a few times, not that it's me as my 5D3 has been used near daily for three years and same lens tested at f22 shows NONE and never been cleaned, now CPS want the supplier to exchange it! Will see what happens as they now want to question CPS on why they want it swapped. I'd not be bothered but some can be seen at f8 and I'd clean it but given that its brand new and after talking to CPS... Still CPS and supplier are great so far.
> ...



Interesting. Something for me to keep in mind...out of all the cameras I've had, no major dust issues...although my old T2i did pick up several dark spots by the time I moved up to the 60D...none of the cameras I've had since then have reached that point though...

Not the first time I've heard that the 1Ds are notoriously hard to keep clean.


----------

