Can we know how many photo have been taken with Rebel XT ?
ThomasT.
I have a simple question, please tell me if you know .
Can we know how many photo have been taken with D Rebel XT ? Is this number
saved somewhere in the camera ? I want to buy a second hand D Rebel XT from
someone, the seller claims that he has taken only about 500 photo max . Is
there a way to verify that ?
Thanks very much
Regards
ThomasT.
Pat
have more difficulty resetting the CDIM number. Format a CF card.
Shoot a picture. Check the CF card and see what number is assigned
within the CDIM directory. If you take 10 pictures at a time, you
would get a directory called something like "050CANON". A number in
that range would be okay. If the number is above 500 or below 005,
then you are pretty certain the person is lying.
OTOH, if they set it back to factory settings, then you can't tell.
Pat.
Bill wrote:
> ThomasT. wrote:
>
> >Can we know how many photo have been taken with D Rebel XT ? Is this number
> >saved somewhere in the camera ?
>
> The camera remembers the last filename assigned on a memory card, so if
> he hasn't shot over 9999 images and created new folders on the memory
> card, then the last filename should reflect the count.
>
> It's not foolproof though...
>
> > I want to buy a second hand D Rebel XT from
> >someone, the seller claims that he has taken only about 500 photo max . Is
> >there a way to verify that ?
>
> The seller could easily change the settings so the camera resets the
> count to start from zero again, and then change it back to sequential
> counting so it shows several hundred.
Bill Hilton
> Hello everybody,
>
> I have a simple question, please tell me if you know .
>
> Can we know how many photo have been taken with D Rebel XT ? Is this number
> saved somewhere in the camera ?
On the 10D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II (and I assume the XT) there's an EXIF
field with the number of shutter actuations called "Image Serial
Number", which you can read with the Capture One raw converter. You
can only read it off RAW files, not jpegs though ... I'm sure there are
other programs that let you read this field as well but I'm not familar
with them (even the Canon software doesn't let you see this value, for
some reason).
>I want to buy a second hand D Rebel XT from
> someone, the seller claims that he has taken only about 500 photo max . Is
> there a way to verify that ?
Get a RAW file from him, download the free trial of Capture One and
hold the mouse over the thumbnail and read the field described above.
Bill
cjcampbell
ThomasT. wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I have a simple question, please tell me if you know .
>
> Can we know how many photo have been taken with D Rebel XT ? Is this number
> saved somewhere in the camera ? I want to buy a second hand D Rebel XT from
> someone, the seller claims that he has taken only about 500 photo max . Is
> there a way to verify that ?
If you were buying a film camera, is there a way of verifying how many
rolls of film it has shot? Even if the seller says he only shot 30
rolls of film with it?
The point is, even if you could verify it, who really cares? It is more
important to know that the camera works. Most manufacturers rate their
shutters for more than 100,000 actuations, but they probably last a lot
longer than that. Figure the seller is lying to you, and he shot 10,000
pictures with it. Does it make the camera worth any less? Would he
discount the price further?
I have Nikon D70 I might sell. It has about 14,000 exposures on it. I
doubt if it is worth any less than a D70 with only 140 exposures on it.
Get the Rebel XT. It is a good camera. And start paying attention to
what is important in photography instead of worrying about whether some
other guy might have had fun with it before you got it. You are not
marrying the camera.
Phil Wheeler
> ThomasT. wrote:
>
>>Hello everybody,
>>
>>I have a simple question, please tell me if you know .
>>
>>Can we know how many photo have been taken with D Rebel XT ? Is this number
>>saved somewhere in the camera ? I want to buy a second hand D Rebel XT from
>>someone, the seller claims that he has taken only about 500 photo max . Is
>>there a way to verify that ?
>
>
> If you were buying a film camera, is there a way of verifying how many
> rolls of film it has shot? Even if the seller says he only shot 30
> rolls of film with it?
>
> The point is, even if you could verify it, who really cares?
Well, it appears the fellow who is perhaps buying a used camera
and asked the question cares.
I would care, too.
