Jump to content

Hot Pixels in new 50s II

Recommended Posts

Hi there, I've had my new 50s II for about 2 weeks now and I'm overall loving the camera. I've noticed that there were hot pixels with the straight out of the box in both the OOC jpegs and RAW files. My initial pixel remapping did take away the hot pixels, but different hot pixels would creep back in after about 2 or so days of shooting. Now, I'm pixel remapping about every other day out of paranoia. I understand that hot pixels are a fact of life with digital sensors, and the problem is more prevalent at high ISOs and long exposures. I was a longtime user of the Sony a7 series and the Fuji X series of cameras and can't recall a time ever having to worry about these hot pixels (aside from cloning out a few here and there from the occasional long exposure). I've noticed a lot of talk about hot pixels with the GFX 100s and am wondering if anyone else is experiencing this as well with their 50S/50S II? I'm hoping to find out before my exchange window runs out. 



Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hello schoepy

I have owned the GFX 50S-II since March (with around 2000 shots) and this problem has not occurred yet, thankfully. The problem of burnt pixels is typical and unique to the sensor structure and seems to afflict many cameras of many different brands. I think the cause is the frenzied rush to resolution / sharpness, which generates increasingly "dense" sensors: it is clear that among many millions of pixels "someone" can go wrong ...

Edited by Giampaolo Masserano
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Amazing! Thank you! Very valuable insights. Did not know about astrophotographers using video to create an image. I'll stay off the field monitors until I decide to get a tracking mount and play with the mask more.
    • You cannot convert. Components used in a film camera are completely different than those used in a DSLR.
    • I mentioned that the 4K video is tricky, a lot of folks doing planetary imaging use video feed captures and use software such as AutoStakkert, etc, to convert and stack the video into the incredible single images or short videos they show us. For them, a 4K feed like what your X-T4 has is a dream come true. They can focus with the settings they are working in, using telescope or camera lens. But they are not trying to combine it with a landscape background as you are in those aurora shots. They are also usually using a tracking mount. The masks I mentioned can help for longer lenses if you are quick enough to get the shot, crank up the ISO and use sort shutter speeds, and quickly take the shot as fast as you can after moving the focus ring. You can relax after that while hitting the play back button to zoom into the shot to see how close you are. Speed is needed because once you get past 50mm or so, the star’s motion over the X-T4’s small pixel sites will make it seem like what should be a round star is instead sort of egg shaped which is a problem if you hesitated getting the shot. For wider lenses, the old technique of finding the lens’ true long distance infinity focus point during the daytime, focus on something miles and miles (kilometers and kilometers) away off in the distance and mark the lens so that you can come back to that setting later at night can work well. In optics, three feet can be considered infinity when it comes to focusing, so trying for very long distances away instead of just a few hundred feet or meters works out better.
    • Welcome to our forum. Short answer: no. While a very few companies offered a kind of digital part to put on the analog camera instead of loading a film, Fuji never did. Since there are a lot of challenges like shutter synchronization and handling the old glasses the results will most likely not satisfy the demands of today’s photographers. The developing costs also would be too high compared to actual digital cameras.
    • Hi there. I have an old Fuji camera and I love my Cam very much. So I dont want it to become useless. I want to convert it into a dslr cam. Is there any possible solution for that? 😪
  • Create New...