Canon Digital Rebel Hacked Into A Pseudo-10D 585
Reverb9 writes "When Canon introduced the Digital Rebel, the world's first entry-level Digital SLR camera, many remarked on its similarities to the 10D , its $500 more expensive big brother. In fact, the two cameras share much of the same technology and so Canon implemented a number of software-based limitations to avoid destroying sales of the professional-oriented 10D. Now, a new hack that restores a previously hidden menu along with a few additional tricks has added nearly all of those 10D features to the Rebel, with an arguably superior user interface to boot. Canon has so far said little on the hack but certainly cannot be happy with its potential effect on sales. This is, however, a reality that more corporations are having to confront. In an era where programming labour is relatively cheap and computer connectivity more frequent can artificial, marketing-driven, barriers between technology products, last?"
Not 100% the same (Score:5, Informative)
notably the faster frames per second and frames that are buffered.
The EOS-300D will shoot 4 frames at 2.5 frames per second and the EOS-10D will shoot 9 frames at 3 frames per second.
Also, the EOS-300D has a cheap-feeling plastic body while the EOS-10D has a black magnesium body.
Server's Slow, So Here's a Synopsis (Score:5, Informative)
Firmware update instructions from Canon [canon.jp]
10D Instruction Manual [powershot.com] (PDF file)
Latest Firmware from Wasia [cat.orc.ru]
(Wasia is apparently the pseudonym of the Russian hacker who has developed all these goodies.)
Wasia's site is here:
http://satinfo.narod.ru/ [narod.ru]
Some more info from the linked page:
There are a bunch of other neat tips on that site, but they aren't directly related to this story, and so I haven't re-posted them here.
p
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:5, Informative)
Many vehicles out there have the same exact engine and drivetrain, but have timing and whatnot adjusted via computer, one to give better fuel consumption, the other to givemore power.. and the manufactuere advertises one as 120HP engine, and one as 150HP. Same, exact, engine.
Also, the timing on many vehicles is adjusted for a certain low grade of fuel (Even if that low grade isn't the lowest grade available).... making the decision to ALWAYS run on a higher octane fuel, and tuning the timing to take that into account can give you a nice increase in power.
Add to that cars with servo controlled turbo wastegates (if I recall correctly).. boost pressure can also be increased (or decreased, for better fuel efficiency) on the fly.
There are numerous ways to tweak a modern computerized engine management system.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:4, Informative)
> for my one cable box on one remote.
Many of the universals are made by one company. Get online and dig around for the advanced programming codes and you can probably merge the volume codes from one set to the set that works everything else and have a seamless experience with only one cable button. And if you are lucky enough to have one with the JP1 header (or solder pads for a plug) you are set for some serious modding.
A practice as old as time (Score:5, Informative)
It is an artifact of the need to standardize board layouts, processors, hardware and designs for mass production. Its also a direct tribute to the greed of companies who wouldn't offer their customers the best possible product possible.
Re:Like those old caller ID boxes (Score:3, Informative)
Re:From the Dilbert Princliple (1996) (Score:4, Informative)
I suspect it'll remain so because typically the company doesn't care about the 4 people who actually use the software to unlock the additional features of their lower end hardware (Voiding any warranties in the process.)
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:1, Informative)
It just dosen't work that way. Octane is a measure of how well gasoline resists spontaneously igniting under heat and pressure. The higher the pressure developed inside the cylinder, the higher the octane you need to aviod a dangerous thing called "pre-detonation"--essentially acting like a diesel. Gas engines aren't built to do that... But higher COMPRESSION RATIOS allow the engine to run more efficiently (develop more power per unit of gas, this is ALWAYS good.) But if you run a high compression engine on low grade gas, you're going to get knocking (sign of detonation). Turbo and super-chargers have much the same effect as a higher compression ratio, at the cost of a little energy.
Modern engines have a knock sensor, and can retard the timing on the fly to reduce detonation (as wells as lower fuel to air mix). Under load (acceleration), you're still likely to get knocking, though. Most turbo or super charged engines should be run on 87 minimum.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:2, Informative)
The SPG model differs only in a tweaked boost controller (at least under the hood. It also had different wheels, ground effects, springs, etc).
Re:Stickin' it to the man (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:5, Informative)
No, in fact, ALL of the MD recorders have features disabled through software. SCMS copy protection anyone?
Re:Who Should Be Angry? (Score:5, Informative)
Er. No.
Canon said, 'we'll give you this camera here, with magnesium body and huge feature set, for X dollars.'
Then Canon said, 'alternately we'll give you this other camera here, with plastic body, and extensive but smaller feature set, for X minus five hundred dollars.'
Canon was quite open about advertising that there were significant similarities. The sensor and a lot of the electronics are essentially the same. The more expensive camera has a more durable body, can shoot multiple frames faster, has a higher maximum shutter speed, and a few other goodies. Canon never said anything about there being entirely different firmware on the two models.