Phil
DoN. Nichols
> Bill Hilton wrote:
>
> >> Can we know how many photo have been taken with D Rebel XT ? Is this number
> >> saved somewhere in the camera ?
> >
> >On the 10D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II (and I assume the XT) there's an EXIF
> >field with the number of shutter actuations called "Image Serial
> >Number", which you can read with the Capture One raw converter. You
> >can only read it off RAW files, not jpegs though ... I'm sure there are
>
> would be the same for all files if it's an EXIF spec.
>
> I don't have Capture one, but I'd like to see that myself with a hex
> editor.
If you're willing to install the (free) language "perl", you can
run exiftool to show it *all*. Perl came from the unix world, but it
has been ported to Windows.
Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: <dnic...@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Miles Ahead
"cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151375441.9...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
I have a different view on this. I had to replace the shutter in my Digital
Rebel (not the XT) after some 18 months of shooting. I'm not sure how many
images I had taken, but it was certainly way less than 100,000. Probably
less than 10,000. A Canon selling point of the recent 5D is that the shutter
is rated for 100,000. That is not true of the Rebel. Even the top of line
Canons only guarantee 150,000 cycles
(http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1d/page3.asp). So the shutter
mechanism, which is the weakest link, does indeed wear out with use.
Pat
Bill wrote:
> cjcampbell wrote:
>
> >> Can we know how many photo have been taken with D Rebel XT ? Is this number
> >> saved somewhere in the camera ? I want to buy a second hand D Rebel XT from
> >> someone, the seller claims that he has taken only about 500 photo max . Is
> >> there a way to verify that ?
>
>
> But it requires that you firmly plant your tongue in your cheek.
>
> >If you were buying a film camera, is there a way of verifying how many
> >rolls of film it has shot? Even if the seller says he only shot 30
> >rolls of film with it?
>
>
> Using electron microscopy it's quite easy to determine the number of
> negative films that have traversed the plane backing by measuring the
> amount of emulsion that has been deposited upon the backing.
>
> Reports indicate that it's possible to be accurate to within 1.0789
> rolls of film over a half-life of 1.6213578927654654657 million years.
Don't you just hate it when you've eroded away the film guide and the
film starts sticking out the back of the camera. Took me only
2.35^854937 rolls of film to do it. Talk about piss poor quality.
>
> >The point is, even if you could verify it, who really cares?
>
> I do.
>
> And so does my girlfriend.
>
> And the person buying the camera.
>
> My mom called asking about it too...
No, I talked to your Mom. She said she didn't give a shit. But she
wonders why you never call or visit. Did that rash clear up? Also,
she said your kids didn't sent Thank You notes for those last presents.
>
> > It is more
> >important to know that the camera works. Most manufacturers rate their
> >shutters for more than 100,000 actuations,
>
> Ah...but the XT/350D does not have an official rating that I'm aware of.
>
> However, it's widely known that an accurate assessment of 23,456 frames
> is not unrealistic.
Seriously, I blew a shutter at about 2,000 frames. It was replaced and
it blew again at about 500 frames. Since then I've put about 5,000
frames on it because I moved it to being the backup camera. The other
camera has gone 19,000 frames with no problems. Interestingly, both
times I blew the shutter I was shooting above 1/1000th of a second,
FWIW.
>
> > but they probably last a lot
> >longer than that.
>
> Maybe, but only if the camera is properly lubricated.
>
> Contrary to what some may claim, the AA filter over the sensor should be
> regularly cleansed and lubricated with 10w30 oil. It has further been
> stated, that only oil processed within the Lagrange point of the lunar
> orbit is to be used. All other oils would void the warranty.
No, no, no. The proper technique is to hold the shutter open with duct
tape and spray it with WD-40. Then rinse in warm, sudsy water and
shake dry.
>
> > Figure the seller is lying to you, and he shot 10,000
> >pictures with it. Does it make the camera worth any less? Would he
> >discount the price further?
>
> That's the key point - price should reflect usage and value.
>
> See above...and below.
Glad you said see above. I got out of the way before the rock hit me.
