«

Hello

I was ready to upgrade from my sturdy little Powershot A20 to a higher
number Canon Powershot until I began reading about the E18 error and
class action suit.

I'd like to stay with CF cards. I have a reader and several cards.

I'd like a camera with a workable manual focus. From time to time I
want to take a photo of a flower on the end of a stem and have it, not
the background in focus. Does anyone make a camera that lets you set
the focal length based on your estimate of the actual distance, or at
least provide feedback in terms of an actual number?

Based on my experience with the A20, I also like AA NiMH batteries.

Have any users got suggestions for a camera that I can buy?

Alternatively, will the day ever arrive when I can install a back on my
OM-1 or OM-4 body, a back that contains a CCD, a compartment for 4 AA
batteries, a CF card holder, and the circuitry to process an image and
store it? It would be nice to use all that hardware again, but without
film, especially now that Kodak is abandoning the film business and
Kodachrome 25 is history.

Thanks,

Baumgrenze

baumgrenze wrote:
> Hello
>
> I was ready to upgrade from my sturdy little Powershot A20 to a higher
> number Canon Powershot until I began reading about the E18 error and
> class action suit.
>
> I'd like to stay with CF cards. I have a reader and several cards.

I would suggest that picking a camera based on that would not be a good
idea. You are likely to eliminate some fine cameras and likely the best one
for you but doing so. Don't ignore a camera because of the media, just
consider home much that feature is worth to you and add it into the bag of
considerations.


>
> I'd like a camera with a workable manual focus. From time to time I
> want to take a photo of a flower on the end of a stem and have it, not
> the background in focus. Does anyone make a camera that lets you set
> the focal length based on your estimate of the actual distance, or at
> least provide feedback in terms of an actual number?

Most if not all the dSLR's fit that requirement. I would also suggest
that an SLR will have some great macro lenses available and a TTL focusing
so you can see what is in focus before you shoot. Of course they are going
to cost a little more. However some of the lower end models have a lot to
offer with not that high a cost. Check out the Canon Rebel models or the
equivalent in other brands.

>
> Based on my experience with the A20, I also like AA NiMH batteries.
>
> Have any users got suggestions for a camera that I can buy?
>
> Alternatively, will the day ever arrive when I can install a back on
> my OM-1 or OM-4 body, a back that contains a CCD, a compartment for 4
> AA batteries, a CF card holder, and the circuitry to process an image
> and store it? It would be nice to use all that hardware again, but
> without film, especially now that Kodak is abandoning the film
> business and Kodachrome 25 is history.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Baumgrenze

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

On 19 Feb 2006 23:49:33 -0800, "baumgrenze" <>
wrote:

>Hello
>
>I was ready to upgrade from my sturdy little Powershot A20 to a higher
>number Canon Powershot until I began reading about the E18 error and
>class action suit.
>
>I'd like to stay with CF cards. I have a reader and several cards.
>

Here I too agree with the other person that responded &
suggested not limiting your search to a camera with CF memory only.
There are some that meet all of your needs but many more & newer
models, especially those that use SD memory might better serve you.

>I'd like a camera with a workable manual focus. From time to time I
>want to take a photo of a flower on the end of a stem and have it, not
>the background in focus. Does anyone make a camera that lets you set
>the focal length based on your estimate of the actual distance, or at
>least provide feedback in terms of an actual number?

This part is fairly simple especially for a P&S type camera
which generally has a much wider DOF (Depth Of Field) than larger
lens/senor cameras such a DSLR.

The trick is 2 fold.

1> Buy a P&S camera with manual focus capability.

2> Buy a camera that also has a "Custom" mode which will
record all of your setting in that mode. This will allow you to
instantly reconfigure your camera to your favorite settings for the
type of "Custom" photography that you want to do. The beauty of a
"Custom" mode is that most cameras with it will recall even MF
settings & zoom lens position as well as the usual other settings.

If you want to stay with Canon, I believe the A95 was the last
camera they made that meets all of "your" desired needs & has a
"Custom" mode.

If you your willing to part with CF compatibility, the A610 or
A620 would be worth considering. They both have all of the above but
use SD flash memory cards. Canon has converted their entire P&S line
over to SD memory, its is now cost competitive with CF & available in
2GB size cards from several manufacturers.

There are very likely other manufactures that meet all of the
above requirements with current models but off-hand I don't know which
they are but this link should help you locate them:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp

Also here is a link that you may find well worth a look even
though it talks about the Canon A80, the principles are basically the
same & I found it very helpful. Since many P&S cameras have
difficulty focusing or are at least slow to focus in low light, this
method of setting the camera up in a "hyper-focal" type mode works
wonders & greatly reduces shutter lag time too!

http://albert.achtung.com/cameras/A80/index7.html#SNAP

>Based on my experience with the A20, I also like AA NiMH batteries.
>
>Have any users got suggestions for a camera that I can buy?
>
>Alternatively, will the day ever arrive when I can install a back on my
>OM-1 or OM-4 body, a back that contains a CCD, a compartment for 4 AA
>batteries, a CF card holder, and the circuitry to process an image and
>store it? It would be nice to use all that hardware again, but without
>film, especially now that Kodak is abandoning the film business and
>Kodachrome 25 is history.

Very unlikely because the profit to expense ratio would not be
in the manufactures favor. Too small of a "potential" market, sorry.

>
>Thanks,
>
>Baumgrenze

Best of luck, I hope what I offered helps you or somebody.

