Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. -Motion Detection, Remote Shutter, Time

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ray, Sep 14, 2010.

  1. ray

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:

    > The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK 19th
    > August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >
    > A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of it
    > on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned elsewhere
    > (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X
    > zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that before I ever heard of
    > CHDK, but then I checked it out.)


    I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    firmware to operate properly.


    >
    > I was bummed, cuz I really wanted a Remote (wireless) shutter, the
    > Motion Detection shutter, and perhaps the Time Lapse movie capibilities
    > of CHDK in my new camera!
    >
    > But I did a last google and discovered that CHDK for SX120 devolopment
    > is coming along nicely.
    >
    > In the CHDK development forum for SX120
    > http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php/topic,4284.390.html I saw quotes
    > like this:
    >
    > ============start quotes:
    > " I haven't tested SX120 CHDK exhaustively, but are there any open
    > issues? I haven't found any bugs, maybe apart from the squished logo
    > aspect ratio..."
    >
    > "Re: CHDK for SX120 on: 14 / August / 2010, Thanks Whin. I did compile
    > it OK and CHDK is running fine."
    >
    > "on: 15 / August / 2010, I successfully installed the
    > sx120is-100b-0.9.9-912-full version of chdk on my camera a couple of
    > days ago and without any eggageration, it's the nicest thing to expand
    > the camera's possibilities into the RAW format. Still, I had a problem
    > of generating the badpixel.bin file. Maybe, you need a special sequence
    > of commands? Instead, I generated one with an older version of chdk and
    > just put it into the chdk folder. Everything works perfectly. I'm
    > eagerly waiting for the release of the finalised chdk! Your work is
    > really perfect!"
    >
    > "fe5o thanks, this works, now I can do timelapses Laugh Out Loud THANK
    > YOU Big Grin"
    >
    > "Re: CHDK for SX120
    > on: 08 / September / 2010,
    > Quote from: pwag on 07 / September / 2010, I know this is still in
    > beta, .....
    > Is this "mostly" ready to install? and what works and what
    > doesn't? ----------
    > I won't say it is bug free, but I will say that I have been
    > using it for about 3 months and I am thrilled with it, and have no
    > issues that I did not cause. I would suggest giving it a try, it is not
    > like you are risking your camera, it is just a few files on the flash
    > card. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do!!!"
    >
    >
    > "on: 10 / September / 2010,
    > Quote from: pioto on 10 / September / 2010,
    > ... would someone mind summarizing where to grab current builds of this
    > on the wiki?
    >
    > Try the following link:
    > http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php/topic,5026.0.html "
    >
    > =======================end quotes.
    >
    >
    > My wild quess is it might be relased by Xmas! Anybody else care to
    > venture a guess? That cinches it. I'm gunna buy a Canon!
    >
    >
    > ---------------------NOTES:
    >
    > Canon PowerShot SX120 IS
    > London, UK 19th August 2009: Canon today announces the PowerShot SX120
    > IS
    > 10 megapixels, 10X, 2 AA alkaline batteries, best photos, no viewfinder
    > [nope, Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X prolly better at ISO 1600 & macro
    > colorwise. see: 2 Cameras ISO 1600 b.bmp]
    > CNET:3.5 stars, $199 walmart, manual and semimanual controls
    > OfficeMax - $229.99 walmart $179.00: Rollback . 8 Gig $15.54
    > walmart
    > Dimensions (WHD) 4.4 x 2.8 x 1.8 inches 3" Display screen Weight
    > (with battery and media) 10.4 ounces
    > shot-to-shot times slow at 6.1 w flash
    > shutter lag 0.7 second, are typical.
    > ISO 1600 photos are usable.
    > some barrel distortion typical of megazoom cameras, magenta and purple
    > fringing. Capable of taking some sharp shots, which is atypical of
    > megazoom cameras. At 10X the image stabilization does an excellent job.
    > Movie clips • 640 x 480 @ 30fps • 320 x 240 @ 30fps

