I don't know if this would work the same for a Canon, but with my
Fuji S2 the hot pixels get mapped out in the RAW conversion. Hot
pixels are there if I shoot a long exposure in jpeg and are also
there before the conversion when I shoot in RAW, but gone after
conversion. Do a long exposure with the lens cap on in jpeg and RAW
and compare the two after converting the RAW.
Almost all sensors have some hot and/or dead pixels. The cost of the
sensor would be much higher if the QA was such that _no_ dead pixels
were allowed. On some cameras, you can remap the dead pixels so that
they are eliminated in the camera. When I was still using a Nikon
995, I used a program that made the camera do just that. Before,
lots of hot pixels; after, none (at least not showing.) I don't know
if you can do that with a DSLR.
If you are in a hot region of Mexico, that would exacerbate the
problem, as sensor noise is temperature sensitive.
On Nov 26, 2006, at 7:13 PM, Felipe González wrote:
> Hi everyone
> I recently updated my Pano equipment and bought my first DSLR (a Canon
> Rebel XT with a Peleng 8mm).
> Last week I was shooting a night pano on a restaurant and I noticed a
> few white and a nasty magenta pixel. My exposure was of 2 seconds.
> I guess the CMOS has "hot pixels" since all my pictures had exactly
> the same pixels in the same position. Afterwards, back in my studio, I
> made some test shots and this pixels appear starting at half second
> exposures and worsen as the exposure time increases.
> I read that "hot pixels" are inevitable, but I'd rather ask (I'm not
> even sure that this white pixels are hot pixels). Is there a method
> (other than cloning the adjacent information in PS) to avoid having
> this problem? Is it normal to have hot pixels or do I have to take my
> camera to service (it's still in warranty)?
> Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
> Thanks from the subtropical regions of Mexico
> Felipe B.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]