DSLRUsers.com

The 3 D70's (4 if you include 1 that I brought back for exchange) that I have bought over the last 8 months have all had dust on the sensor from the factory - and believe me, I put that first lens on the body like a surgeon on speed in a dust free environment.

Has anyone else noticed this or do I have shocking luck?

Sensor swabs and eclipse fixes the issue but is a major annoyance. On one of the cameras a blower did the job, but I realise with this method that the specks of dust are most likely just being pushed around inside...

Seeing as a camera is not classified as being sterile you will have to expect dust on the sensor - it’s like expecting take away food not to have any germs

I c.

Wonder when Nikon will use technology similar to Olympus to make it less of an issue. Probably when Canon does.

Off topic - Why do you need 3 D70's?
Are you a pro photog by any chance?

Hi Paul,

Yes and No. Yes because I get paid to shoot -but- no because it is not my main source of income. Some people believe that you are only a real pro if most of your money is from photog.

I have been though this many bodies because I have had a few cool overseas photo assignments where I get to sell the gear over there (camera gear more expensive in Mauritius) at the completion of the job and come back and buy another Especially useful when you don't want to be relying on bodies in remote areas that have high shutter usage counts.

sirhc55 wrote:Seeing as a camera is not classified as being sterile you will have to expect dust on the sensor - it’s like expecting take away food not to have any germs

Take away food has germs? That explains my disposition.

Not if its a kebab and its 2am and your drunk,then its the healthiest food in the world

stephen wrote:Not if its a kebab and its 2am and your drunk,then its the healthiest food in the world

Absolutely bloody true

Mmm i love a loosely folded kebab. Spicey lamb sanga. Bonza.

BOT
Sorry about your dust probs.

mmm drunken greesey meaty stuff that looks a bit like food.

to be brutally honest I started this post too get my post count up a little...

This thread explains why I found dust on my kebab the other night.

I just picked up my D70 on Thursday (2 days ago) and noticed a large speck on every picture in the same spot. I had a rebel before this, so I've read about sensor cleaning for when the time comes. So I opened it up, did mirror lock-up, looked inside and examined the sensor, and there wasn't a single speck of anything on that glass cover. I guess it had to be dust though -- but I took it back and got a new one. This new one has 2 little spots but they were only visible on test shots at f/16 and higher and the blue sky...otherwise, you could barely see them, if at all.

Maybe Nikon should swab the surface after they put the CCD in or something because that's annoying. My 300d didn't have any dust and I had it for about a year and changed lenses often.

I believe I had dust from day one. Only realised when I hit f/16 and up. Blowing got most off, but there were about 7 stubbin spots that took about 4 swabs to get off! All is fine now.
If this was from factory, then hopefully a quick blowoff each week or so should take care of the majority for now.

gstark wrote:This thread explains why I found dust on my kebab the other night.

When I grab a late night kebab under the influence though, there's not usually time for dust to settle on it.

Folk
Dust on the CCD is a fact of life with digital SLR cameras. Get used to it and learn how to deal with it. Cleaning it off on a regular basis is not rocket science.

yes, but dust on a kebab is not a fact of life, even while drunk.

Matt. K wrote:Folk
Dust on the CCD is a fact of life with digital SLR cameras. Get used to it and learn how to deal with it. Cleaning it off on a regular basis is not rocket science.

Wow, you're pretty helpful in your response. I appreciate it.

Everyone is used to it. But when I pay a lot of money for a camera outfit, I don't want dust on every picture. I was content with it. I inspected my CCD and could not see a single piece of dust, so I brought it back. Maybe Nikon should be a bit more careful with these things when they assemble them. I had a 300d for almost a year with not a single speck of dust on it whatsoever. Now I get a d70 and two come with dust.

You need to understand my reasoning. It was either take it in and swap it or live with it, and in the future realize that it MAY NOT be a speck of dust. It could be a defect in the CCD sensor. Either way, a brand new expensive camera with speckles in the same spot on every picture is 100% COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE in my opinion. If I get the dust there myself, it's a different story.

Maybe $1700 to you isn't a lot, but to me, that is a lot of saving up, a lot of sitting up late at night wondering when I can get the rest...hoping my Canon will sell after I get my Nikon so that I can have some living money. Sorry man...but I expect perfection out of the box -- if you do not, then that's you. People like that are responsible for the diminished quality of products that litter shelves everywhere. If something isn't to your liking, it is your right to get what you do like.