    Maximum clip
    > length Up to 4GB or 1 hour Movie File formats • • Movie: AVI

    [Motion
    > JPEG compression + WAVE (monaural)]
    >
    >
    >
    > Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1
    > CNET editors' rating: 3.5 stars Very good $200 $187 at Amazon.
    > (never was at walmart)
    > Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1 10MP Digital Camera with 12x Wide Angle MEGA
    > Optical Image Stabilized Zoom and 2.7 inch LCD Amazon: 4.3 out of 5
    > stars (131 customer reviews) 10 megapixels, 12x, Lithium ion , no
    > viewfinder 2.4 inches wide by 4.1 inches high by 1.3 inches deep Weight
    > (with battery and media) 7.7 ounces
    > Shot-to-shot times are 2.8 seconds with flash. The bad news
    > is shutter lag. In bright conditions = 0.9 second; most point-and-shoot
    > cameras come in at roughly half (0.5) that time in good lighting. In
    > more challenging lighting the ZS1 takes 1.1 seconds, which is a more
    > typical result for its class, but still high.
    > Photo quality is very good for its class. Things that megazoom
    > photos typically exhibit--softness, barrel distortion, purple
    > fringing--didn't seem to trouble the ZS1. Is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1
    > and DMC-TZ6 the same camera? Prolly.
    >
    >
    > http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK
    > CHDK - Unleash the POWER in your Canon PowerShot! What is CHDK? *
    > Canon Hack Development Kit; Features:
    > * Professional control - RAW files, bracketing, full manual
    > control over exposure, Zebra-Mode, Live histogram, Grids, etc.
    > * Motion detection - Trigger exposure in response to motion,
    > fast enough to catch lightning.
    > * USB remote - Simple DIY remote allows you to remotely
    > trigger the shutter (wireless or cable).
    > * Scripting - Control CHDK and camera features using ubasic
    > and Lua scripts. Enables time lapse, motion detection, advanced
    > bracketing, and much more.
    > * More - read the Manual & explore this wiki.
    >
    >
    >
    > The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational
    > change their world view to fit the facts.
    ray, Sep 14, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ray

    J. Clarke Guest

    Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - MotionDetection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >
    >> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK 19th
    >> August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>
    >> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of it
    >> on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned elsewhere
    >> (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X
    >> zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that before I ever heard of
    >> CHDK, but then I checked it out.)

    >
    > I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    > firmware to operate properly.


    I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means that
    they do not "operate properly" without it.

    It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly" because
    you can put Windows on them.
    J. Clarke, Sep 14, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ray

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

    > On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>
    >>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK 19th
    >>> August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>
    >>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of
    >>> it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic Lumix
    >>> DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that before I
    >>> ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)

    >>
    >> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    >> firmware to operate properly.

    >
    > I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    > extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means that
    > they do not "operate properly" without it.


    The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he NEEDS
    3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made more sense to
    me to find a camera that did it in the first place!

    >
    > It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly" because
    > you can put Windows on them.


    Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know for
    a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they would not
    need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.
    ray, Sep 14, 2010
    #3
  4. ray

    J. Clarke Guest

    Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - MotionDetection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    On 9/14/2010 3:49 PM, ray wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >
    >> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK 19th
    >>>> August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>
    >>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of
    >>>> it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic Lumix
    >>>> DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that before I
    >>>> ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)
    >>>
    >>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    >>> firmware to operate properly.

    >>
    >> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    >> extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means that
    >> they do not "operate properly" without it.

    >
    > The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he NEEDS
    > 3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made more sense to
    > me to find a camera that did it in the first place!


    Please identify a camera that does everything that an SX120 with CHDK
    does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK.

    >> It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly" because
    >> you can put Windows on them.

    >
    > Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know for
    > a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they would not
    > need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.


    Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that runs
    on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using "doesn't
    operate properly".
    J. Clarke, Sep 14, 2010
    #4
  5. ray

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

    > On 9/14/2010 3:49 PM, ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK
    >>>>> 19th August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>>
    >>>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of
    >>>>> it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>>>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic
    >>>>> Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that
    >>>>> before I ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    >>>> firmware to operate properly.
    >>>
    >>> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    >>> extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means that
    >>> they do not "operate properly" without it.

    >>
    >> The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he NEEDS
    >> 3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made more sense
    >> to me to find a camera that did it in the first place!

