Ebay buy dead pixels

Messages
2,070
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
I bought a Canon G9 off ebay this week. I have just noticed that it has about 3 dead pixels on the screen that are quite noticable. I know it's not that big a deal but the camera was described as "mint" and in my opinion dead pixels isn't considered mint.

What should I do, ask for money back, or am I just being over sensitive?

Andy S
 
Pixels do die, I think unless there's over a certain number, even the manufacturer wouldn't replace it! If it REALLY bothers you, then you can start to go about getting another one, but don't expect it to be easy. Personally I'd live and learn, but if you like a good arguement you could always get in touch with the seller!
 
Dead pixel or hot pixel?

Different. Hot pixel is stuck on one colour, and I'm pretty sure can be fixed.

Dead pixel is different.

There are millions of pixels on a screen and 3 are dead.

I'm 100% sure that there are more important things to worry about.
 
If its described as mint i would email the seller ans see what he responds with?

As long as you paid with paypal you will be covered for a while. Don't leave it too long.
 
if they're noticeable then it should have been in the description, at the least inform the seller and start some kind of dialogue on the matter :)
 
Dead pixels should have been mentioned but the se do not affect the image taken and as such with most things including monitors the manufacturer allow 3 dead pixels some even more.
 
How do I tell if it's dead or stuck?

There are 3 very small dots that look kind of white when viewing a dark image on the camera screen.
 
There are 3 very small dots that look kind of white when viewing a dark image on the camera screen.
According to DPReview there are 230,000 LCD dots on the rear screen of a Canon G9. If only 3 of them are dead that leaves 99.99869% of them still working. As the LCD is there to give you a preview of the shot you've taken and the actual image isn't affected at all then I'd reckon you should be able to live with it quite easily.
 
Stuck versus dead pixels

Stuck pixels are often incorrectly referred to as dead pixels, which have a similar appearance. In a dead pixel, all three sub-pixels are permanently off, producing a permanently black pixel. Dead pixels can result from similar manufacturing anomalies as stuck pixels, but may also occur from a non-functioning transistor resulting in complete lack of power to the pixel. Dead pixels are much less likely to correct themselves over time or be repaired through any of several popular methods.

Stuck pixels, unlike dead pixels, have been reported by LCD screen owners to disappear, and there are several popular methods purported to fix them,[9] such as gently rubbing the screen (in an attempt to reset the pixel), cycling the color value of the stuck pixel rapidly (in other words, flashing bright colors on the screen,) or simply tolerating the stuck pixel until it disappears (which can take anywhere from a day to years). While these methods can work on some stuck pixels others cannot be fixed by the above methods. Also some stuck pixels will reappear after being fixed if the screen is left off for several hours.

Hardware manufacturers and distributors tend to claim [10] that TAB faults, in opposition to other forms of defective pixels, will not allow for repair or reliving of the issue, in opposition to other physical defects that may be found in an LCD.

[edit] Manufacturer policy

In LCD manufacture, it is common for a display to be manufactured that has a number of sub-pixel defects (each pixel is composed of three primary-colored sub-pixels). The number of faulty pixels tolerated before a screen is rejected is dependent on the class that the manufacturer has given the display (although officially described by the ISO 13406-2 standard, not all manufacturers interpret this the same way, or follow it at all).

Some manufacturers have a zero-tolerance policy with regard to LCD screens, rejecting all units found to have any number of (sub-)pixel defects. Displays meeting this standard are deemed Class I. Other manufacturers reject displays according to the number of total defects, the number of defects in a given group (e.g. 1 dead pixel or 3 stuck sub-pixels in a 5x5 pixel area), or other criteria.

In some cases, the manufacturer sends all screens to sale, and then replaces the screen if the customer reports the unit as faulty and the defective pixels meet their minimum requirements for return.[11] Some screens come with a leaflet stating how many dead pixels they are allowed to have before you can send them back to the manufacturer. Dead pixels may tend to occur in clusters; in most cases displays with such a problem can be sent back to the manufacturer.
 
According to DPReview there are 230,000 LCD dots on the rear screen of a Canon G9. If only 3 of them are dead that leaves 99.99869% of them still working. As the LCD is there to give you a preview of the shot you've taken and the actual image isn't affected at all then I'd reckon you should be able to live with it quite easily.

Not quite millions as per my estimation but you get me point.
 
As the LCD is there to give you a preview of the shot you've taken and the actual image isn't affected at all then I'd reckon you should be able to live with it quite easily.

To be honest, it would irritate the backside off of me. I have one on my iPhone and I see it every time I look at the screen and can't wait to upgrade to a new handset to be shot of it.

I'd be especially annoyed having been told that the camera was 'mint' rather than in excellent condition but with some dead pixels.
 
I know they wouldn't, which is why I'm living with the iPhone. Still annoying.

