Replacement Digital Rebel Still Giving Me Fluctuating Setting Problems

On 30 Nov 2006 02:39:57 -0800, wrote:

I'm trying to decide whether the appearance of the BUSY signal and
fluctuating exposure problems with the replacement 400D I got from
Amazon means that the entire batch of cameras they had on sale was
faulty. I plan to call Canon again and find out if this fluctuation,
in ambient interior light settings, is something I have to learn to
live with.

In any case, some kind folks posted when I made my first post about The
Roof Falling In and said they had encountered the same problem with
their DRs. Do you find that this fluctuation is so severe that it
keeps you from being confident you can predictably use the camera
indoors at all?

Thanks.

IIRC, NOBODY got the fact that your last camera was malfunctioning as
you finally described; peobably because you never described it that
way.
I know I asked for verification twice, and didn't get it.
So, let's start from scratch: describe exactly what problem you're
having.
Not generally, but exactly; ar eyou using a tripod? Indoors (if so,
what lighting conditions), outdoors, underwater, what? What is the
subject? What is the camera set to? What lens/filters are you using?
Have you read/do you understand the manual?
The BUSY signal can be very normal if the auto-focus can't find
anything to focus on.
In general, you need to help us help you.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

The BUSY signal can be very normal if the auto-focus can't find
anything to focus on.

That would be my guess. Low light means low contrast and the focus sensor
has trouble with that.

Bill Funk wrote:
On 30 Nov 2006 02:39:57 -0800, wrote:

I'm trying to decide whether the appearance of the BUSY signal and
fluctuating exposure problems with the replacement 400D I got from
Amazon means that the entire batch of cameras they had on sale was
faulty. I plan to call Canon again and find out if this fluctuation,
in ambient interior light settings, is something I have to learn to
live with.

In any case, some kind folks posted when I made my first post about The
Roof Falling In and said they had encountered the same problem with
their DRs. Do you find that this fluctuation is so severe that it
keeps you from being confident you can predictably use the camera
indoors at all?

Thanks.

IIRC, NOBODY got the fact that your last camera was malfunctioning as
you finally described; peobably because you never described it that
way.
I know I asked for verification twice, and didn't get it.
So, let's start from scratch: describe exactly what problem you're
having.
Not generally, but exactly; ar eyou using a tripod? Indoors (if so,
what lighting conditions), outdoors, underwater, what? What is the
subject? What is the camera set to? What lens/filters are you using?
Have you read/do you understand the manual?
The BUSY signal can be very normal if the auto-focus can't find
anything to focus on.
In general, you need to help us help you.

Go easy Bill, you're setting a dangerous precedent. You really want
posters to describe their problem with all the relevant detail. That
takes all the fun out of guessing.
Dave Cohen

wrote:
On Nov 30, 9:35 am, Rod Williams wrote:


I guarantee you they will not be able to duplicate your problem and you
will get the camera back two weeks later with the same problem, assuming
there is in fact a problem.


I'm not sure if your post was meant to reassure or not, but in fact,
I'm sincerely concerned. $900. is (for me) an awful lot of money; and
to be unsure whether this instrument was "marked down" because of these
fluctuations is extremely unsettling. Thank you for taking the time to
reply, in any event.


I don't mean to scare you but if you are having a problem and they can't
re-create easily you may be into sending it back several times. I would
make sure you don't have something set wrong or maybe you can find
someone that has the same camera and see if he can see what you are
talking about.
When you say fluctuating exposure what do you mean? Do you get a
different exposure taking a second picture of the same thing, one right
after the other?

On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:15:05 GMT, Dave Cohen wrote:

Have you read/do you understand the manual?
The BUSY signal can be very normal if the auto-focus can't find
anything to focus on.
In general, you need to help us help you.

Go easy Bill, you're setting a dangerous precedent. You really want
posters to describe their problem with all the relevant detail. That
takes all the fun out of guessing.

When the posters catch on and learn to slip in red herrings . . .

THE FUN WILL RETURN!


More seriously, Bill asked good questions. Whether the answers
help provide a solution or not, they can greatly reduce the time
needed to find an answer or realize that none are to be had. That
can amount to a savings of several days or more . . .

On Nov 30, 11:53 pm, ASAAR wrote:

More seriously, Bill asked good questions. Whether the answers
help provide a solution or not, they can greatly reduce the time
needed to find an answer or realize that none are to be had. That
can amount to a savings of several days or more . . .

Thank you, and Mr. Schuler, Mr. Funk, et al. Although I *thought* I
iterated the problem sufficiently, I'll try something different.

{Clearing throat}

Is it possible that the sensitivity of a DSLR *without* image
stabilization can cause the camera to be so exquisitely sensitive that
it might not be of much use? This is a very serious question, one I
had with a cheaper Canon P&S and that (in that case) was somewhat
resolved by the use of a tripod.

The only problem--and it's considerable--is that if even if the camera
operator is a digitalrube such as yours truly, if certain Auto settings
are CHOSEN, shouldn't the camera oblige his/her stupidity and fire
anyway? I was used to getting "BUSY" signals on the P&S when the
shutter setting was too fast. However, the camera was apparently
smarter than the Digital Rebel and ultimately processed a photo
anyway...even if it turned out a big black or white smudge.

This willingness to "obey" is important if for no other reason than
that the "BUSY" signal takes so long to go away (on the DR) that I
would far rather have crap on my CF card than sit and watch the paint
dry waiting for the camera to decide to be unbusy.