    >
    > Please identify a camera that does everything that an SX120 with CHDK
    > does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK.
    >
    >>> It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly"
    >>> because you can put Windows on them.

    >>
    >> Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know
    >> for a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they
    >> would not need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.

    >
    > Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that runs
    > on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using "doesn't
    > operate properly".


    So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make an
    argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements over
    the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as far.
    ray, Sep 14, 2010
    #5
  6. ray

    J. Clarke Guest

    Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - MotionDetection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    On 9/14/2010 5:06 PM, ray wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >
    >> On 9/14/2010 3:49 PM, ray wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK
    >>>>>> 19th August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of
    >>>>>> it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>>>>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic
    >>>>>> Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that
    >>>>>> before I ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    >>>>> firmware to operate properly.
    >>>>
    >>>> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    >>>> extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means that
    >>>> they do not "operate properly" without it.
    >>>
    >>> The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he NEEDS
    >>> 3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made more sense
    >>> to me to find a camera that did it in the first place!

    >>
    >> Please identify a camera that does everything that an SX120 with CHDK
    >> does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK.
    >>
    >>>> It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly"
    >>>> because you can put Windows on them.
    >>>
    >>> Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know
    >>> for a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they
    >>> would not need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.

    >>
    >> Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that runs
    >> on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using "doesn't
    >> operate properly".

    >
    > So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make an
    > argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements over
    > the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as far.


    I note that you, being unable to identify a camera that does everything
    that an SX120 with CHDK does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK,
    have chosen instead to attempt to divert the discussion to operating
    systems.

    So, can you identify such a camera?
    J. Clarke, Sep 14, 2010
    #6
  7. ray

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:35:05 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

    > On 9/14/2010 5:06 PM, ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 9/14/2010 3:49 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK
    >>>>>>> 19th August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention
    >>>>>>> of it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>>>>>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic
    >>>>>>> Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that
    >>>>>>> before I ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third
    >>>>>> party firmware to operate properly.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    >>>>> extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means
    >>>>> that they do not "operate properly" without it.
    >>>>
    >>>> The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he
    >>>> NEEDS 3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made
    >>>> more sense to me to find a camera that did it in the first place!
    >>>
    >>> Please identify a camera that does everything that an SX120 with CHDK
    >>> does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK.
    >>>
    >>>>> It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly"
    >>>>> because you can put Windows on them.
    >>>>
    >>>> Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know
    >>>> for a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they
    >>>> would not need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.
    >>>
    >>> Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that runs
    >>> on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using
    >>> "doesn't operate properly".

    >>
    >> So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make
    >> an argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements
    >> over the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as
    >> far.

    >
    > I note that you, being unable to identify a camera that does everything
    > that an SX120 with CHDK does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK,
    > have chosen instead to attempt to divert the discussion to operating
    > systems.


    No, not really, I simply answered your uninformed comment. I've been a
    computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    comment on that.

    >
    > So, can you identify such a camera?


    'google' is your friend.
    ray, Sep 14, 2010
    #7
  8. ray

    J. Clarke Guest

    Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - MotionDetection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    On 9/14/2010 6:07 PM, ray wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:35:05 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >
    >> On 9/14/2010 5:06 PM, ray wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 9/14/2010 3:49 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK
    >>>>>>>> 19th August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention
    >>>>>>>> of it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>>>>>>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic
    >>>>>>>> Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that
    >>>>>>>> before I ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third
    >>>>>>> party firmware to operate properly.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    >>>>>> extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means
    >>>>>> that they do not "operate properly" without it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he
    >>>>> NEEDS 3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made
    >>>>> more sense to me to find a camera that did it in the first place!
    >>>>
    >>>> Please identify a camera that does everything that an SX120 with CHDK
    >>>> does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly"
    >>>>>> because you can put Windows on them.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know
    >>>>> for a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they
    >>>>> would not need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.
    >>>>
    >>>> Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that runs
    >>>> on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using
    >>>> "doesn't operate properly".
    >>>
    >>> So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make
    >>> an argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements
    >>> over the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as
    >>> far.

