Has anybody here tried the "NEW" firmware for the 300DRebel? It's a hacked version of the 1.1.1 firmware, which released some of the custom functions available on the 10D.
Here's a link from DPReview for anybody who is interrested:
1- I would presonally wait a while. See what happens to others.
2- What are the features.
3- Features you need?
4- I'll second the warranty consideration.
Anyone understand the set shutter speed to 1/200 in Av mode with flash
option ?
Care to explain it in general EOS terms ?
NB please don't point me to the photonotes article on it, or the Av exposure section. I've read it, I just don't get it - does it really mean you are fixed at 1/200s at the aperture you pick, and the light is just varied by the flash power ?
I use it for snapshots. Yeah you're stuck at 1/200th. Basically in this mode you're using the flash metering to expose properly. It allows you to adjust aperture value and use the E-TTL flash metering for exposure. I vary the aperture for the DOF effects and not for ambient exposure. I use it because it's fast enough to avoid motion blur from ambient exposure and slow enought for proper flash sync. Basically in a snapshot situation it takes a variable away so you end up with fairly consistent shots. The 1/200th is the fastest x-sync for the 10D so it just pegs it at that shutter speed for convenience's sake.
Originally posted by Gordon:
Anyone understand the set shutter speed to 1/200 in Av mode with flash
option ?
Care to explain it in general EOS terms ?
NB please don't point me to the photonotes article on it, or the Av exposure section. I've read it, I just don't get it - does it really mean you are fixed at 1/200s at the aperture you pick, and the light is just varied by the flash power ?
I read this thread and I think it would be foolish to install this hacked firmware. There are no benefits worth voiding your warranty over.
You can easily return to the original firmware by resetting all the modifications to the original settings and then reinstalling the Canon 1.1.1 firmware.
One of the added benefits, as John mentioned, is that you can modify the embedded JPEG in RAW mode. By making it SMALL/COARSE, you can get quite a few more shots on your CF card. Conversly, you can save a LARGE?FINE embedded JPEG, so you have the versatility of using the HQ JPEG or the RAW image.
To me that was the main advantage for trying it out.
You can easily return to the original firmware by resetting all the modifications to the original settings and then reinstalling the Canon 1.1.1 firmware.
According to this post, there are some "issues" even if you roll back (such as the red-eye indicator blinking all the time and the beeper icon staying on). Who knows what internal memory values (perhaps some calibration settings programmed in on the assembly line?) are being inadvertently modified...
I personally wouldn't take the chance. Especially since many of the features that are listed after applying the "mod" do not work (such as 2nd-curtain sync) and some of them can't possibly ever work (like programming how the "Assist" button works, since that button doesn't exist on the 300D).
there are some "issues" even if you roll back (such as the red-eye indicator blinking all the time and the beeper icon staying on).
Those were addressed in a later thread (which I can't find at the moment). You must RESET all the modified custom functions to their original settings PRIOR to reinstalling the Canon firmware.
I read this thread and I think it would be foolish to install this hacked firmware. There are no benefits worth voiding your warranty over.
You can easily return to the original firmware by resetting all the modifications to the original settings and then reinstalling the Canon 1.1.1 firmware.
I don't have any experience with this particular embedded system, but I design them for a living. The statement above is a prime example why people shouldn't be installing this sort of thing on their camera. If you believe that's all that is involved in doing this or is how easy it would be to undo if something went wrong with the process, then you are not sufficiently educated to be using untested firmware modifications and hacks.
Here's the issue. You need working firmware to be able to undo a change to your firmware. If you screw it up, it will stay screwed up until you get an alternative flash memory installed, or remove the existing one and replace the existing firmware - requiring tools I would be willing to be you do not have.
This is not a software upgrade. it is a firmware upgrade, with everything that that implies.
on a $1000 body - a $100 CF card would alleviate any storage issues, and won't possibly affect the internals of the body - possibly rendering it useless - all it takes is someone else posting a simlar hacked file to download that is corrupted to cause all sorts of issues.
i'll stick to canon firmware - or save for a 10d... or better
I use it for snapshots. Yeah you're stuck at 1/200th. Basically in this mode you're using the flash metering to expose properly. It allows you to adjust aperture value and use the E-TTL flash metering for exposure. I vary the aperture for the DOF effects and not for ambient exposure. I use it because it's fast enough to avoid motion blur from ambient exposure and slow enought for proper flash sync. Basically in a snapshot situation it takes a variable away so you end up with fairly consistent shots. The 1/200th is the fastest x-sync for the 10D so it just pegs it at that shutter speed for convenience's sake.
Okay - makes sense. Sort of like a P mode but without the 1/60 to 1/200 variance - thanks.
Well, I succesfully managed to reload my original firmware. There are no apparent side-effects left over. As had been mentioned, you need to reset all the custom functions back to the defaults, while the hacked fw is still in place. Actually, the blinking red-eye light went away once I did that, with the hacked fw still in. It only starts to blink when you change a setting from the default.
I now have a question: everybody who posted to this thread seemed opposed to this hacked firmware. It didn't do enough to justify possibly voiding your warranty. What if it affected the metering system? After all, this is the weak link to this camera. No flexibility. What if it made it act just like the 10D. What then? Would it be worth it then? The hackers are continuously working on the firmware, and it's probably just a matter of time before they crack the code to unleash the full potential of the DRebel.
I think Canon should beat them to the punch, by creating a new firmware (perhaps at a small cost) that would make the Rebel do all that it PHYSICALY can. No software restrictions. Only design restictions. It still would not be a 10D, because it still is plastic (and silver), so they could still justify the additional cost of the 10D.
I think Canon should beat them to the punch, by creating a new firmware (perhaps at a small cost) that would make the Rebel do all that it PHYSICALY can. No software restrictions. Only design restictions. It still would not be a 10D, because it still is plastic (and silver), so they could still justify the additional cost of the 10D.
Just a thought.
Perhaps they have and the things that get hacked in don't meet Canon's requirements for quality control and functionality ?
I thought Canon's Europe site did a great job of explaining the difference between the 10D and the 300D. I really don't expect to find any big surprises in firmware hacks.
I thought Canon's Europe site did a great job of explaining the difference between the 10D and the 300D. I really don't expect to find any big surprises in firmware hacks.
Do you have a link to that, Garry?
Are you talking about feature differences here? If so, that doesn't necessarily marry with technical differences. It's quite possible, given the fact the 10D and 300D have the same sensor, and I believe the same processor, to support the same functionality.
I can quite readily imagine Canon just setting compiler flags to build in/out firmware functionality.
It's a consumer guide to choice of 300D vs 10D so of course it deals with feature comparisons. I am not convinced after reading it that the same sensor is used in both cameras. "Very similar" and "same" have different meanings. I thought before I read the article both cameras used the same... now I am not sure. I would be very surprised to learn if the 300D has been "programmed" to shoot slower than the 10D.
I would be very surprised to learn if the 300D has been "programmed" to shoot slower than the 10D.
It could very well be the same sensor, but just parts that fail the quality control standards for the 10D that are used in the 300D. This is a pretty common practice in the semiconductor industry, as different particular pieces of silicon will work at different speeds.