>
> >I have Nikon D70 I might sell. It has about 14,000 exposures on it. I
> >doubt if it is worth any less than a D70 with only 140 exposures on it.
Correct. Who'd want a Nikon? Scap metal either way.
>
> Wrong...according to the blue book value, a D70 with 140 frames used is
> worth 0.789 % more than one with 14,0000 frames.
>
> You do the math.
If I could do math, would I be a photographer???????
>
> >Get the Rebel XT.
>
> Oh Jesus...another Nikon user promoting Canon.
What about a Cannon with only 500 shots on it. Now THAT would be FUN.
>
> That'll be the end of us...
>
> > It is a good camera. And start paying attention to
> >what is important in photography instead of worrying about whether some
> >other guy might have had fun with it before you got it. You are not
> >marrying the camera.
>
> In some areas of the galaxy, purchase of a camera is grounds for
> divorce...that's almost the inverse to marrying a camera...sort of...
but there are some advantages to a camera ....
>
> Having said all that...just buy it for what you think it's worth.
>
> :-)
Agreed. If you don't know the person and/or have any reason to believe
he/she/it might be lying, assume he/she/it is and buy it at that price.
How credable is the reason he is selling it. If he's saying something
like "It doesn't have a lot of frames through it because it a demo at
the photo store I stole it from", then it probably doesn't have too
many frames through it.
Good luck.
Pat. :-)
ThomasT.
if
you know the answer, reply my question if you like or just ignore it. You
don't need to justify ppl 's concerns
"cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151375441.9...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
Pat
Yes, certainly everything wears out: cameras, shutters, you, me, etc.
I just hope to die peacefully in my sleep, like my dear old Grandfather
-- not screaming for my life like the passengers in his car.
If a camera -- any camera -- has 150,000 cycles though it, there will
be other noticable signs of wear. So part of what the OP should do is
carefully examine the camera. Maybe it has 500 cycles throught it or
maybe it has 2000, but that shouldn't matter much. But if it has
100,000; then it matters. So the OP should look for wear and remember
that a well cared for camera with 1500 cycles though it is better than
an abused one with 150 cycles through it.
Bill Hilton
>
> The point is, even if you could verify it, who really cares? ...
> Most manufacturers rate their shutters for more than 100,000
> actuations
I think for the consumer models the number is closer to 50,000
actuations, and 150,000 - 250,000 for the more robust pro models like
the Canon 1D series.
As for "who really cares" I certainly would, especially since it's
simple to check out. Think of it like a car, would the same model be
worth more with 10,000 miles on it vs 100,000 miles on it? Same with
cameras ...
> Figure the seller is lying to you, and he shot 10,000
> pictures with it. Does it make the camera worth any less?
What if he shot 40,000 frames ... would you feel the same? You can
check the count easily enough so there's no reason not to ...
Bill
Dave Cohen
> DoN. Nichols wrote:
>
>>> Does anyone have the offset for this in the EXIF data? I presume it
>>> would be the same for all files if it's an EXIF spec.
>>>
>>> I don't have Capture one, but I'd like to see that myself with a hex
>>> editor.
>> If you're willing to install the (free) language "perl", you can
>> run exiftool to show it *all*. Perl came from the unix world, but it
>> has been ported to Windows.
>
>
> However, this machine does not have it, nor will it due to certain
> constraints.
>
> I'm gathering from your comments that this may NOT be a standard of EXIF
> v2.x??
Exifer, a free download shows image number on .jpeg file from A95. Not
sure if this is same number you are talking about. Irfanview does not
show this field.
Dave Cohen
DoN. Nichols
> DoN. Nichols wrote:
>
> >> Does anyone have the offset for this in the EXIF data? I presume it
> >> would be the same for all files if it's an EXIF spec.
> >>
> >> I don't have Capture one, but I'd like to see that myself with a hex
> >> editor.
> >
> > If you're willing to install the (free) language "perl", you can
> >run exiftool to show it *all*. Perl came from the unix world, but it
> >has been ported to Windows.
>
O.K.
> However, this machine does not have it, nor will it due to certain
> constraints.