    >>
    >> I note that you, being unable to identify a camera that does everything
    >> that an SX120 with CHDK does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK,
    >> have chosen instead to attempt to divert the discussion to operating
    >> systems.

    >
    > No, not really, I simply answered your uninformed comment. I've been a
    > computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    > comment on that.


    Irrelevant.

    >> So, can you identify such a camera?

    >
    > 'google' is your friend.


    <plonk>
    J. Clarke, Sep 15, 2010
    #8
  9. ray <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:


    [snip 8 lines of relevant context]

    > I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    > firmware to operate properly.


    [snip 126 lines or irrelevant non-context!]

    I'm continually amazed by folks who haven't even learned to
    properly reply to a posting[0], yet believe their inane world
    view[1] merits reading over all the crap they leave in their
    posting.

    -Wolfgang

    [0] You quote enough for context, not the whole posting, unless
    the whole posting is absolutely necessary for context.
    It certainly isn't in this case.

    [1] The camera operates properly with the firmware supplied, as
    proven by it following the description inside the fine manual.
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 15, 2010
    #9
  10. ray <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:35:05 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >> On 9/14/2010 5:06 PM, ray wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:


    [snip 34 lines]

    >>>> Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that runs
    >>>> on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using
    >>>> "doesn't operate properly".


    >>> So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make
    >>> an argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements
    >>> over the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as
    >>> far.


    I could easily make the argument that the fact that other
    people exist makes you malfunctioning. Compare the advances of
    communication networks over the last 20 years to the advances of
    your communication ...

    >> I note that you, being unable to identify a camera that does everything
    >> that an SX120 with CHDK does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK,
    >> have chosen instead to attempt to divert the discussion to operating
    >> systems.


    > No, not really, I simply answered your uninformed comment.


    You choose to make a shallow remark to hide that there is no
    camera equal to an SX120 with CHDK which does not need 3rd party
    software to archive all features at a similar price point.

    > I've been a
    > computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    > comment on that.


    I've been a human being for over 30 years and feel quite qualified
    to comment on that.

    >> So, can you identify such a camera?


    > 'google' is your friend.


    It tells me there is no such camera.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 15, 2010
    #10
  11. Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - Motion Detection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    On 14 Sep 2010 19:49:18 GMT, ray <> wrote:

    >On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >
    >> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK 19th
    >>>> August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>
    >>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of
    >>>> it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic Lumix
    >>>> DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that before I
    >>>> ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)
    >>>
    >>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    >>> firmware to operate properly.

    >>
    >> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    >> extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means that
    >> they do not "operate properly" without it.

    >
    >The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he NEEDS
    >3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made more sense to
    >me to find a camera that did it in the first place!
    >


    True. But in the case of CHDK, there's is NO OTHER line of cameras made
    today that can do all that a CHDK enhanced camera can do. Are you really
    this ignorant?
    Outing Trolls is FUN!, Sep 15, 2010
    #11
  12. Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - Motion Detection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:35:05 -0400, "J. Clarke" <>
    wrote:

    >On 9/14/2010 5:06 PM, ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 9/14/2010 3:49 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK
    >>>>>>> 19th August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no mention of
    >>>>>>> it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've mentioned
    >>>>>>> elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the Panasonic
    >>>>>>> Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I decided that
    >>>>>>> before I ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it out.)
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third party
    >>>>>> firmware to operate properly.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of an
    >>>>> extended operating system for a particular line of cameras means that
    >>>>> they do not "operate properly" without it.
    >>>>
    >>>> The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he NEEDS
    >>>> 3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made more sense
    >>>> to me to find a camera that did it in the first place!
    >>>
    >>> Please identify a camera that does everything that an SX120 with CHDK
    >>> does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK.
    >>>
    >>>>> It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly"
    >>>>> because you can put Windows on them.
    >>>>
    >>>> Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know
    >>>> for a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they
    >>>> would not need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.
    >>>
    >>> Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that runs
    >>> on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using "doesn't
    >>> operate properly".

    >>
    >> So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make an
    >> argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements over
    >> the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as far.