On 1 Dec 2006 04:36:45 -0800, wrote:

On Nov 30, 11:53 pm, ASAAR wrote:

More seriously, Bill asked good questions. Whether the answers
help provide a solution or not, they can greatly reduce the time
needed to find an answer or realize that none are to be had. That
can amount to a savings of several days or more . . .

Thank you, and Mr. Schuler, Mr. Funk, et al. Although I *thought* I
iterated the problem sufficiently, I'll try something different.

{Clearing throat}

Is it possible that the sensitivity of a DSLR *without* image
stabilization can cause the camera to be so exquisitely sensitive that
it might not be of much use? This is a very serious question, one I
had with a cheaper Canon P&S and that (in that case) was somewhat
resolved by the use of a tripod.

What does "exquisitely sensitive" mean? I haven't managed to hurt the
feelings of any of my cameras yet (though I've certainly offered
enough insults to them). :-)
Seriously, I don't know what you mean here.

The only problem--and it's considerable--is that if even if the camera
operator is a digitalrube such as yours truly, if certain Auto settings
are CHOSEN, shouldn't the camera oblige his/her stupidity and fire
anyway? I was used to getting "BUSY" signals on the P&S when the
shutter setting was too fast. However, the camera was apparently
smarter than the Digital Rebel and ultimately processed a photo
anyway...even if it turned out a big black or white smudge.

No, the camera will let you know the photo you're trying to take is
outside it's capabilities within hte conditions you've set.
If you want the camera to take the photo anyway, you're best off in
the Manual mode; here, you set everything, and the camera will shoot
anyway. You can shoot with the lens cap on in the M mode. If you turn
the AF off, it will also ignore any focus problems.

This willingness to "obey" is important if for no other reason than
that the "BUSY" signal takes so long to go away (on the DR) that I
would far rather have crap on my CF card than sit and watch the paint
dry waiting for the camera to decide to be unbusy.

Again, the busy signal is probably the camera telling youit can't
focus.

In any case, you have not described the problems other than the busy
signal, and an undefined "exquisitely sensitive".
Try going to manual focus, and I bet the busy problem will disappear.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

Hi,
wrote:

This willingness to "obey" is important if for no other reason than
that the "BUSY" signal takes so long to go away (on the DR) that I
would far rather have crap on my CF card than sit and watch the paint
dry waiting for the camera to decide to be unbusy.

I downloaded the 400 manual and went through it. The busy signal,
according to the manual should only show up if 1. the flash is
reycling or 2. if the camera buffer is full and it's writing to the
CF. The first one should show up with the lightning icon as described
on page 54. The other one, described on page 59, indicates that the
buffer is full. This should never take more than a very small fraction
of a second to clear. After going through this, my suggestion would be
to get a different CF card and try it out. To me it sounds like the
camera is having problem writing to it.

Now, if you are shooting in the dark (literallyg) the autofocus will
not work properly and in the automatic modes the camera will not fire.
The AF warning blinky thingy (very technical term!) in the viewfinder
will blink to indicate that the camera can't focus. Use the manual
mode or turn the autofocus off and focus manually.

If switching CF cards does not help, I would seek professional help -
for the camera that is

Best regards,

wrote:
On Nov 30, 11:53 pm, ASAAR wrote:

More seriously, Bill asked good questions. Whether the answers
help provide a solution or not, they can greatly reduce the time
needed to find an answer or realize that none are to be had. That
can amount to a savings of several days or more . . .

Thank you, and Mr. Schuler, Mr. Funk, et al. Although I *thought* I
iterated the problem sufficiently, I'll try something different.

{Clearing throat}

Is it possible that the sensitivity of a DSLR *without* image
stabilization can cause the camera to be so exquisitely sensitive that
it might not be of much use? This is a very serious question, one I
had with a cheaper Canon P&S and that (in that case) was somewhat
resolved by the use of a tripod.

The only problem--and it's considerable--is that if even if the camera
operator is a digitalrube such as yours truly, if certain Auto settings
are CHOSEN, shouldn't the camera oblige his/her stupidity and fire
anyway? I was used to getting "BUSY" signals on the P&S when the
shutter setting was too fast. However, the camera was apparently
smarter than the Digital Rebel and ultimately processed a photo
anyway...even if it turned out a big black or white smudge.

This willingness to "obey" is important if for no other reason than
that the "BUSY" signal takes so long to go away (on the DR) that I
would far rather have crap on my CF card than sit and watch the paint
dry waiting for the camera to decide to be unbusy.

I think that you have multiple problems going on but that you haven't
been able to distinguish them and you haven't provide enough info for
other to.

If you use your camera in low light and take a pic and hold down the
shutter, it will go bang, bang, bang and keep taking pics until the
buffer is full. If you are using cheap (ie. slow) cards, you will then
get quite a lag as the images are writing to the card and it will say
"busy". So you are forced to sit there and admire the wallpaper. When
you do this, your first image should be exposed about right and the
rest will be dark because you are shooting before your flash recovers.
It might go okay, dark, dark, okay, dark or something like that
because you might get another flash shot at some point.

The second time your camera won't fire if is very low light where there
is not enough contrast to confirm a focus. The only way around that is
to use a good flash (such as a 550 or 580) where the flash will put out
an infrared pattern to focus the camera (yes, the flash focuses the
camera, not the way you'd think).

Finally, different modes tend to meter differently. So if you have the
back-lit face of a person with a light bulb behind them, you'll get
vastly different spot readings of the face, the bulb, and the
background.