Respectfully, DHB

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

baumgrenze wrote:

> Alternatively, will the day ever arrive when I can install a back on my
> OM-1 or OM-4 body, a back that contains a CCD, a compartment for 4 AA
> batteries, a CF card holder, and the circuitry to process an image and
> store it? It would be nice to use all that hardware again, but without
> film, especially now that Kodak is abandoning the film business and
> Kodachrome 25 is history.
>
It is possible, but not likely.

It appears I should have included a link after my first paragraph. Here
it is, with the first bit of text on the web page.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...non_class.html

Canon Named in Class Action Suit
Company Ignored Defect in Digital Cameras, Suit Charges
September 13, 2005

A defect in a product is one thing. A failure to deal with it is far
more serious. They should never have let things get to this point.

baumgrenze

baumgrenze wrote:
> It appears I should have included a link after my first paragraph.
> Here it is, with the first bit of text on the web page.
>
> http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...non_class.html
>
> Canon Named in Class Action Suit
> Company Ignored Defect in Digital Cameras, Suit Charges
> September 13, 2005
>
> A defect in a product is one thing. A failure to deal with it is far
> more serious. They should never have let things get to this point.
>
> baumgrenze

I wonder who's behind that site? It does not appear to be any
government agency. I wonder how accurate the information may be.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

On 20 Feb 2006 09:42:59 -0800, "baumgrenze" <>
wrote:

>It appears I should have included a link after my first paragraph. Here
>it is, with the first bit of text on the web page.
>
>http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...non_class.html
>
> Canon Named in Class Action Suit
>Company Ignored Defect in Digital Cameras, Suit Charges
>September 13, 2005
>
>A defect in a product is one thing. A failure to deal with it is far
>more serious. They should never have let things get to this point.
>
>baumgrenze

A universal response to the claim that the user did someting wrong is,
"No, I didn't."
Just like the response by many notables when accused of just about
anything from drug use to DUI to child molestation: "No, I didn't."
I'm sure some of them actually didn't. But most are found guilty, or
make a bargain whilke protesting innocence.
In this case, "probably" Canon has a problem. But I don't see a class
action suit as much more than money makers for lawyers.

Here, you can have the soap box back...


--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

Mea Culpa.

Thank you Joseph Meehan for raising the question, "I wonder who's
behind that site?"

I did a search and learned the following information once constituted a
'bottom of the home page disclaimer' on their website. It is no longer
there.

"Consumer Affairs.Com is a service of The Oakton Press, Inc., in
association with the Law Offices of Horwitz, Horwitz & Associates,
Ltd., licensed to practice in Illinois. ConsumerAffairs.Com is an
independent service not affiliated with any government agency. The
information on this Website is general in nature and is not intended as
a substitute for competent legal advice. The Oakton Press makes no
representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided
and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use
thereof. See About ConsumerAffairs.Com for more information. "

A search of their website shows that Horwitz et. al. are the attorneys
who have filed on many of the prominent complaints featured on the
website. They are not the only firm to file against Canon with regard
to E18.

In their current FAQ Consumer Affairs.Com says:

Are you hooked up with lawyers in some way?

Yes, lawyers read all of the complaints submitted to us by consumers.
They then advise us, the editors, to help us figure out which
complaints reflect illegal activity, which are just distasteful, etc.
On occasion, the lawyers will find something that they believe could
form the basis of a class action suit on behalf of consumers. They then
research the issue and, now and then, file suit against the
perpetrator. Since our founding, hundreds of class action suits have
been filed on behalf of consumers. We are not a party to those actions
and do not profit from them.

A friend of mine sent you a complaint, then the company took care of
him but you didn't remove his complaint. Why not?

First of all, when a complaint is filed it becomes our property, as
clearly stated on the complaint form. We are under no obligation to the
consumer who sent it to us to remove it just because he changes his
mind. To be blunt, this is not an extortion service. If you send us a
complaint about the Bucket of Bolts Store and the store owner then
sends you a truckload of bolts, that's great for you -- but what about
all the other poor boltless wonders he took advantage of? Sorry, that's
not what we're here for.

Caveat emptor - both with regard to E18 and consumeraffairs.com.

baumgrenze

"baumgrenze" <> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
> Mea Culpa.
>
> Thank you Joseph Meehan for raising the question, "I wonder who's
> behind that site?"
>
> I did a search and learned the following information once constituted a
> 'bottom of the home page disclaimer' on their website. It is no longer
> there.
>
> "Consumer Affairs.Com is a service of The Oakton Press, Inc., in
> association with the Law Offices of Horwitz, Horwitz & Associates,
> Ltd., licensed to practice in Illinois. ConsumerAffairs.Com is an
> independent service not affiliated with any government agency. The
> information on this Website is general in nature and is not intended as
> a substitute for competent legal advice. The Oakton Press makes no
> representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided
> and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use
> thereof. See About ConsumerAffairs.Com for more information. "
>
> A search of their website shows that Horwitz et. al. are the attorneys
> who have filed on many of the prominent complaints featured on the
> website. They are not the only firm to file against Canon with regard
> to E18.
>

Horowitz and Horowitz, if this is the firm I remember, have raised the class
action "lawsuit" (read: shakedown) to an art form. Forbes had an article on
them a few years ago. They hit large firms with nuisance suits that are
cheaper for the companies to settle than to contest. And, big surprise, the
firm of Horowitz and Horowitz takes the lions' share of the settlement.
After all, they have all those billable hours...
Often, an impact is responsible for jamming the lens, so it won't extend,
causing the Err18.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com