Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware

"Wolfgang Weisselberg" <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:nd57h6-c9f.ln1@ID-52418.user.berlin.de...

> [1] Bluetooth is widely available in mobile phones, smart phones,
> PDAs, netbooks, laptops, etc. Computers can easily be
> upgraded to bluetooth. Interfaces for bluetooth should
> be all standardized, as I understand it, and usable for
> transmitting data. It's also not hampered by the wish for
> even tinier memory packages for mobile phones and mutually
> incompatible flash memory interface designs.

By a remarkable coincidence Brad Templeton has an interesting blog topic on
cameras, connectivity, and additional functionality that covers a lot of
what's being discussed in this topic:

http://ideas.4brad.com/features-high...igital-cameras

--
Charles E Hardwidge

Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
>
> It's going off topic but I plan on keeping my A590 IS forever even when
> I do jump for a mid-range or dSLR sometime.
>

If you want another one, mine is for sale cheap - the quality is far
poorer than I hoped.

BugBear

Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
> "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
> news:nd57h6-c9f.ln1@ID-52418.user.berlin.de...
>
>> [1] Bluetooth is widely available in mobile phones, smart phones,
>> PDAs, netbooks, laptops, etc. Computers can easily be
>> upgraded to bluetooth. Interfaces for bluetooth should
>> be all standardized, as I understand it, and usable for
>> transmitting data. It's also not hampered by the wish for
>> even tinier memory packages for mobile phones and mutually
>> incompatible flash memory interface designs.
>
> By a remarkable coincidence Brad Templeton has an interesting blog topic on
> cameras, connectivity, and additional functionality that covers a lot of
> what's being discussed in this topic:
>
> http://ideas.4brad.com/features-high...igital-cameras
>

Excerpt:

>> Show me the blurries

>> A feature I have been requesting for some time. After I take a photo, let
>> one of the review modes offered provide a zoom in of something that is supposed to be in focus.

I don't know about "high-end cameras" but my (ironically, soft photo making)
A590IS has exactly this feature!

BugBear

"bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote in message
news:CN2dnXzdJP_NqN7XnZ2dnUVZ8upi4p2d@brightview.c o.uk...
> Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
>>
>> It's going off topic but I plan on keeping my A590 IS forever even when I
>> do jump for a mid-range or dSLR sometime.
>
> If you want another one, mine is for sale cheap - the quality is far
> poorer than I hoped.

I'd prefer an A650 as a do everything pocket camera but the A590 was what
was around when I got one. I haven't been comparing it to anything so what's
poor? The sensor, lens, or JPEGs?

I think, the lens is a _bit_ soft and the JPEG's mess with colour, tone
curve, and detail. I'm running CHDK so can get raw, and have calibrated it
against a Macbeth chart so can get better results.

What about a G9/G10?

--
Charles E Hardwidge

Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
> "bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote in message
> news:CN2dnXzdJP_NqN7XnZ2dnUVZ8upi4p2d@brightview.c o.uk...
>> Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
>>>
>>> It's going off topic but I plan on keeping my A590 IS forever even
>>> when I
>>> do jump for a mid-range or dSLR sometime.
>>
>> If you want another one, mine is for sale cheap - the quality is far
>> poorer than I hoped.
>
> I'd prefer an A650 as a do everything pocket camera but the A590 was what
> was around when I got one. I haven't been comparing it to anything so
> what's
> poor? The sensor, lens, or JPEGs?

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.p...2f9f0ba?hl=en&

(I later used CHDK in both cameras, and the difference remained,
although both images improved slightly)

BugBear

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On 24 Jun 2009 11:57:23 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote
> in <7aeil3F1uij0pU1@mid.individual.net>:

>>In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>>> Only with a good external antenna, which a camera won't have. Or are
>>> you supposing an antenna connector on digital cameras so they can be
>>> hooked up to external antennas? What's next, a TV coax connector?
>>
>>For many years now GPS units have worked well inside cars with no
>>external antenna. If the GPS is hand held in the front of the car the
>>windscreen usually provides enough visibility unless it had one of the
>>RF blocking heating systems within it.