...it's dust which can be easily removed. It's not the end of the world Sure there's the issue of quality control but from the quality of Nikon built gear, I fail to see dust being such a major issue? If it is, why not switch back to the Canon? Or the Olympus DSL....that has the swanky ultrasonic dust remover

Dust was not my main concern. If you read my post, you would see that. I was concerned with a possible defect in the CCD sensor itself, as upon inspection, I couldn't see a single speck of anything on the CCD cover.

As far as switching back to Canon... Are you serious or are you just being an ignorant dolt?

Why bash me or anyone else for that matter because they expect an expensive piece of equipment to properly function up to their expectations? I tried to clean the sensor -- but there was not a speck on it to clean. If I read a review of the d70 and it said that there were a dead pixel, or two, or three on every new Nikon d70, there's no way in hell I would have bought one -- and no way you would have bought one either. A piece of dust that is un-removeable by normal means that came from the factory, in my opinion, might as well be a dead pixel, or two, or three.

Deapee wrote:Are you serious or are you just being an ignorant dolt?

We simply do not talk to each other like that on this forum... If you want to use that sort of language and flame other members, can I suggest that you please post your messages elsewhere.

Other members have been simply stating facts without emotion. Please do not use that sort of language in return.

I second that Leek!!!!!

Thats why I come here!

MATT

leek wrote:

Deapee wrote:Are you serious or are you just being an ignorant dolt?

We simply do not talk to each other like that on this forum... If you want to use that sort of language and flame other members, can I suggest that you please post your messages elsewhere.

Other members have been simply stating facts without emotion. Please do not use that sort of language in return.

Excuse me? Are you being serious? Asking if he's being ignorant and stupid is in no way 'bad language.' Yes, it's rather offensive, I'll give you that. But go back through and read the post. Here is one person complaining of a geniune issue, being told that he should just switch back to Canon. What words would you use to describe that person?

Honestly, and I know absolutely nobody cares what I think...I'm not coming back to this forum. Ban me if you wish, but it will be unnecessary. Ignorant dolt.

Hi All
I think this FNG comes from another forum and he thought we're the same bunch of other tribe.

deapee,

Welcome,

If you don't change your way to talk to your fellow members on this board, you may leave us alone. There're heaps of measurbastors and flamer on other sides, not here.

For dust, it's not an issue on the DSLR, it comes and goes after you cleaned it, and that is our lives.

For defects CCD, or dead pixel, yes it may have, but not only Nikon, it happens in all manufactures of DSLR, if you're bad luck you can find it on the Canon 1DS MKII or Nikon D2x also, just go back to the store where you bought and swap it.

deapee wrote:

leek wrote:

Deapee wrote:Are you serious or are you just being an ignorant dolt?

We simply do not talk to each other like that on this forum... If you want to use that sort of language and flame other members, can I suggest that you please post your messages elsewhere.

Other members have been simply stating facts without emotion. Please do not use that sort of language in return.

Excuse me? Are you being serious? Asking if he's being ignorant and stupid is in no way 'bad language.' Yes, it's rather offensive, I'll give you that. But go back through and read the post. Here is one person complaining of a geniune issue, being told that he should just switch back to Canon. What words would you use to describe that person?

Honestly, and I know absolutely nobody cares what I think...I'm not coming back to this forum. Ban me if you wish, but it will be unnecessary. Ignorant dolt.

Yes... I was being serious and yes it was offensive - 4 posts and 2 of them offensive - that's not a bad record...

As Birddog has explained - we are not like the people on dpreview or other forums...

As people have already responded to you in different terms, dust is unfortunately a fact of life in Digital Photography.
Some professionals take their cameras back to Canon / Nikon every 2 weeks for a sensor clean. We amateurs prefer to clean the sensors ourselves and accept that as a regular part of camera maintenance.

Dust bunnies on your new camera's sensor is unfortunate, but is quite common. It need not have been a Nikon QC issue - the camera could have been used for test shots in the store - trialled by other customers - who knows...
If you had a Rebel for a year without having dust bunnies, then I would say that you had astounding luck...

There is a wealth of information in this forum - and amongst other things if you do some reading here it would enable you to tell the difference between a dust bunny on the sensor / dust on the inside of the lens / hot pixels.

If you post some pictures of your problem (F16 picture of blue sky or white paper), then we could probably advise you what the problem is likely to be and whether you should take it up with your dealer or simply clean your sensor...

Ummm...

If it makes you feel any better, I found drool all over my Nikon

deapee wrote:You need to understand my reasoning. It was either take it in and swap it or live with it, and in the future realize that it MAY NOT be a speck of dust. It could be a defect in the CCD sensor. Either way, a brand new expensive camera with speckles in the same spot on every picture is 100% COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE in my opinion. If I get the dust there myself, it's a different story.

