Hot Pixel - Advice needed

Billy

Billy

Messages
3,239
Name
Billy
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a D300s it's only a 6-7 weeks old I've only used it out doors with the odd shot indoors the other night I was having a play with the ISO and my SB 900, I shot at 800 ISO with the flash on just testing the new flash unit, when I zoomed in I noticed a blue pixel on the image, looking on the net I found it to be a hot pixel.

I did a few test shots and it's more visible with the ISO cranked up, I gave Nikon service centre a call and they said it's an easy fix with re-mapping.

Have anyone had any problems like this and did it get sorted when you sent it for repair.

The images below where shot at 800 ISO with the SB 900 on.

When looking back at my earlier images I can also make the pixel out on a few images but not to many as most of my earlier images where shot at 200 ISO,

Am I just being to fussy?

4274334107_4869a2ee70.jpg




4271901987_6eeafae978_o.jpg
 
Just one stuck pixel, out of 12million?

If it's bugging you and Nikon will remap it for free then you'd be as well getting it sorted.
 
I contacted Nikon over the hot pixel and they said it was an easy fix they would just re-map the sensor, I then sent it off to Nikon and today they have just sent me an estimate bill for £71.63 this is for -
Check/Adjust image output levels to Nikon standard
Firmware upgrade to latest firmware
Check, test clean equipment

The camera is only 6 weeks old and when I contacted Nikon they never said anything about there being a charge to re-map the camera, have any of you had this problem or is it normal for Nikon to charge for this service as when I bought the camera I didn't expect there to be a hot pixel and if there was I would expect it to be fixed free of charge.
 
Typical Nikon, well it`s under warranty so tell them to repair it free of charge as it has a fault which makes it unfit for its purpose.
I have spotted a pixel like that on some of my shots too [ D40 still under a year old ], but thought it was the filter, I am already battling Nikon over the kit lens which fell apart after 5 weeks so for now I will just keep cloning out the stray pixel whenever it`s noticeable but I will be bringing it up in Court when I get the date through [ suing re the lens ].
 
My experiences with Nikon must be most untypical then,they have always been very good.
 
I'm going to give them a call at 09:00 this morning and find out what happens next, as I'm not willing to pay for the camera's repair as its only 6 weeks old and it's (as stated above) not fit for purpose.
 
Return it to the place your bought it, not fit for purpose is a sales of goods act thing and that is between you and the retailer not the manufacturer. One of my older cameras had a few hot pixels and I returned it and got a refund as they were unable to provide a replacement in time for why I bought it. The refund took months to come through and I returned it within 24 hours of recieving it.
 
:agree:

As Little John says, your dispute is with the retailer (assuming that's the route you purchased it as opposed to a private sale). Where did you buy it?

Similarly with Patch - from what you've said it seems your dispute is with the retailer too. (Obviously if it was bought privately then tackling Nikon might be your only route).
 
I bought a D90 from Dixons duty free in Gatwick in December, and used it for the 2 weeks while I was away. About a week into the holiday I was scrolling back through the photo's and noticed on every single photo I had the exact same 'hot pixel' mark you have there.

When I landed back at Gatwick I phoned up Dixons while I was in arrivals, and they arranged all the paper work while I was on the phone, and then met me in the arrivals area with a complete new boxed up D90.

So I would definitely go back to the place you bought it and get it swapped as it's not fit for use. Dixons were good as gold for me, I phoned them up ready for a bit of a barney expecting hassle, but they couldn't have been more happy to do the swap out. :thumbs:
 
I had similar problems with Canon. I sent mine off to an authorised repair shop, under warranty, and got sent a bill. Rang them, told them it was under warranty and had an argument as they said I never sent the warranty information. I provided the dates and times of the emails I had sent, along with noting I also provided the details in the box. Surprise surprise, oh we've found the document, no problem, it will now be repaired under warranty.

1 week later, no camera, rang them again. We haven't repaired it yet, you have to agree to the charges...

Gargh, patience test.

