Curious about cable release

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:58:59 +0100, Ofnuts <>
wrote:

>Dudley Hanks wrote:
>> "Jürgen Exner" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
>>>> In addition to the gels for my flash, I picked up a cable release for my
>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>> A cable release? A real true honest to god cable release? I had no idea
>>> that modern cameras even have a socket for them. I thought all remote
>>> controls were electronic nowadays.
>>>
>>> jue
>>
>> No, not in the old sense of the word "cable."
>>
>> It's actually a corded electronic switch, so it's only a "cable" release in
>> that it attaches to the camera by a wire.
>
>"electronic" is a bit overboard since it contains two plain switches...

That may be true for that one, but not all. One for my P&S cameras also
lets you adjust zoom, half-press for focus, full press for shutter. When
taken apart there's a small IC chip in there to send digital-signals to
accomplish all that. Discovered this when I tried just a simple switch on a
longer wire to accomplish at least one function. No go. Opened up the OEM
cable-release to see what was up and saw the more complex circuitry and IC.

Charles B

"Charles B" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:58:59 +0100, Ofnuts <>
> wrote:
>
>>Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>> "Jürgen Exner" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
>>>>> In addition to the gels for my flash, I picked up a cable release for
>>>>> my
>>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>> A cable release? A real true honest to god cable release? I had no idea
>>>> that modern cameras even have a socket for them. I thought all remote
>>>> controls were electronic nowadays.
>>>>
>>>> jue
>>>
>>> No, not in the old sense of the word "cable."
>>>
>>> It's actually a corded electronic switch, so it's only a "cable" release
>>> in
>>> that it attaches to the camera by a wire.
>>
>>"electronic" is a bit overboard since it contains two plain switches...
>
> That may be true for that one, but not all. One for my P&S cameras also
> lets you adjust zoom, half-press for focus, full press for shutter. When
> taken apart there's a small IC chip in there to send digital-signals to
> accomplish all that. Discovered this when I tried just a simple switch on
> a
> longer wire to accomplish at least one function. No go. Opened up the OEM
> cable-release to see what was up and saw the more complex circuitry and
> IC.
>

I'm guessing this has more than just simple switches as well. Nowadays,
nobody uses simple mechanics when a circuit can be used to stave off generic
copies...

Take Care,
Dudley

Dudley Hanks

Dudley Hanks wrote:
> "Charles B" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:58:59 +0100, Ofnuts <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>>> "Jürgen Exner" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:...
>>>>> "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
>>>>>> In addition to the gels for my flash, I picked up a cable release for
>>>>>> my
>>>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>>> A cable release? A real true honest to god cable release? I had no idea
>>>>> that modern cameras even have a socket for them. I thought all remote
>>>>> controls were electronic nowadays.
>>>>>
>>>>> jue
>>>> No, not in the old sense of the word "cable."
>>>>
>>>> It's actually a corded electronic switch, so it's only a "cable" release
>>>> in
>>>> that it attaches to the camera by a wire.
>>> "electronic" is a bit overboard since it contains two plain switches...
>> That may be true for that one, but not all. One for my P&S cameras also
>> lets you adjust zoom, half-press for focus, full press for shutter. When
>> taken apart there's a small IC chip in there to send digital-signals to
>> accomplish all that. Discovered this when I tried just a simple switch on
>> a
>> longer wire to accomplish at least one function. No go. Opened up the OEM
>> cable-release to see what was up and saw the more complex circuitry and
>> IC.
>>
>
> I'm guessing this has more than just simple switches as well. Nowadays,
> nobody uses simple mechanics when a circuit can be used to stave off generic
> copies...

Not the one for Canon cameras. You'll find plenty of wiring diagrams for
them on the net. All the camera requires is two contacts that correspond
to half-press and full-press on the trigger. It is indeed that simple. I
cobbled up a light-activated trigger by just connecting the output of a
$5 slave flash controller to the remoter control socket of my camera.

--
Bertrand

Ofnuts

J?rgen Exner <> wrote:
> "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
>>In addition to the gels for my flash, I picked up a cable release for my
>>Rebel XSi.

> A cable release? A real true honest to god cable release? I had no idea
> that modern cameras even have a socket for them. I thought all remote
> controls were electronic nowadays.

My three most modern cameras all have sockets for a cable shutter
release, which can either take an electric cable with a double action
switch at the end (for the press and half press) or else a radio
receiver for a radio controlled shutter release.

--
Chris Malcolm

Chris Malcolm

"Ofnuts" <> wrote in message
news:4af0b2f1$0$20950$...
> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>> "Charles B" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:58:59 +0100, Ofnuts <>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>>>> "Jürgen Exner" <> wrote in message
>>>>> news:...
>>>>>> "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
>>>>>>> In addition to the gels for my flash, I picked up a cable release
>>>>>>> for my
>>>>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>>>> A cable release? A real true honest to god cable release? I had no
>>>>>> idea
>>>>>> that modern cameras even have a socket for them. I thought all remote
>>>>>> controls were electronic nowadays.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> jue
>>>>> No, not in the old sense of the word "cable."
>>>>>
>>>>> It's actually a corded electronic switch, so it's only a "cable"
>>>>> release in
>>>>> that it attaches to the camera by a wire.
>>>> "electronic" is a bit overboard since it contains two plain switches...
>>> That may be true for that one, but not all. One for my P&S cameras also
>>> lets you adjust zoom, half-press for focus, full press for shutter. When
>>> taken apart there's a small IC chip in there to send digital-signals to
>>> accomplish all that. Discovered this when I tried just a simple switch
>>> on a
>>> longer wire to accomplish at least one function. No go. Opened up the
>>> OEM
>>> cable-release to see what was up and saw the more complex circuitry and
>>> IC.
>>>
>>
>> I'm guessing this has more than just simple switches as well. Nowadays,
>> nobody uses simple mechanics when a circuit can be used to stave off
>> generic copies...
>
> Not the one for Canon cameras. You'll find plenty of wiring diagrams for
> them on the net. All the camera requires is two contacts that correspond
> to half-press and full-press on the trigger. It is indeed that simple. I
> cobbled up a light-activated trigger by just connecting the output of a $5
> slave flash controller to the remoter control socket of my camera.
>
> --
> Bertrand

Cool! That opens up a few possibilities... I may have to check into it.

