Bottom 20-percent D70s image dark

On Sep 27, 8:48 am, Dr Hfuhruhurr wrote:
On 27 Sep, 13:34, k-man wrote:



I have a D70s and recently encountered a problem whereby the bottom
20% of the frame of some shots were dark. What I did was I set the
camera on a tripod, set the self-timer and got the shot. I saw in the
LCD panel the darkened bottom and, leaving all settings the same, I
set the self-timer again and got another shot and then the pic came
out OK. Then the next shot was fine and then I saw the dark band at
the bottom again on the shot after that. No fingers and no lenses and
no filters and no hoods, etc. were in the way. And no flash was
used.

The camera had been sitting in a house (on a table instead of in a
closed camera bag) all day where the humidity reached 60%. I don't
know if that could have been a culprit or what.

Any insight on this?

Thanks.
Kevin

Could be due to light leakage though the eyepiece, off the prism and
onto the sensor.
My D50 came with an eyepiece cap for just such shooting.

Doc

Light leaking? To me, that would cause an "over-exposed" band, which
would be white, not dark. It seems like the mirror was in the way of
the exposure.

k-man wrote:
On Sep 27, 1:38 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
k-man writes:
http://bikeoften.com/photoproblem/
The shape, position, and intermittent appearance suggests a mirror-flipping
problem.

Remember the image is upside down in the camera.

A mirror problem seems about right. I remember the camera sounding
funky during the shot. Something sounded prolonged and it was
probably the mirror taking too long to flip up. Through the black
band, you can still see part of the image, suggesting that the
obstruction was only in the way for part of the exposure.

I tried to replicate it last night but couldn't get it to do it again
-- WHICH IS A GOOD THING.


Yeah, but what happens if it starts happening again when you really,
REALLY want to get a good shot?

Greg
--
Ticketmaster and Ticketweb suck, but everyone knows that:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org

Dethink to survive - Mclusky

G.T. wrote:
k-man wrote:
On Sep 27, 1:38 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
k-man writes:
http://bikeoften.com/photoproblem/
The shape, position, and intermittent appearance suggests a
mirror-flipping
problem.

Remember the image is upside down in the camera.

A mirror problem seems about right. I remember the camera sounding
funky during the shot. Something sounded prolonged and it was
probably the mirror taking too long to flip up. Through the black
band, you can still see part of the image, suggesting that the
obstruction was only in the way for part of the exposure.

I tried to replicate it last night but couldn't get it to do it again
-- WHICH IS A GOOD THING.


Yeah, but what happens if it starts happening again when you really,
REALLY want to get a good shot?

Greg
Which brings up a question.. Most cameras have shutters that are rated
for X number of pictures.. I assume most people who've owned cameras for
a bit have gone past this number? Is this something that can simply be
replaced by techs? I assume you can replace *anything* on a camera, but
does the procedure cost outweigh the possibility of simply moving up in
model?

I've not had to take my D70 in for servicing yet so I'm not sure on the
pricings for various procedures.

TIA
P.

On Sep 28, 1:17 pm, "G.T." wrote:
k-man wrote:
On Sep 27, 1:38 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
k-man writes:
http://bikeoften.com/photoproblem/
The shape, position, and intermittent appearance suggests a mirror-flipping
problem.

Remember the image is upside down in the camera.

A mirror problem seems about right. I remember the camera sounding
funky during the shot. Something sounded prolonged and it was
probably the mirror taking too long to flip up. Through the black
band, you can still see part of the image, suggesting that the
obstruction was only in the way for part of the exposure.

I tried to replicate it last night but couldn't get it to do it again
-- WHICH IS A GOOD THING.

Yeah, but what happens if it starts happening again when you really,
REALLY want to get a good shot?

Greg
--
Ticketmaster and Ticketweb suck, but everyone knows that:http://www.ticketmastersucks.org

Dethink to survive - Mclusky

Well, a never-been-flaky camera can just happen to finally fail and do
so on that shot, too. I guess it's an odds game, where the odds of a
new camera breaking are less than the odds of an older camera breaking
-- in very generic theory, of course. I guess what I'll do is run
around the yard this weekend and take numerous shots and try to get a
"feel" for whether what I experienced was a glitch or whether it's
time to consider getting the camera serviced. I've taken over 10,000
shots with it and have taken it in all sorts of environments. I
should probably get a backup (besides my little P&S). But some shot
opportunities come only once. If your main camera fails, then, if
that was it and the shot is now gone, having a backup would be of no
use.

I like your Ticketmaster quote.