    >
    >I note that you, being unable to identify a camera that does everything
    >that an SX120 with CHDK does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK,
    >have chosen instead to attempt to divert the discussion to operating
    >systems.
    >
    >So, can you identify such a camera?


    You can leave out the price requirement. There's no camera at ANY price
    that can do what any CHDK enhanced camera can do.
    Superzooms Still Win, Sep 15, 2010
    #12
  13. ray

    ray Guest

    On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:28:26 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

    > ray <> wrote:
    >> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:35:05 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>> On 9/14/2010 5:06 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

    >
    > [snip 34 lines]
    >
    >>>>> Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that
    >>>>> runs on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using
    >>>>> "doesn't operate properly".

    >
    >>>> So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make
    >>>> an argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements
    >>>> over the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as
    >>>> far.

    >
    > I could easily make the argument that the fact that other people exist
    > makes you malfunctioning. Compare the advances of communication
    > networks over the last 20 years to the advances of your communication
    > ...
    >
    >>> I note that you, being unable to identify a camera that does
    >>> everything that an SX120 with CHDK does for the same price as an SX120
    >>> with CHDK, have chosen instead to attempt to divert the discussion to
    >>> operating systems.

    >
    >> No, not really, I simply answered your uninformed comment.

    >
    > You choose to make a shallow remark to hide that there is no camera
    > equal to an SX120 with CHDK which does not need 3rd party software to
    > archive all features at a similar price point.


    If you check back, you'll see that it was not I who introduced the OS
    comparison.

    >
    >> I've been a
    >> computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    >> comment on that.

    >
    > I've been a human being for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    > comment on that.


    Pretty hard to tell on the basis of your post.

    >
    >>> So, can you identify such a camera?

    >
    >> 'google' is your friend.

    >
    > It tells me there is no such camera.



    >
    > -Wolfgang
    ray, Sep 15, 2010
    #13
  14. ray

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:48:19 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

    > On 9/14/2010 6:07 PM, ray wrote:
    >> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:35:05 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 9/14/2010 5:06 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:55:45 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On 9/14/2010 3:49 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:55:48 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On 9/14/2010 2:20 PM, ray wrote:
    >>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:08:05 -0700, Crash! wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> The Canon PowerShot SX120 IS 10X zoom was released in London, UK
    >>>>>>>>> 19th August 2009. [today, rollback under $199 walmart,]
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> A year later I was disapointed the CHDK home page made no
    >>>>>>>>> mention of it on its Supported Cameras list. So for reasons I've
    >>>>>>>>> mentioned elsewhere (ISO 1600 photo qual) I was ready to buy the
    >>>>>>>>> Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1 12X zoom, also about $200. (In fact, I
    >>>>>>>>> decided that before I ever heard of CHDK, but then I checked it
    >>>>>>>>> out.)
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I'm continually amazed by folks who buy cameras that need third
    >>>>>>>> party firmware to operate properly.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I am constantly amazed by people who think that the existence of
    >>>>>>> an extended operating system for a particular line of cameras
    >>>>>>> means that they do not "operate properly" without it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The OP obviously didn't think his operated properly - he says he
    >>>>>> NEEDS 3th party software to do certain functions. Would have made
    >>>>>> more sense to me to find a camera that did it in the first place!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Please identify a camera that does everything that an SX120 with
    >>>>> CHDK does for the same price as an SX120 with CHDK.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> It's like arguing that Apple computers don't "operate properly"
    >>>>>>> because you can put Windows on them.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I
    >>>>>> know for a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else
    >>>>>> they would not need layers of 3rd party software to make them
    >>>>>> 'safe'.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Pick any OS--by your reasoning the existence of any other OS that
    >>>>> runs on the same hardware is evidence that whatever OS you are using
    >>>>> "doesn't operate properly".
    >>>>
    >>>> So, what part of that do you have a problem with? I could easily make
    >>>> an argument that that is the case. Compare the hardware advancements
    >>>> over the last 20 years with the OS advances - haven't come nearly as
    >>>> far.
    >>>
    >>> I note that you, being unable to identify a camera that does
    >>> everything that an SX120 with CHDK does for the same price as an SX120
    >>> with CHDK, have chosen instead to attempt to divert the discussion to
    >>> operating systems.