I'm familiar with those. The machines at work (before I
retired) had all kinds of restrictions on what could be loaded on them,
and they have gotten worse since.
> I'm gathering from your comments that this may NOT be a standard of EXIF
> v2.x??
I just don't know. But if you are familiar enough with perl,
you might be able to figure it out from the code found in exiftool. I
don't see the "Shutter Count:" string in exiftool anywhere, nor do I
find it by running strings on an image from which I can get the shutter
count, so it may be in a perl library which the program uses.
Good Luck,
Steve Wolfe
> Exifer, a free download shows image number on .jpeg file from A95. Not
> sure if this is same number you are talking about. Irfanview does not show
> this field.
> Dave Cohen
If I'm not mistaken, it's not part of the official EXIF standard, but
Canon puts plenty of stuff into their RAW files that isn't part of the
standard - and exiftool, despite the name, is happy to read all of it,
whether it's standard or not.
steve
Pat
Bill wrote:
> Pat wrote:
>
> >> My mom called asking about it too...
> >
> >No, I talked to your Mom. She said she didn't give a shit. But she
> >wonders why you never call or visit. Did that rash clear up? Also,
> >she said your kids didn't sent Thank You notes for those last presents.
>
> knows that rash is gone.
>
> >Seriously, I blew a shutter at about 2,000 frames. It was replaced and
> >it blew again at about 500 frames. Since then I've put about 5,000
> >frames on it because I moved it to being the backup camera. The other
> >camera has gone 19,000 frames with no problems. Interestingly, both
> >times I blew the shutter I was shooting above 1/1000th of a second,
> >FWIW.
>
> their consumer models. The mechanical shutter in the D70s only works up
> to 1/250, while speeds above that are electronically controlled through
> the sensor. The D50 is 1/90 and then electronic.
>
> That would help increase shutter life.
>
> From what I can gather, the D200 is fully mechanical.
>
> I haven't read anything about the Canon shutters in this regard, so I
> presume they are fully mechanical.
>
> >> Contrary to what some may claim, the AA filter over the sensor should be
> >> regularly cleansed and lubricated with 10w30 oil. It has further been
> >> stated, that only oil processed within the Lagrange point of the lunar
> >> orbit is to be used. All other oils would void the warranty.
> >
> >No, no, no. The proper technique is to hold the shutter open with duct
> >tape and spray it with WD-40. Then rinse in warm, sudsy water and
> >shake dry.
>
You weren't being serious !!! :-o
Then I probably shouldn't have used the WD-40? At least the camera
dried out after putting in the oven overnight at 200F. Only a little
of the plastic melted.
(Actually, there's a film technique that includes taking pictures then
wrapping the film in aluminum foil and baking overnight at 200F, but
you really don't want to know why people do that, trust me on that one.
I've never done it, but I've read about it, know why they would do it,
and understand why it would work, but it's in a VERY different area of
photography.)
>
> :-)
>
> >> >I have Nikon D70 I might sell. It has about 14,000 exposures on it. I
> >> >doubt if it is worth any less than a D70 with only 140 exposures on it.
> >
> >Correct. Who'd want a Nikon? Scap metal either way.
>
> I'm shocked!
>
> Actually, I like Nikon gear as much as Canon. A good friend has a D70s
> and a new D200, along with some really sweet f/2.8 glass. I've been
> borrowing his D70s from time to time when I wanted better glass, and it
> certainly handles very nicely.
>
> Another friend has the Canon 20D and comparing them, I prefer the way
> the Nikon controls fall under my fingers.
>
> Even though I like having the small and light Rebel XT to carry around,
> I've always thought the shutter release and several controls are in the
> wrong places on both Canons.
>
> But that's just me...
>
> >Agreed. If you don't know the person and/or have any reason to believe
> >he/she/it might be lying, assume he/she/it is and buy it at that price.
> > How credable is the reason he is selling it. If he's saying something
> >like "It doesn't have a lot of frames through it because it a demo at
> >the photo store I stole it from", then it probably doesn't have too
> >many frames through it.
> >
> >Good luck.
>
> With the cops or the camera...?
>
> :-)