Kevin

Pboud wrote:
G.T. wrote:
k-man wrote:
On Sep 27, 1:38 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
k-man writes:
http://bikeoften.com/photoproblem/
The shape, position, and intermittent appearance suggests a
mirror-flipping
problem.

Remember the image is upside down in the camera.

A mirror problem seems about right. I remember the camera sounding
funky during the shot. Something sounded prolonged and it was
probably the mirror taking too long to flip up. Through the black
band, you can still see part of the image, suggesting that the
obstruction was only in the way for part of the exposure.

I tried to replicate it last night but couldn't get it to do it again
-- WHICH IS A GOOD THING.


Yeah, but what happens if it starts happening again when you really,
REALLY want to get a good shot?

Greg
Which brings up a question.. Most cameras have shutters that are rated
for X number of pictures.. I assume most people who've owned cameras for
a bit have gone past this number? Is this something that can simply be
replaced by techs? I assume you can replace *anything* on a camera, but
does the procedure cost outweigh the possibility of simply moving up in
model?

I've not had to take my D70 in for servicing yet so I'm not sure on the
pricings for various procedures.

AFAIK there isn't a specific rating for the D70.
There seems to be an expectation that shutter life is in the
range 50,000-100,000 actuations.
It will almost certainly cost more to repair a shutter than
the camera body is worth.
50,000 exposures is a lot. I'm guessing that a "keen
amateur" might typically shoot something like 5-10,000
exposures a year, many casual users much less than that.
My guess would be that shutter failures in amateur dslrs
would also be from dirt/dust/foreign object in the shutter,
or accidental abuse rather than mechanical wear and tear.
There was a D70 user in the UK posting on DPReview who "used
up" cameras very fast. For some inexplicable reason, he
took many thousands of photos of handbag-sized dogs. I
think he "averaged" just over 100,000 exposures per D70
body, and moved on to D2x bodies on the theory that the
longer shutter life and possibility to replace the shutters
made the economics viable.
You needed to see his portfolio to see that eccentric
englishmen still truly exist in the 21st century.

frederick wrote:
Pboud wrote:
G.T. wrote:
k-man wrote:
On Sep 27, 1:38 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
k-man writes:
http://bikeoften.com/photoproblem/
The shape, position, and intermittent appearance suggests a
mirror-flipping
problem.

Remember the image is upside down in the camera.

A mirror problem seems about right. I remember the camera sounding
funky during the shot. Something sounded prolonged and it was
probably the mirror taking too long to flip up. Through the black
band, you can still see part of the image, suggesting that the
obstruction was only in the way for part of the exposure.

I tried to replicate it last night but couldn't get it to do it again
-- WHICH IS A GOOD THING.


Yeah, but what happens if it starts happening again when you really,
REALLY want to get a good shot?

Greg
Which brings up a question.. Most cameras have shutters that are rated
for X number of pictures.. I assume most people who've owned cameras
for a bit have gone past this number? Is this something that can
simply be replaced by techs? I assume you can replace *anything* on a
camera, but does the procedure cost outweigh the possibility of simply
moving up in model?

I've not had to take my D70 in for servicing yet so I'm not sure on
the pricings for various procedures.

AFAIK there isn't a specific rating for the D70.
There seems to be an expectation that shutter life is in the range
50,000-100,000 actuations.
It will almost certainly cost more to repair a shutter than the camera
body is worth.
50,000 exposures is a lot. I'm guessing that a "keen amateur" might
typically shoot something like 5-10,000 exposures a year, many casual
users much less than that.
My guess would be that shutter failures in amateur dslrs would also be
from dirt/dust/foreign object in the shutter, or accidental abuse rather
than mechanical wear and tear.
There was a D70 user in the UK posting on DPReview who "used up" cameras
very fast. For some inexplicable reason, he took many thousands of
photos of handbag-sized dogs. I think he "averaged" just over 100,000
exposures per D70 body, and moved on to D2x bodies on the theory that
the longer shutter life and possibility to replace the shutters made the
economics viable.
You needed to see his portfolio to see that eccentric englishmen still
truly exist in the 21st century.
Wow.... See, I'm a dog lover (um, that just sounds wrong.. I like
dogs...) but that seems a tad excessive..

Thks for the info
P.

frederick writes:

50,000 exposures is a lot.

Not really. I was planning on using a digital still camera to scan movie
film frames, until I realized the digital camera shutter lifetime amounted
to less than an hour's worth of movie film.

Richard J Kinch wrote:

frederick writes:

50,000 exposures is a lot.

