G10 defective pixels the norm?

C

craigatkinson

Messages
7
Name
Craig Atkinson
Edit My Images
No
Sorry to cross post - new here!
Got a G10 yesterday, seems great, images fine etc. Screen has two green defective pixels. Wondering whether to return it or just get on and forget about it. Are a couple of DPs normal?
 
It will almost certainly be within the manufacturers tolerance levels....it's up to you really. :)
 
is it dead pixels on the sensor or on the LCD?

either way you can expect them to replace the item for you but I think most people could live with it if its only on the LCD
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
is it dead pixels on the sensor or on the LCD?

either way you can expect them to replace the item for you but I think most people could live with it if its only on the LCD
Click to expand...

It's just two green stuck ones on the LCD. I can live with it but think things should be perfect when you spend so much on them. Hmm.

The sensor is seemingly fine, although I haven't pushed it yet.
 
craigatkinson said:
It's just two green stuck ones on the LCD. I can live with it but think things should be perfect when you spend so much on them. Hmm.

The sensor is seemingly fine, although I haven't pushed it yet.
Click to expand...

If you feel that way return it to where you originally purchased it and they'll swap it for you. Yours will probably get a new LCD screen and be sold as refurbished online
 
craigatkinson said:
It's just two green stuck ones on the LCD. I can live with it but think things should be perfect when you spend so much on them. Hmm.

The sensor is seemingly fine, although I haven't pushed it yet.
Click to expand...

Things should be perfect for the price you pay. I would return it and get a new one.
 
Peter Loew said:
Things should be perfect for the price you pay.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. The price you pay reflects the level of engineering tolerances and quality control. If everyone were to insist on every unit being 100% perfect rather than 99.99999% perfect than they wouldn't be affordable.
 
StewartR said:
Rubbish. The price you pay reflects the level of engineering tolerances and quality control. If everyone were to insist on every unit being 100% perfect rather than 99.99999% perfect than they wouldn't be affordable.
Click to expand...

It isn't 99.99999% perfect though. I found another coupe of stuck ones too!
 
craigatkinson said:
It isn't 99.99999% perfect though. I found another couple of stuck ones too!
Click to expand...
OK, that's 4 stuck pixels out of 461,000? Which means it's only 99.9991% perfect.

I suspect you would probably not be very happy if you got the sack from work because you were only there punctually 99.9991% of the time.
 
so why should he put up with something that isn't 100% when someone else who has paid the same has something perfect?

out of all the lenses you get you're telling me you're happy if some of them are slightly soft?
 
I'd be more than happy to be sacked

To get a % rate like that would mean working every single day (Mon to Fri) for over 443 years !!!

I'd get it replaced, if it was 2 then now 4, how many more are going to go?
 
Why not give it a bit of time and see if any more go. 99.9991 % is 100% in most peoples' books. 4 dead pixels wouldn't worry me, however 40 or 400 in 2 weeks time might!
 
somewhere inside the manufacturers definition of sharp and outside your definition of sharp i'd expect.

hopefully you see my point?
 
so just to be daft - would you buy a new car with a scratch on the surface, or would you want the one that was not scratched? what if the camera had a scratch on the body that didn't affect the way it worked- still happy? I have ordered another - second best is no good.
 
alexkidd said:
somewhere inside the manufacturers definition of sharp and outside your definition of sharp i'd expect.

hopefully you see my point?
Click to expand...
No, I'm afraid I still don't. My definition of sharp is exactly the same as the manufacturer's definition of sharp, because that's what I'm paying for.

If I had a lens (or any other manufactured item) which was outside the manufacturer's engineering and QC tolerances, then I wouldn't be happy. But that's not the situation here.
 
craigatkinson said:
so just to be daft - would you buy a new car with a scratch on the surface, or would you want the one that was not scratched? what if the camera had a scratch on the body that didn't affect the way it worked- still happy?
Click to expand...
That's not a good analogy. The manufacturer's quality threshold as far as scratches is concerned is zero, so that's what I'd expect. The manufacturer's quality threshold for the number of dead pixels is not zero.
craigatkinson said:
I have ordered another - second best is no good.
Click to expand...
Well, that's your right of course. Just so long as you realise that by demanding such a high level of quality you're helping to increase the price for everyone.
 
thing is a scratch on the body dosn't matter so much as stuck pixels on the screen. I don't look through the body each time I take a photograph - the screen I do. I'm no going to encourage the manufacturers to make defective screens by thinking 'it's ok'. if it puts the prices up then so be it, the cost will be recovered when it's sold anyway, and surely with the competition the prices won't go any higher anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top