> Can work well if you put it on (and secure it to) the dash,
> but not so good on the seat next to you.

>>> Sorry, but no -- the A-GPS in my cell works well anywhere I get cell
>>> service. (I have another half dozen or so GPS units, but I assume
>>> you're referring to my cell.) Suggest you read up on A-GPS before
>>> posting more bad information.
>>
>>If your A-GPS uses RAW GPS readings from the cell phone GPS receiver
>>which is sent off for processing and the calculated location returned
>>to the phone then it has the same aerial requirements as a GPS. ...

> A-GPS units can use tower triangulation to supplement GPS signals.

They can't use triangulation since the towers don't know angles. They
could do trilateralisation by using signal strength as a rough
approximation to distance. So if there's a building (or your head) in
the way they get the distance wrong. And you can only do
trilaterisation if your phone is being monitored by three towers,
which is far from being always the case. It also only works if the
system provider has set up the systems to do trilaterisation. In the
UK for example, although this is regarded as a desirable system which
system providers should provide, it's not legally mandatory, and most
of them don't. Most of them don't even use the signal strength
differences. They just report the position of the tower your phone is
currently locked into. But that doesn't stop their salesmen from
describing how wonderful their systems might be, and possibly even are
in one or two places, and just happening to fail to mention that
mostly that's not how they work.

That's why I asked you what location errors you actually get from your
phone, as opposed to those you might get if the advised best systems
had been fully implemented and you were lucky enough to be in range
of three towers.

As I said, on my phone in the UK I get miles of error in the
countryside, and hundreds of yards of error in the city.

--
Chris Malcolm

"bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote in message
news:JI-dnYGZ9tFvoN7XnZ2dnUVZ8opi4p2d@brightview.co.uk...
> Charles E Hardwidge wrote:

>> I'd prefer an A650 as a do everything pocket camera but the A590 was what
>> was around when I got one. I haven't been comparing it to anything so
>> what's poor? The sensor, lens, or JPEGs?
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.p...2f9f0ba?hl=en&
>
> (I later used CHDK in both cameras, and the difference remained,
> although both images improved slightly)

I've zoomed in tight on a similar image I've got and some sharp edges look a
_bit_ softer in raw than I think they could be. I read a few weeks back
somewhere else that someone said the A590 lens was soft. A similar scene
from a better 8 mpix camera might provide some more clues.

I've found the A590 is a bit noisy, and JPEGs have a problem with tossing
detail, contrast, and sharpening turning noise into sludge and overdone
edges. A good DNG profile and some lightroom presets can help that but, I
agree, better would be nice.

I feel kinda bummed about this but it's what I bought and it will do for
getting the basic practice I need. Most stuff I'll take will probably be
viewed on screen so it's no big deal.

--
Charles E Hardwidge

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Wolfgang Weisselberg <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:04:24 -0400, Alan Browne

>>>b) GPS's (now) track amazingly well in autos even if they don't have a
>>>clear view of the sky. ...

>> Actually not so good.

> Personal experience tells me someting quite different to your
> claims. Maybe you only drive in tunnels. Maybe you should
> upgrade your GPS receiver to something sold in recent years.

>>>So the receiver can be off except in the half minute or so before
>>>I need it. Doesn't matter what happens in the car.

>> Nice start up time for your camera. Not. LOL

> There are ways to reduce the start-up time to about 0 seconds, if
> your clock is somewhere around 10 minutes of correct.

>> GPS also has problems in urban canyons, under trees, and anywhere
>> inside. Cell generally does better except in areas where there's no
>> cell coverage.

> Most areas are without cell phone coverage.
> And that "under trees" claim is spurious, personal experience
> tells me something quite different to your claims.

There is a big difference in the under trees performance of the latest
receivers and the previous generation, and another big difference
between those and the antepenultimate systems.

The special problem of tree cover comes from keeping moving under the
trees, and the fact that recovering a temporariliy lost satellite lock
takes much less time than locking onto a new satellite. While under
trees passing trunks and boughs keep losing lock very briefly. That
doesn't matter, because it picks it up again in seconds as you
move. But as you keep travelling under tree canopy some satellites
drop below the rather high visible horzion, and new ones rise. But the
time in between passing trunks and boughs is rarely enough to acquire
lock on a fresh satellite. So after a while you end up with too few
locked satellites and loss of position.

