Railfan_Bill Loc: "Lost Wages", Nevada

Bearcat, I have been shooting trains with this camera for over two years without any so called artifacts showing up. This is really a strange phenomenon. I would be aware of anything unusual. Like over a thousand trains, planes, race cars, and many other moving objects. Additionally, the plane was pretty far away and not moving very fast considering it only lifted off about 2 to 3 minutes before the picture was taken

bearcat

As Wall Street would say, "Past Performance is No guarantee of Future Results".

The plane had a plain (blank) background, making the ghost images visible, whereas trains are rarely photographed against a blank canvas, therefore too much image data that would hide any ghosting...

If it repeats, you have a new problem... a shop diagnosis and possible repair might be in order.

But, if it repeats, does it happen with ALL lenses or only one? That could point you in the right direction.

If not, it was just a fluke... one of those unexplained issues.

In the computer world, it would be called an "undocumented feature"...

After all, modern cameras are nothing more than computers with a light sensor, and other peripherals, attached.

As asked before, have you updated to the latest firmware?

A Google search of this issue brings up this possibility.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-6d/canon-6dA5.HTM

Look down the article just below halfway and see the topic of HDR mode...

Did you shoot in HDR mode? If so, ghosting of moving objects would be normal as the multiple exposures take a bit, though minimum amount of time.

Also, do you remove your SD card to download the photos, or do you use a cable?

If a cable, you might want to remove and insert the SD Card just to make sure the contacts are good and clean.

Just a thought.

It IS a puzzlement.

BC

Railfan_Bill Loc: "Lost Wages", Nevada

Bearcat, I will try to duplicate this artifact by shooting a plane out of the sky against a solid foreground. I will try to see if this happens again. If it does not, just a fluke, but if it occurs again, I will change lenses to see if it follows the lens or the body. I will get back to you tomorrow. Bill BTW, this was not shot with HDR. Single exposure. Look at st3v3's post. Firm ware by definition cannot be changed without changing the internal data of the camera. That is how I understand firmware to be. It is the hardware working with the software to get everything working properly. BTW, I will contact Canon about this, also.

Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)

Yes, it was Photoshopped. Forget the plane for a moment, just look at the surrounding sky. It comes down to that age old question .... "Are you going to believe me, or your own lying eyes?" Someone put this through a post editing program.

2bob Loc: Sydney, Australia

Not questioning Railfan Bill, but I agree too. It has clearly been dodged and the lighting on the building vs the lighting on the plane don't appear to match, suggesting that they could be two separate images. Just commenting on what I see. I don't see a lens or filter issue!

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

Well spotted, I had to go back to see the 3rd image. I note that the sky surrounding the plane is different to the rest of the sky, the same outline being visible several times. My guess would be pp, but if railfan says it's s.o.o.c. then I haven't a clue.

Skellum0

If you look at the sky around the edges of the building there is a similar effect to that around the plane, it looks like clumsy pp. is it possible you have something set in camera, eg over sharpening making artefacts appear around defined edges?

queencitysanta Loc: Charlotte, North Carolina

Could slow shutter speed amd plane movement be the problem

queencitysanta Loc: Charlotte, North Carolina

Could slow shutter speed amd plane movement be the problem

Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)

Perhaps ... If the plane were flying backwards :-)
The image is preceding the plane and any camera movement would have affected the building.

Chuckwal Loc: Boynton Beach Florida

I just purcased a 6d with the same lens have taken
Sunsets with backroad. So far no double images
Could be reflection off water vapor in the air. Maybe
an anomaly please let us know what canon says
Cool picture anyway
Chuck

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Here you go -

"Ghost Riders in the Sky" :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mynzbmrtp9I

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

big-guy Loc: Peterborough Ontario Canada

I'm really surprised at all of the answers, nay, guesses here. St3v3m had the pertinent fact but failed to expand on it. The shutter speed of 1/166 is the culprit. Taken from the meta data; 1/166 sec, f/6.3, ISO 100. While 1/166 is fine for a standing building it is definitely not sufficient for a jet plane flying horizontally to the plane of the sensor. To freeze a flying jet, at that altitude, you would need a shutter speed of at least 1/500. Now if the jet is at cruising altitude then you could get away with 1/125 but then it would just be a dot in the photo. Now if your standing beside the runway then you would require a shutter speed of 1/2000 to get a clear capture. (speaking of standing beside the runway and capture... but I digress)

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

My first thought as well.
Especially if it is a less expensive filter that does not have good coating on it.