Jump to content

M246 "banding test"


greene881

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have my M246 monochrom up for sale and had a request from an interested party.

 

They have asked for a series of shots at various ISOs of a black background, they say they want to test for banding and any other [unspecified] issues.

 

Can anyone enlighten me as to what they are looking for / what these test should show.

 

They also wish to check the shutter count from the RAW file, is this possible from a 246.

 

many thanks

 

John

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have my M246 monochrom up for sale and had a request from an interested party.

 

They have asked for a series of shots at various ISOs of a black background, they say they want to test for banding and any other [unspecified] issues.

 

Can anyone enlighten me as to what they are looking for / what these test should show.

 

They also wish to check the shutter count from the RAW file, is this possible from a 246.

 

many thanks

 

John

 

 

A black background at various ISOs would suggest that they want to see the level of noise and possible banding when lifting the shadows. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Checking the shutter count isn't possible, so I suggest they have been listening to whispers and misinformation, always a pain if the buyer is expecting too much. This may also be the case with 'banding' in which they may have higher expectations than what is reasonable. It suggests they may be a novice so be prepared to tell them they can't have it before they find faults where there are none.

 

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be rather hesitant to sell a camera under these conditions. I would certainly have them sign an indemnity that this is a private sale without guaranty or returns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just tell him the last number on the file. While that isnt an accurate way to determine shutter count, it's also not completely unreasonable if you are the original owner and have always reset your numbering after updating with firmware.

 

regarding the banding, I also dont think it's unreasonable to provide *a few* pictures as requested. 

While I dont know what they're expecting, I'm imaging they just want to verify that there's no crazy horizontal or vertical banding or dead pixels or anything like that.

What I'd say to do is just go into a dark closet or bathroom and shoot at ~3200, 6400, and 10000 and provide them with the images. Use a fast enough shutter speed to avoid having the 2nd noise image subtracted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Asking for test shots when buying from a private a second hand high ticket canera might not be totally unreasonable

No it is certainly not, but it rather sets the tone. Reason why I will always sell on this forum to established members and accept a return within a reasonable period, say a week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[...] It suggests they may be a novice so be prepared to tell them they can't have it before they find faults where there are none.

 

I'm with Steve on this. Some time ago we witnessed a confused individual making a seller just miserable, demanding a return for a misunderstanding, nothing was wrong with the camera. I'd avoid this particular buyer. He can find his answers in so many places.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Attached image shows what "banding" looks like - streaky horizontal sensor noise. M240, converted to B&W, ISO 6400 - "pushed" (brightened) extremely for demonstration purposes. (vertical crop from a horizontal original).

 

Which just goes to show, one can find banding in almost any high-ISO image, if one tries hard enough... (my Monochrom v.1 shows faint bands without pushing at ISO 10000, none at 8000 without some manipulation)

 

Digital M's output a "unique image ID" in EXIF, which is supposed to be the true number of actuations (shutter firings) in hexadecimal notation - but in the CMOS Ms it seems to be a nonsense number. I have three sequential pictures from an M240, that show "unique ID" numbers of - about 6000, about 1.1 million, and about 500000. :blink:

 

Additionally, in any camera with live view and video capability, "actuations" themselves, as a measure of use, are mostly nonsense these days. Use "live view" or EVF 1000 times, without ever taking a picture, and you'll still record 1000 actuations. Shoot 20 minutes of video in one take, and that is significant use, that will get counted as only one actuation.

 

But what the heck - send the prospective buyer a few images. Tell him you can't check exact actuations yourself (but give an estimate, if you can make a good guess of your history -1500, 6500, 24500). If he thinks he knows how to get a useful measure of actuations from the file data - good luck to him!

 

Same for banding. Send correctly exposed DNG images at high ISOs under poor light, and let him hack at them to see what he sees.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking for test shots when buying from a private a second hand high ticket canera might not be totally unreasonable

 

And what will you learn? Will you know if the rangefinder is inaccurate, the exposure made perfectly, the post processing optimal,....or are you looking at photographs made by a photographer with a low skill threshold? Just about the only thing you could tell from a supplied picture is if there are any hot pixels, and those could have been cloned out. You could perhaps tell if the camera has been looked after if there was any dust in the picture, but there will be dust on the sensor after being joggled around in the post on it's way to you, so it would need cleaning anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And what will you learn? Will you know if the rangefinder is inaccurate, the exposure made perfectly, the post processing optimal,....or are you looking at photographs made by a photographer with a low skill threshold? Just about the only thing you could tell from a supplied picture is if there are any hot pixels, and those could have been cloned out. You could perhaps tell if the camera has been looked after if there was any dust in the picture, but there will be dust on the sensor after being joggled around in the post on it's way to you, so it would need cleaning anyway.

I think we are talking about raw files, not jpegs, and from a raw file you can learn a lot of things....among others, if you are not familiar with the camera, you might want to see how the file reacts in post-processing etc. etc. etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but improving one's postprocessing skills by pretending to buy a camera is not a very nice way to go about it. If you want to see whether the output of a specific type of camera appeals there are other ways of obtaining DNG's

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are talking about raw files, not jpegs, and from a raw file you can learn a lot of things....among others, if you are not familiar with the camera, you might want to see how the file reacts in post-processing etc. etc. etc.

 

Do you think that? I think if it comes to demanding .dng files that should definitely be the last straw. I've had potential buyers like that trying to sell a house, happy to tell you on their way out after a viewing that they only came to see what was available in this price range. There is so much information available for todays digital cameras (sample .dng files, tutorials, etc.) that it makes you realise how difficult it was to sell a film camera, having to shoot a roll of film and post it to the buyer to prove it works..............not. If you can't spot an awkward customer then you are your own worst enemy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think that? I think if it comes to demanding .dng files that should definitely be the last straw. I've had potential buyers like that trying to sell a house, happy to tell you on their way out after a viewing that they only came to see what was available in this price range. There is so much information available for todays digital cameras (sample .dng files, tutorials, etc.) that it makes you realise how difficult it was to sell a film camera, having to shoot a roll of film and post it to the buyer to prove it works..............not. If you can't spot an awkward customer then you are your own worst enemy.

Whatever, but I still think it was not an akward request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever, but I still think it was not an akward request

 

I tend to agree.  It is very hard to get someone to take something back on eBay, esp if the seller is convinced there's nothing wrong.  This is a huge amount of cash to invest on a second hand item with potentially no recourse in the event of an issue.

 

This guy might have saved every spare penny for years to buy this camera.  Wanting to see that there are no hidden issues is not that bizarre.

 

Would you buy a camera without seeing photos of it?  Imagine if there was a M240 on ebay with no photos.  I know I wouldn't.  And yet how much more important is the photos that come out of a camera than photos of it?!

 

I personally didn't think to ask for an image out of the camera when I bought mine, but now I think it's not a bad idea.  I wouldn't be looking for the same things (unless I'd read whatever he's read that's got him worried), but just knowing that it's producing photos with no obvious issues is probably a wise move.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your comments.

 

By way of an update I provided the enquirer with five test raw files via Dropbox on 12 July.

 

To date I have not received an acknowledgement, thanks or heard from him since, no surprise to some probably.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...