Not really. I was planning on using a digital still camera to scan movie
film frames, until I realized the digital camera shutter lifetime amounted
to less than an hour's worth of movie film.

I do (short) time lapse movies & got 33,360 shots on my D70 in less than
2 years before dropping it. The D200 is up to 48,076 in 1-1/2 years.
Still not 100K/year.

--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com

"frederick" wrote in message
news:1191015143.953406@ftpsrv1...
Pboud wrote:
G.T. wrote:
k-man wrote:
On Sep 27, 1:38 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
k-man writes:
http://bikeoften.com/photoproblem/
The shape, position, and intermittent appearance suggests a
mirror-flipping
problem.

Remember the image is upside down in the camera.

A mirror problem seems about right. I remember the camera sounding
funky during the shot. Something sounded prolonged and it was
probably the mirror taking too long to flip up. Through the black
band, you can still see part of the image, suggesting that the
obstruction was only in the way for part of the exposure.

I tried to replicate it last night but couldn't get it to do it again
-- WHICH IS A GOOD THING.


Yeah, but what happens if it starts happening again when you really,
REALLY want to get a good shot?

Greg
Which brings up a question.. Most cameras have shutters that are rated
for X number of pictures.. I assume most people who've owned cameras for
a bit have gone past this number? Is this something that can simply be
replaced by techs? I assume you can replace *anything* on a camera, but
does the procedure cost outweigh the possibility of simply moving up in
model?

I've not had to take my D70 in for servicing yet so I'm not sure on the
pricings for various procedures.

AFAIK there isn't a specific rating for the D70.
There seems to be an expectation that shutter life is in the range
50,000-100,000 actuations.
It will almost certainly cost more to repair a shutter than the camera
body is worth.


I don't know about the Nikon's, but I did a search on Canon 10d/20d shutter
replacements and they seem to be in the $150-200 range. I would think a
Nikon D70 repair is around the same price and isn't a good working one worth
more than that used?




Dennis

50,000 exposures is a lot. I'm guessing that a "keen amateur" might
typically shoot something like 5-10,000 exposures a year, many casual
users much less than that.
My guess would be that shutter failures in amateur dslrs would also be
from dirt/dust/foreign object in the shutter, or accidental abuse rather
than mechanical wear and tear.
There was a D70 user in the UK posting on DPReview who "used up" cameras
very fast. For some inexplicable reason, he took many thousands of photos
of handbag-sized dogs. I think he "averaged" just over 100,000 exposures
per D70 body, and moved on to D2x bodies on the theory that the longer
shutter life and possibility to replace the shutters made the economics
viable.
You needed to see his portfolio to see that eccentric englishmen still
truly exist in the 21st century.

Dennis' Newsgroups wrote:
"frederick" wrote in message
news:1191015143.953406@ftpsrv1...
Pboud wrote:
G.T. wrote:
k-man wrote:
On Sep 27, 1:38 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
k-man writes:
http://bikeoften.com/photoproblem/
The shape, position, and intermittent appearance suggests a
mirror-flipping
problem.

Remember the image is upside down in the camera.
A mirror problem seems about right. I remember the camera sounding
funky during the shot. Something sounded prolonged and it was
probably the mirror taking too long to flip up. Through the black
band, you can still see part of the image, suggesting that the
obstruction was only in the way for part of the exposure.

I tried to replicate it last night but couldn't get it to do it again
-- WHICH IS A GOOD THING.

Yeah, but what happens if it starts happening again when you really,
REALLY want to get a good shot?

Greg
Which brings up a question.. Most cameras have shutters that are rated
for X number of pictures.. I assume most people who've owned cameras for
a bit have gone past this number? Is this something that can simply be
replaced by techs? I assume you can replace *anything* on a camera, but
does the procedure cost outweigh the possibility of simply moving up in
model?

I've not had to take my D70 in for servicing yet so I'm not sure on the
pricings for various procedures.

AFAIK there isn't a specific rating for the D70.
There seems to be an expectation that shutter life is in the range
50,000-100,000 actuations.
It will almost certainly cost more to repair a shutter than the camera
body is worth.


I don't know about the Nikon's, but I did a search on Canon 10d/20d shutter
replacements and they seem to be in the $150-200 range. I would think a
Nikon D70 repair is around the same price and isn't a good working one worth
more than that used?


If you could get it replaced for that price, then yes it'd
be worth it I guess. I'd heard that it was about US$300.
I doubt that my well used D70 body is worth much more than
that. A Canon 20d body is worth a bit more than a D70.