Anyway, its not just Nikon, it's Canon too. Just fight with them about the warranty and they will give in.
 
Spuff said:
:agree:

As Little John says, your dispute is with the retailer (assuming that's the route you purchased it as opposed to a private sale). Where did you buy it?

Similarly with Patch - from what you've said it seems your dispute is with the retailer too. (Obviously if it was bought privately then tackling Nikon might be your only route).
Click to expand...

It is the retailer yes however in my case the retailer sent my lens to Nikon supposedly just for them to confirm I had`nt caused the thing to fall apart and had promised to replace it when getting that confirmation.
Nikon then told me I should have sent it to them direct, but legally I had to send it via the retailer [ Bennetts ] :cuckoo: so they are just playing off against each other while I am without the lens [ since last June !! ].
Under Nikon warranty had the damage been my fault they would not do a repair however - against my strict instructions because a repair is not acceptable, [ I want a replacement to which I am entitled ] - they repaired it anyway [ therefore proving I did`nt damage the thing ] but they refuse to send me the report on it as Bennetts sent the thing to them so under data protection they don`t have to let me see it and Bennetts refuse to let me see the report unless I accept the supposedly repaired piece of duff garbage they flogged so they STILL have the lens, they and Nikon have the report, I have no lens and have to take Bennetts to court and I will be calling as witnesses every person from Nikon with whom I have corresponded and every person from Bennetts with whom I have corresponded so they will lose a lot more man hours and expense over this than if they just did the right [ and legal ] thing and replaced the stupid lens - I hope the OP fares better but be aware that they are giving me the runaround between them, make sure you get everything in writing from Nikon and your retailer whomever it was so they can`t treat you the same way they have treated me.
 
I seem to remember you just have to either tell it to engage "dust off" sensor cleaning or do the "mirror lock up for cleaning" and after that it will map out the dead pixels or was it a reflash with firmware?

Try googling for it, there certainly is an easy FREE user fix, because sometimes it can loose its dead pixel mapping database and ALL cameras have dead pixels, but they are suppressed in software....
 
Sounds like a nightmare Patch - I assume you're bringing this court action under the Small Claims Track? A lot of times the larger companies settle the action before the hearing (when they realise the cost of defending outweighs the thing they're arguing about).

Good luck and let us know how you get on. When you win don't forget to claim reasonable costs/expenses (which means keeping a record of them as you go along). :thumbs:
 
Spuff said:
Sounds like a nightmare Patch - I assume you're bringing this court action under the Small Claims Track? A lot of times the larger companies settle the action before the hearing (when they realise the cost of defending outweighs the thing they're arguing about).

Good luck and let us know how you get on. When you win don't forget to claim reasonable costs/expenses (which means keeping a record of them as you go along). :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Yep, Small Claims, along with wanting a replacement kit lens I intend to claim as well for the cost [ or some of ] for the lens I bought just so I could use the camera at all, I am doubtful that I will get anything on that though the fact is I was unable to use the body for a full five weeks before I scraped the money together for a Tamron lens and the cheapest one at that but still one I could ill-afford, I want compensating for the time I was completely unable to use the camera, the numerous phone call costs, and for good measure the lost opportunities for shots because of not having the kit lens which I had been using for a specific sort of shot at my dog agility club, a type which is impossible with my Tamron as it`s too long lens, I will be taking examples to court in case the judge is not of the two most recent ceturies in terms of understanding anything since Box Brownies :lol:
All I really want is the lens they owe me but they seem to want a war - well they are getting their wish, war it is !
I`ll start a thread with any updates as and when I have them :thumbs:
 
My problem is now sorted, I gave Nikon a call this morning and the guy said it was because I had not sent a copy of the receipt with the camera, I thought they would know it was under warranty as it is registered with them and I've just received the free SB-900 because I sent them all my documents to prove ownership.

Anyway the good thing is it's all sorted and it's being done under warranty.

I just need to find something to do now in my spare time whilst I'm waiting for the camera to return.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top