As it is, this was bought from someone who knew about them but chose to keep it quiet and instead offer up a slightly misleading description of the product he was selling.
 
To be honest, it would irritate the backside off of me. I have one on my iPhone and I see it every time I look at the screen and can't wait to upgrade to a new handset to be shot of it.

I'd be especially annoyed having been told that the camera was 'mint' rather than in excellent condition but with some dead pixels.

I feel the same way as Simmotino. I could live with it ok I think but it's something that now I've noticed it I always notice it. It annoys me that it was described as mint. Even if they are just stuck I don't think I got a mint camera.

I'll maybe send the seller and eamil and see what he says. He has 100% feedback and was freindly enough in his messages. The only problem is I am off to Amsterdam and Zurich on Sunday and will be away for 3 weeks. It needs sorting fast I guess.
 
It's a tricky one.. if it was like this from new, and within the manufacturer's tolerances, he could legitimately describe it as mint (as in mint = as-new condition) IMO.

Maybe contact him and see whether he's willing to exchange/refund or knock a few £££'s off.. I think it would be unfair to leave negative feedback (perhaps neutral?) if he doesn't want to discuss it.

A.
 
hmm 3 out of 230,000. As mentioned above - 99.999% ok - well thats even better than six sigma manufacture...

As doesn't affect the picture at all - why fuss?

Is it quite possible that he didn't notice them himself?
 
Maybe contact him and see whether he's willing to exchange/refund or knock a few £££'s off.. I think it would be unfair to leave negative feedback (perhaps neutral?) if he doesn't want to discuss it.
A.

Actually, I would feel that should the seller not discuss or respond, that would warrant negative feedback.
If they concede a fault, and return some money, then neurtral.
If they concede the fault, and offer refund/exchange then positive.

As far as I see it, if the item had been sold 'as new' then it might have these hot pixels.
However, if described as mint, I would expect that the item has been used, and no fault found (which isn't the case).

Comming from an OEM background,
Usually dead pixels are difficult to warrant, one dark pixel in millions isn't a big problem (thunderflies inside the screen isn't a proble). Hot pixels however, usually do have a better returns percentage. Often there is a clause (actually there is a 'voluntary' code of conduct which states that there has to be a minimum distance for hot pixels) about the number available from the manufacturer.
Try contacting the seller, then Canon to try and get this resolved.
If it is just the back LCD, then perhaps you could learn to live with it, or, if not liveable, I suspect that a replacement screen is possible.
 
To me the seller should have mentioned it in the listing.
And if I had got it brand new and it had 1 dead pixel it would be going back simple as that.
 
I wouldn't know a dead pixel from a carrot.
I wouldn't know a hot pixel from a parsnip either.

Maybe the seller is like me, and didn't know. I have only ever bought one thing off ebay - and then I had to phone someone and ask how to do it. Then I had to ask how to contact the seller to find out how to pay! I bought it in the end, with some help.

So, don't think everyone knows how all these things work perfectly. Some of us still struggle with emails.:bonk:

What you do about it I have no idea - just giving an example of how a genuine seller might not have known - I wouldn't have.
 
To me the seller should have mentioned it in the listing.
And if I had got it brand new and it had 1 dead pixel it would be going back simple as that.

That's what I feel. If I had bought it from a shop I would just go back there and argue my case.


@Lensflare - I agree with you that the seller may not have much knowledge. The dead pixels are quite noticable though if you know where to look.


Anyway I have emailed him to tell him about the problem. I'll see what he says then take it from there.
 
it would annoy me , i had a 32" lcd with one pixel stuck on red out of over a million , annoyed the hell out of me , managed to get comet to refund the tv nearly a year after purchase :lol:
 
I had a monitor with a dead pixel, part of a PC deal I got from PC world.
Back then they told me that they only change screens with 6 or more dead pixels, but I was back there on the same day I bought the thing. They exchanged it for me after testing it, I think they knew I would have come back for a full refund.

I think the seller should have mentioned it, but as said a lot of people maybe wouldn't even notice and maybe had best intentions.
I know it wouldn't bother me on a review screen, but on that monitor I had it would have driven me barmy as you look at a computer screen pretty much constantly while you use a computer.
 
it would annoy me , i had a 32" lcd with one pixel stuck on red out of over a million , annoyed the hell out of me , managed to get comet to refund the tv nearly a year after purchase :lol:

I had one the same from John Lewis and when I complained I was told it was acceptable but I stood my ground and insisted it was not acceptable being bang on dead centre, to the side maybe but not where it will be seen all the time, they did exchange it.
 
I had one the same from John Lewis and when I complained I was told it was acceptable but I stood my ground and insisted it was not acceptable being bang on dead centre, to the side maybe but not where it will be seen all the time, they did exchange it.

way to go Mal :clap:
 
sorry but I still think getting in a tizz over not much in this situation...............

its only on the LCD on the back of the screen - and hey well Canon G9 is 12Meg (according to google), then the 230,000 pixels on the screen is 1.92% of the total resolution of the whole picture......... so just what is the problem?