The latest units ameliorate that problem a lot, but can't remove
it. So this tree canopy problem is also highly dependent on usage. If
you keep moving under canopy you will eventually lose lock on all
visible satellites. But if you stop now and then to admire the view
and take a photograph, you may well give the system time to acquire a
new satellite. So fast walkers (or drivers) under tree canopy may get
very bad performance, whereas dawdlers and view admirers under the
same trees may get very good performance.

Of course if you understand how your GPS system works you can get good
location performance in heavily wooded places by stopping every now
and then for a session in which you check out where the satellites you
ought to be able to lock to are in the sky, and you move carefully
around to make them visible one by one through gaps in the canopy, and
acquire lock. Even if there's only one good window through the canopy,
you can walk around under it to catch each satellite one by one. Once
a satellite had been recognised and locked most modern GPS systems can
put up with catching a glimpse of it every thirty seconds to keep
going, more if you have more than the minimum set locked in.

But most people use their GPS units in ignorant auto mode, just as
most people use their cameras :-)

--
Chris Malcolm

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:

> More of the world has GPS coverage than mobile phone coverage.
> BTW you have to have the right mobile phone... not all can handle all
> four of the main systems in use.

> You can loose signal GPS or Phone in some conditions. They loose signal
> for different reasons. IT often depends on the construction of the
> building.

> Most camera GPS systems will "freeze" the co-ordinates when they loose
> signal. For example go into a building. How accurate do you need the
> position for the picture?

Some GPS units don't freeze co-ordinates when losing signal, they
simply keep on trucking at the last calculated speed and direction for
a while, usually about 30 secs. So if you move into a place without
signal at constant speed and direction you can get a good fix for up
to 30 seconds. So you could for example walk into a church and
steadily straight ahead until you're right under the steeple, and get
a fix on it. And good GPS systems will let you define a waypoint as
the average between two others, so you can stand either side of the
church and average the steeple location. Some GPS systems with
magnetic orientation sensors will let you take bearings on a location
from two known positions so you can triangulate its position.

Note that sometimes you want to locate the camera position, and
sometimes you want to locate the image location, such as a photograph
of a building or a distant landmark.

If I'm using GPS to locate my photographs I like to have those kinds
of facilities, but I don't see camera makers putting all that into a
camera, or camera users having the patience to learn how to use
it. Mostly they don't even read the photography section of the camera
manual :-)

So I'm a fan of a separate sophisticated GPS unit, and simply taking a
snapshot of it to locate a photograph.

--
Chris Malcolm

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:
> Chris H wrote:
>> In message <24i4455t0il27jbkurpvefql288lpef1d9@4ax.com>, John Navas
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes
>>> On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:19:56 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
>>> <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in
>>> <sne9h6-3bu.ln1@ID-52418.user.berlin.de>:

>>>> And that "under trees" claim is spurious, personal experience
>>>> tells me something quite different to your claims.
>>> Your trees must be pretty thin.
>>
>> I agree... trees are not a problem

> I'm curious--what are you using? My etrex Vista loses lock on a regular
> basis in Connecticut forests in the summer. Maybe it's time to upgrade
> again.

Depends which model of Vista. The second model had a much improved
receiver. Performance under tree cover also depends a lot on how you
use. The first easiest way to improve under trees performance is to
stop at least every half hour for a few minutes in a place with a nice
open view, and put the GPS down, away from your body, in best
reception orientation position (with Vistas that's horizonal face up)
well away from your body's satellite signal shadow. That let's the
unit acquire any new risen satellites, which it can't do when you're
moving under trees due to the constant interruption of satellite view.
But it tolerates constant interruption of locked satellite view.

And of course when walking under tree canopy give your Vista the best
view of the sky. That means don't put it in a body-shadowed pocket, clip
it horizontal facing up to your rucksack strap on top of your
shoulder.

--
Chris Malcolm