Quite correct.

A quick question for you though: do you live in a dust free environment?

Can you guarantee - 100% watertight guarantee - that the dust that you were seeing evidence of didn't get on to the camera as you assembled the camera, out of the box, and installed the lens on it?

My guess would be that your answer is "no", and I suspect that's Matt's point.

Did you make any test images with the camera in the camera store before you took it home?

I'm the last person you'll find defending Nikon, and I'd certianly be pissed off if my new camera had dust on the sensor too, but the bottom line is that it's not a lost cause, and the reality is that we should be spending some time every week (say) maintaining our cameras and lenses, keeping them clean, batteries charged, etc, and a sensor clean should simply become a part of this regime.

deapee wrote:Excuse me? Are you being serious? Asking if he's being ignorant and stupid is in no way 'bad language.' Yes, it's rather offensive, I'll give you that.

Pretty well to the point of flaming, and flaming is simply not permitted here.

But go back through and read the post. Here is one person complaining of a geniune issue, being told that he should just switch back to Canon. What words would you use to describe that person?

None, actually. What's the relevance of insulting someone who doesn't agree with your point of view? If you cannot remain on topic, and discuss the issues at hand, then say nothing.

Otherwise, please make your point, sticking to the topic, and keeping personal attacks of any and every type completely out of the picture.

Honestly, and I know absolutely nobody cares what I think...I'm not coming back to this forum.

Actually, you're wrong on both counts, but it's your choice, and we're certainly not going to ram ourselves down your throat.

First, I've never been on dpreview forums. Secondly, I'm a very easy guy to get along with. Why is everyone explaining dust on the sensor to me? I realize that dust on the sensor is not a big deal. I think it's a quality control issue that Nikon should work on.

Thirdly, telling me to switch back to Canon is just as insulting to me as being called ignorant would be.

I have the camera that I have and that's that. Dust or no dust, I don't care...sheesh. If calling someone who is being rude to me ignorant or a dolt offends anyone, then you must not live in the same world as me. Clearly, a punch for a punch is the way I see it.

This is a world full of censorship -- they are taking away our freedoms. I realize that this is a private web site and access is completely up to the site owners, but just why is it so offensive to you all that I called someone ignorant? I didn't swear, I didn't threaten anyone physically -- and for your information, both ignorant and dolt are in the dictionary. As far as I can remember, they don't put swear words in the dictionary.

Lastly, you're all right, dust on the sensor is going to happen. So stop explaining it to me. I never said it wasn't inevitable or that I live in a dust-free environment. wow...I find just about everyone here a bit over-reactive and offensive, to be honest.

deapee wrote:First, I've never been on dpreview forums. Secondly, I'm a very easy guy to get along with. Why is everyone explaining dust on the sensor to me? I realize that dust on the sensor is not a big deal. I think it's a quality control issue that Nikon should work on.

And several here, including myself, have expressed some level of agreement, but I've also expressed the reservation that perhaps there's no way that they can, given that there's a strong probability that dust could also get onto the sensor at some point in time subsequent to the camera departing the factory.

Are you suggesting that Nikon be responsible for, say, what happens in the camera store before you take delivery of the camera?

Thirdly, telling me to switch back to Canon is just as insulting to me as being called ignorant would be.

No, I respectfully disagree. There is no personal attack - implied or implicit -whatsoever in suggesting to you that you make a choice to use a different camera (or lens, flash, tripod, car, frying pan, or whatever) than the one you selected for a given task.

If you choose to read something else into that, then there's little I can do, but no, I cannot see that telling you to use your Canon - which is quite a fine camera - is an insult.

I have the camera that I have and that's that.

Reading your messages, you state that you currently possess both a Nikon and a Canon. Have I misinterpreted that?

Dust or no dust, I don't care...sheesh. If calling someone who is being rude to me ignorant or a dolt offends anyone, then you must not live in the same world as me. Clearly, a punch for a punch is the way I see it.

Well, no. Not here, anyway. If you believe you were insulted (and while I don't see that as valid, I do respect and accept that you may have interpreted it that way) the way those sorts of things are dealt with here is with respect and restraint, and thus the last thing that is acceptable is your "punch for a punch" suggestion.

If you believe someone has personally insulted you - and thus broken the rules - the correct and only approach is a PM to myself or one of the other Mods and then allow us to deal with the miscreant.

This is a world full of censorship -- they are taking away our freedoms.

First of all, there is NO censorship here.

You are welcome to vigorously discuss pretty well any topic you like, but the point is, that you need to discuss the topic.

