I recently purchased a Canon 1D Mark II. I had it serviced, picking it up last Monday. Nothing was wrong with the camera. A coworker asked to take photos in the office. Free Program Samsung Printer Toner Reset Firmware Fix Patch there. He stepped away, returning a few minutes later, asking me if the camera's taking a black frame, every other frame was normal. At the time, I didn't think much of it. I thought it was user error.

Download drivers, software, firmware and manuals for your Canon product and get access to online technical support resources and troubleshooting. EOS-1D Mark II N - Support - Download drivers, software and manuals - Canon UK.

However about a hour later, I tried to take some photos and encountered the same problem. Every other photo is black.

The photos which do show up, are clear, well balanced and properly exposed. So far I reset all custom settings on the camera, and make sure noise reduction was disabled. So far no luck. Does anyone know what's going on? Thanks so much. If you are copying the images off the camera and onto a computer then my guess is that you are telling the camera to save in RAW+JPEG.

When you do this, each 'single' shot you take produces two files. One is saved in RAW and the other is saved as a JPEG. 'RAW' is not technically a standard per se. It's a conecpt which means that the camera should not do anything to the image data which would result in the loss of original information. As such, a RAW image processor for one camera model would not work on a different camera model. Consequently, comptuers cannot natively just view RAW files. They typically need something installed that knows how to deal with the RAW specifically for the camera model that made the RAW file.

That would result in every other photo being viewable (you'd see all the JPEGs but would not be able to view the RAW files. Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising Cd Crack there. ) If I'm planning to give someone else copies of my images then I make sure I provide them with JPEG images (everyone can view those). I normally wouldn't provide someone with a RAW unless i knew they happened to have the correct software on their computer (most of my photographer friends would.

Most of my non-photographer friends not only would not -- they'd have no idea what they need to do to view those files.). Thanks for getting back to me. Here's a link to the JPEGS. I noticed that it was taking 2 to 3 blanks per image. I saved 1 image and 4 blacks. I wasn't able to locate anything out of the ordinary. Perhaps I loverlooked something?

The below links are files created from Lightroom on my MacPro. You are going to Box.net to download the files. I really appreciate your help everyone!

Here's the link to a Zip file of all the files. Here are links to each individual file (4 blacks, 1 regular exposure) BLACKS: EXPOSED: BLACKS: LIGHTROOM SCREEN SHOT.

This question already has an answer here: • 13 answers I have a friend that's starting to study photography at university and needs a camera. Because she doesn't have a lot of money to buy a new camera and all the equipment, I offered to let her use my Canon 1D Mark III at the beginning until she has the money to buy something better. Besides the camera I still have some additional equipment. • Canon 17-40mm f/4.0 • Canon 85mm f/1.8 • Canon 50mm f/1.2 • Sigma 100-300 f/4.0 • Canon 580 EX II Speedlite The question is: How outdated is the Mark III compared to other Canon or Nikon cameras in the low/mid price range? What newer canon model can be compared to the Mark III? The high-end cameras will obviously beat the 1D Mark III.

Would you even replace the Mark III having all this equipment? If yes, what would be a low/mid range alternative? I know I could do some research, but my technical knowledge is completely outdated and I don't know the difference between all the technologies released in the past 10 Years. So I can't compare anything without spending tons of hours in research.

How outdated is the [1D] Mark III compared to other Canon or Nikon cameras in the low/mid price range? But in other ways, not at all. The biggest advances since 2007 have been in high ISO performance and resolution on the sensor. Comparing a 10MP 2007 APS-H sensor to a current 20MP ASP-C or full frame sensor is going to be a bit like comparing apples to oranges. But generally, if you've wanted to print larger, shoot above iso 1600 with acceptable levels of noise, or were looking at newer features like video, wi-fi, or off-camera flash with the new RT system, then maybe a new body would be worth it. What newer canon model can be compared to the Mark III? The high-end cameras will obviously beat the 1D Mark III.

1DX or the 7DMkII are liable to be the closest current 'successors' to the 1DMkIII. But the 7DMkII, obviously, will lack the build quality, the integrated vertical grip, weathersealing, and some of the physical UI stuff that makes the 1 series the pro line. The 1DX is full-frame--Canon doesn't do the APS-H 1.3x crop thing any more. And the 7DMkII basically has a 1D AF system in it these days. So if fast-action is why you got a 1D, then maybe you could step down to a 7DMkII.