Thanks,
Dudley

Dudley Hanks

Dudley Hanks wrote:
> I'm guessing this has more than just simple switches as well.

The standard Canon DSLR cable-release is two simple leaf-switches.

> Nowadays,
> nobody uses simple mechanics when a circuit can be used to stave off generic
> copies...

Canon uses weird connectors instead...


--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Bob Larter

Chris Malcolm <> wrote:
>J?rgen Exner <> wrote:
>> "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
>>>In addition to the gels for my flash, I picked up a cable release for my
>>>Rebel XSi.
>
>> A cable release? A real true honest to god cable release? I had no idea
>> that modern cameras even have a socket for them. I thought all remote
>> controls were electronic nowadays.
>
>My three most modern cameras all have sockets for a cable shutter
>release,

Really? You really mean like
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ol...bleRelease.jpg

>which can either take an electric cable with a double action
>switch at the end (for the press and half press) or else a radio
>receiver for a radio controlled shutter release.

Though so. That's not a cable release, that is a remote control/release,
either wired or radio controlled.

jue

Jürgen Exner

"Doug Jewell" <> wrote in message
news:. au...
> Bob Larter wrote:
>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>> I'm guessing this has more than just simple switches as well.
>>
>> The standard Canon DSLR cable-release is two simple leaf-switches.
>>
>>> Nowadays, nobody uses simple mechanics when a circuit can be used to
>>> stave off generic copies...
>>
>> Canon uses weird connectors instead...
> On the xxD and xD series cameras they do. On the xxxD series it is a
> standard 2.5mm stereo headphone socket. The sleeve is the common, the ring
> is AF Enable and the Tip is Shutter.
> To start AF you simply need to short the ring to the sleeve, and to take a
> photo you short the tip to the sleeve.
> You can use NPN transistors across the terminals for remote controlling.
> Note that if doing this you need to have 2 NPN transistors - one for AF
> enable and one for shutter. You cannot simply connect AF Enable and
> shutter together. If you don't ground AF Enable, it will work on Manual
> Focus IF the camera is set to Manual Focus, but if the camera goes into
> it's half-sleep mode the shutter enable won't wake it.
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdaj/1317816870/
> is a little circuit that I cobbled together (I can't quite take full
> credit for it, as the principle was copied), that I use for timed control
> shutter with my old palm pda. With suitable software the same circuit
> could be used for PC Control. I originally did that for use with Pentax,
> but have since tested with Canon.
> Both have identical remote control interfaces.
> I am led to believe that xxD and xD cameras can use the same system IF you
> have a suitable plug and can work out the connectors.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> What is the difference between a duck?

This is really quite interesting. It definitely leaves the door wide open
for triggering the camera by remote, and it could help me a lot with my
style of shooting...

Thanks,
Dudley

Dudley Hanks

Doug Jewell wrote:

>> Canon uses weird connectors instead...
> On the xxD and xD series cameras they do.

One explanation is that the audio-jack socket is a "hole" in the casing
and so cannot be used on the more "pro" models that are designed to be
dust/splash-proof. It also takes more space inside.

> I am led to believe that xxD and xD cameras can use the same system IF
> you have a suitable plug and can work out the connectors.

You're correct. See
<http://www.camerahacker.com/Canon/Canon%20N3%20Connector%20Pin-Out.php>

The easiest/cheapest way to obtain a plug is to cannibalize a remote
control.

--
Bertrand

Ofnuts

J?rgen Exner <> wrote:
> Chris Malcolm <> wrote:
>>J?rgen Exner <> wrote:
>>> "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
>>>>In addition to the gels for my flash, I picked up a cable release for my
>>>>Rebel XSi.
>>
>>> A cable release? A real true honest to god cable release? I had no idea
>>> that modern cameras even have a socket for them. I thought all remote
>>> controls were electronic nowadays.
>>
>>My three most modern cameras all have sockets for a cable shutter
>>release,

> Really? You really mean like
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ol...bleRelease.jpg

>>which can either take an electric cable with a double action
>>switch at the end (for the press and half press) or else a radio
>>receiver for a radio controlled shutter release.

> Though so. That's not a cable release, that is a remote control/release,
> either wired or radio controlled.

In my version of English, which is probably a slightly archaic version
of British English, the words wire and cable can apply both to
electrically wired connections and physical Bowden cable
connections. And any kind of shutter release which involves pressing
something distant from the camera body is a remote shutter release,
regardless of whether the connection is electrical, pneumatic,
infra-red, or whatever.

It's also generally speaking the case that British English is less
liable than American English to let usage of common phrases take
semantic precedence over the compositional meaning derived from the
meanings of the individual words.

--
Chris Malcolm

Chris Malcolm