That someone else has an opinion that differs from yours is great; we enjoy the discussion that this engenders, but we always respect that they are entitled to a different perspective.

I realize that this is a private web site and access is completely up to the site owners, but just why is it so offensive to you all that I called someone ignorant?

It's a personal attack, and personal attacks are simply not permitted.

Think about it this way: could you have made your point without bringing the tone down to a personal level?

You're right. I post my public apology. I let my feelings get the best of me and I made a personal attack. I'm hard-headed, strong-willed, and blunt, no doubt about it. Sorry.

's all good...

Now settle back and enjoy the wealth of this forum...

Not sure where you are located, but you may want to attend one of our mini-meets... That's where this forum community really comes alive...

We'll even clean your sensor for you (is that enough smileys?)

deapee wrote:You're right. I post my public apology.

Apology accepted; many thanx.

I'm hard-headed, strong-willed, and blunt, no doubt about it. Sorry.

There's nothing at all wrong with any of those qualities. I'll gladly plead guilty to each of them, as well as quite a few others. And I'm quite sure that a few people here could probably add a few more to my list as well.

The point is to simply be respectful to others, and as long as you can be mindful of that, we'll all get along just fine.

Again, I thank you for your apology; let's now get back to Nikon bashing!

Or at least, discussing their QC.

Deapee, there are a couple of points here which may make things clearer.

I personally rate getting a camera with dust on it similar to getting a new car with 5 litres of fuel in it. Poor form by the dealer and frustrating, but no reason to send the car back and soon enough the car will be in that state anyway. Probably one of the reasons people mentioned dust and cleaning is that many new people to DSLR are afraid of cleaning a sensor or alternatively don't have a good understanding of the process. You mentioned you couldn't see the dust so took the camera back. Understandable, but in a couple of hundred goes I have had at removing dust spots I have been able to see them two or three times. When one looks at it logically one can see why, there are 6 million pixels on a sensor 23.7mm X 15.5. If one of those 6 million sites is covered by dust you get a spot. I truly doubt anyone has good enough eyes to see any of the 6 million sensor sites. This fact probably gave away you were new to sensor cleaning, so people are letting you know it is not a big deal and will come up sooner or later just like refuelling the car. I think you probably sent back a good camera due to a valid concern on your part (with your level of understanding), but really the camera did not need to go back.

Second the comment about going back to Canon or Olympus was again directed at the dust issue, you A) have had good fortune with dust and Canon and B) more clearly the Olympus reference was due to them having an ultrasonic dust cleaner on their sensor. This, while not required, was clearly put there because many users are concerned and worried about dust and cleaning. Good selling point by them and an appropriate choice for one who doesn't want to clean sensors.

You mentioned that it is a quality conrol issue that Nikon should work on. The camera and lens come in different boxes, who assembled them, you or the dealer? Was that enviroment sealed? We are talking microscopic bits of dust here, as shown above, so very hard to establish blame here.

Enjoy your time here if you do stay, and whilst you note we do not like flaming here, the good news is that works all ways.

These past few pages seem to indicate one of the dangers of misinterpretation in reading text.

However, I'd prefer it to the incident in the Northern Territory this week.

Deapee, apologies if what I mentioned about switchign back to Canon or going to Olympus sounded offensive. I merely referred to Canon as you had mentioned you were using a 300D for well over a year with no dust issues and Olympus, well that's their marketing ploy.

This is the best thing about the forums, if someone seems to go out of hand by flaming another a whole bunch of admins and mods come in to lay down the law

The wealth of info that you'll receive from each and every single member will be valuable. Enjoy your stay.

All’s well that ends well

I just read through this whole post and thought i would share an interesting thought,

in a conversation
20 % of what we tell each other is conveyed by words
40% by body language
and
40% by tone of voice.

I can't remember the exact figures but the split is something like the above.

So when we email/Post we take away 80% of the standard communication method.
What we say one way could be taken a complete other way by someone else.

The solution to this problem is to go to a Mini Meet, clean the censor (read moderator) and take some photos

olrac wrote:clean the censor

Love it!!!

olrac wrote:The solution to this problem is to go to a Mini Meet, clean the censor (read moderator)

Oooohhhh ..... that tickles!

It's a shame the following doesn't apply to online text based conversation, but it's a little known piece of science that women generally speak a minimum of 3,000 words a day.

Men on the other hand only speak a minimum of 500 words a day and generally get through a lot of their day by communicating through grunts and wheezing and sighing and all sort of odd sounds that most men can translate and women just find odd.

As a robot, I find all of you daft.