    >>
    >> No, not really, I simply answered your uninformed comment. I've been a
    >> computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    >> comment on that.

    >
    > Irrelevant.


    Of course it's irrelevant - so WHY DID YOU START IT?

    >
    >>> So, can you identify such a camera?

    >>
    >> 'google' is your friend.

    >
    > <plonk>
    ray, Sep 15, 2010
    #14
  15. ray <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:48:19 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
    >> On 9/14/2010 6:07 PM, ray wrote:


    [snip]

    >>> I've been a
    >>> computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    >>> comment on that.


    >> Irrelevant.


    > Of course it's irrelevant - so WHY DID YOU START IT?


    You started saying you were a computer professional. J. Clarke
    didn't accuse you to be one.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 15, 2010
    #15
  16. ray <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:28:26 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> ray <> wrote:


    >> You choose to make a shallow remark to hide that there is no camera
    >> equal to an SX120 with CHDK which does not need 3rd party software to
    >> archive all features at a similar price point.


    > If you check back, you'll see that it was not I who introduced the OS
    > comparison.


    If you check back, you'll see that you have not answered the
    question of an SX120 with CHDK feature set camera which does
    not use CHDK.

    >>> I've been a
    >>> computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    >>> comment on that.


    >> I've been a human being for over 30 years and feel quite qualified to
    >> comment on that.


    > Pretty hard to tell on the basis of your post.


    Much easier to tell than your claim of being a computer
    professional.

    >>>> So, can you identify such a camera?


    >>> 'google' is your friend.


    >> It tells me there is no such camera.


    No reply is also a reply.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 15, 2010
    #16
  17. ray

    Peter Guest

    Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. - Motion Detection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    "ray" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    >>> Can't comment on the apples, because I've never had one - but I know
    >>> for a fact that the MS computers don't operate properly - else they
    >>> would not need layers of 3rd party software to make them 'safe'.

    >>


    Some apples grow on trees. Other Apples are computers.


    --
    Peter
    Peter, Sep 17, 2010
    #17
  18. ray

    John Turco Guest

    Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120. -MotionDetection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >
    > ray <> wrote:


    <heavily edited for brevity>

    > > I've been a computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite
    > > qualified to comment on that.

    >
    > I've been a human being for over 30 years and feel quite qualified
    > to comment on that.


    <edited>

    Are you giving away your age, Herr Weisselberg?

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
    John Turco, Sep 25, 2010
    #18
  19. Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120.-Motion Detection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    John Turco <> wrote:
    > Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> ray <> wrote:


    >> > I've been a computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite
    >> > qualified to comment on that.


    >> I've been a human being for over 30 years and feel quite qualified
    >> to comment on that.


    > Are you giving away your age, Herr Weisselberg?


    I am also giving away my species. Darn, I though I could
    pose as an alien.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 25, 2010
    #19
  20. ray

    John Turco Guest

    Re: Year Later, CHDK coming SOON for Canon Ultra-Zoom SX120.-MotionDetection, Remote Shutter, Time Lapse, etc

    Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >
    > John Turco <> wrote:
    > > Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > >> ray <> wrote:

    >
    > >> > I've been a computer professional for over 30 years and feel quite
    > >> > qualified to comment on that.

    >
    > >> I've been a human being for over 30 years and feel quite qualified
    > >> to comment on that.

    >
    > > Are you giving away your age, Herr Weisselberg?

    >
    > I am also giving away my species. Darn, I though I could
    > pose as an alien.
    >
    > -Wolfgang



    Aliens are from Mexico, extraterrestrials are from Mars.

    Hmmm, wait a moment...that sounds like a catchy book title!

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
    John Turco, Oct 31, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. HokusPokus
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    1,351
    ASAAR
    Jul 16, 2007
  2. Stephen James

    CHDK for Canon P&S Cameras Now with Motion Detection

    Stephen James, Sep 14, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    504
    Stephen James
    Sep 14, 2007
  3. KevenGaston
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    6,130
    KevenGaston
    Oct 11, 2007
  4. Matthew Poole
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    284
    Philip
    May 11, 2006
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    648
    Peter
    Aug 18, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page