As far as I know, the issue is the LCD panel on the back, so when view pics on monitor etc, all is fine? Now unless you use the LCD screen as a slideshow for your shots (100% sure you don't) its just a quick glance to basically see if you've got what you want in the shot.......... or to view camera settings...........

If it was a problem with the sensor I might be a bit more " I am not happy with this"
 
i don't think we're talking about D3X or IDS MK III, are we - however I will say my original point stands.

No idea how many pixels in either of those LCD's but and I would hope the money is in the sensor and other clever bits photograhy bits, not the LCD screen on the back.

Would assume if had one of those, even less likely to use the LCD to view the pics.

99.99+ % pixels ok........... I don't see an issue - sorry......


I assume than Canon has the same customer service with respect to a G9 or a IDS Mk III, not a "oh well Sir, thats a £200 camera, what do you expect, if you wanted 100% perfection you need to spend £5K + on our top end product, oh and the same again for a selection of lenses Sir."

Sorry, don't see what you're getting at?
 
I have tried taking a picture of the actual screen while it is showing the stuck pixels. You can clearly see about 3 and there are about 2 more less noticable ones.

I have also taken a picture in the dark and it appears that there are two white pixels that I think are actually on the sensor. They don't show up in the LCD screen but I can see them in LR and PS.

I have uploaded the files here for you to have a look at. No 1 is the stuck pixels on the LCD circled in red and the scond is the two dead pixels I think are on the sensor. Both were taken in RAW then changed to TIFF in PS, apart from that unedited.

1) http://www.filehosting.org/file/details/50764/2-0594.tif
2) http://www.filehosting.org/file/details/50770/2-1708.tif

Hope those two work.



sorry but I still think getting in a tizz over not much in this situation...............

its only on the LCD on the back of the screen - and hey well Canon G9 is 12Meg (according to google), then the 230,000 pixels on the screen is 1.92% of the total resolution of the whole picture......... so just what is the problem?

As far as I know, the issue is the LCD panel on the back, so when view pics on monitor etc, all is fine? Now unless you use the LCD screen as a slideshow for your shots (100% sure you don't) its just a quick glance to basically see if you've got what you want in the shot.......... or to view camera settings...........

If it was a problem with the sensor I might be a bit more " I am not happy with this"

No matter what camera it is, I paid my hard earned cash for it and I am a little unhappy to get something that is not as stated. If you would accept it that's fine by me but I don't feel the same way myself. ;)
 

Yep - thats your right - and if thats how you feel, then the ONLY option you leave yourself is to contact the seller and either return for a refund or negotiate a partial refund as not as described.

Personally I think you're being pedantic as the issue does not affect Image Quality at all which to me is about 99.9999+% of the purpose of a camera.....

I think you'll find that 3/230,000 dead pixels falls well within Canon's tolerances of product control, (Don't think they are 6 Sigma accredited) so all the best in your debate with the seller. I am sure their argument will be along the lines of "If Canon can sell new products with 3 dead pixels, then the condition of mint is fair, given that a new camera would be in mint condition", but good luck........... let us know what happens...
 
If it came like that from Canon (which it almost certainly did, pixels seldom die after manufacture), then it is efectively 'as new' which is what most people would consider 'mint' to mean.

Since the screen is only for aiming and reviewing, and as such is only for intermittent use, I wouldn't consider it to be as serious as failed pixels on a PC monitor. Annoying, but not much you can do about it.
 
If it came like that from Canon (which it almost certainly did, pixels seldom die after manufacture), then it is efectively 'as new' which is what most people would consider 'mint' to mean.

Unless the technology is significantly different, which I doubt, pixels in LCD screens can and will stick during the early phases of life. Dead pixels are later in life.
This may not have been delivered in this state.
 
How much did you pay?

Seems like a nice compact.

My new 30D had five hot ones, I learnt to ignore them!
 
a dozen times?

in a week?
month?
year?
 
The guy said he bought it about 8 months ago and only used it about a dozen times.


From the G9 manual:

"Less than 0.01% of the pixels may occassionally misfire, or appear as red or black dots ... this does not constitute a malfunction."

So, irritating as it may be,that equates to 23 pixels, so 3 would be well with in the tolerances for a "mint" camera....
 
So, irritating as it may be,that equates to 23 pixels, so 3 would be well with in the tolerances for a "mint" camera....

That makes sense but I have found that there are 3 pretty noticable ones and at least 2 dimmer ones that may or may not get worse. :(

So at least 5 and maybe 2 on the actual sensor (but I don't know how to confirm if these are dead pixels or not).
 
Back
Top