When you buy the camera, what are you paying for? The advertised set of features. What did Canon give you for your money? The advertised set of features. Why are they lying, again?
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:4, Informative)
Some examples:
Audi A3 150 hp to 180 hp, depending on country of sales
Audi A4 163 hp and 190(?) hp
VW Golf GTI 150 hp
Skoda Octavia 150 hp, RS has 180 but with different hardware.
Seat Leon 150hp to 180 hp.
Seat Toledo 180 hp
And more....
This really won't change much (Score:1, Informative)
For those of you that haven't I'll let you in on something; it feels like cheap plastic kodak crap. It's like they didn't even try to make it feel like a 'real' camera. Comparing it with my old Canon AE-1 film SLR, there is just no comparison. I say that as someone that has abandoned film entirely, not a film fanboy holdout.
The Rebel only exists because they cut corners in the manufacturing to get it under the magic $1000 price point before any other manufacturers could get something in that price range. Now that stuff like the Nikon D70 is on the market, the Rebel is effectively competing on price alone by being the cheapest dslr out there.
Cheap. Plastic. Kodak. Crap.
Re:Stickin' it to the man (Score:2, Informative)
You mean kinda like how Creative's Muvo 2 went flying off the shelves when word leaked out that the 4 gig microdrive in there would work in a camera?
Joe Consumer may not be as tech savvy as the Slashdot crowd, but a killer bargain appeals to EVERYONE.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:3, Informative)
The example requested earlier in this thread is right here: VW uses the 1.8T engine in the Audi TT as well and detunes the VW version so you'll pay more for the admittedly just as pretty (I think Golfs look great) but less practical (GTIs and Golfs can hold a huge amount of stuff) Audi.
While the chip can cause you trouble when getting service (for which reason APR designs many of their chips to act like the stock chip when you enter an easter-egg sequence of buttons on the cruise control/turn signal stalk), APR has been doing this long enough that their chips are pretty safe to use.
I'm a VW Golf owner (2000 GLS) but I'm not a 1.8T owner, but I know a lot of people who are, and complaints are relatively rare.
Incorrect (Score:3, Informative)
You're joking, right? No camera has 90% viewfinder. Both 10D and 300D have 95%.
Metering is done in the software, so it should be about the same if the codebase is the same. Mechanics are different, but the difference is not as big as the
If you want the real thing, go for the 1Ds. Or even the new 1D Mark II. If you don't have the money, stop complaining and get what you can afford.
Anyway, the difference between 10D and 300D is mostly one of the photographer's skill. But it's always easier to blame the tool. How many of the 300D dissers would make half-decent pictures with a classic Leica?
Re:Can artificial, marketing-driven, barriers last (Score:2, Informative)
The last time the DMCA was used against hardware manufacturers (Chamberlain garage door openers), the case was dismissed.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:1, Informative)
Ummmm (Score:4, Informative)
The reason they don't bus lock is there isn't really a feasable way of doing it. It would require some kind of trickiness with the chip generating it's own internal clock, and doing a comparison, which would never work since external bus speed can vary from one board to teh next natrually.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:5, Informative)
The most important link is this one:
http://ravn.net/md/ [ravn.net]
But maybe you'll find these interesting too:
http://www.minidisct.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&t hreadid=13149 [minidisct.com]
http://home.kabelfoon.nl/~bertrik/netmd/mdhack.htm l [kabelfoon.nl]
http://forums.minidisc.org/viewtopic.php?t=5&start =195 [minidisc.org]
Re:Should be considered fraud. (Score:5, Informative)
It is not the same camera. The 300D has a plastic body shell, isn't designed to be as robust as its more expensive rival the 10D.
For serious photography the heavier weight of the 10D helps avoiding camera shake (or atleast it does for most the people I know).
Also the 10D has built in PC socket (no not a PC as in computer - its a flash connector for studio flashes), I doubt the software hack magically opens up a new socket on the side of the body
The 10D has a higher frame rate which implies a larger buffer between the CCD and the flash memory.
Okay, the differences don't add up to $500 but the targeted markets arent the same and so the price does vary.
My film based 30 doesn't have many features above the 300v if you ignore eye control but still costs 200 more - for the features I do get and the better quality build etc I think its worth it.
So in short as the cameras are different beasts for different markets why should Canon be accused of fraud....
The original post to which this is the reply is a typical
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:4, Informative)
Of course, BMW has programmed the gearbox for maximum clutch and tire life - that is, it lets out the clutch slowly at low RPMs to reduce wear and tear on the clutch and not cause any wheelspin. However, when racing, clutch and tire life are secondary to getting a quick start - thus, you can use this easter egg to do the equivalent of popping the clutch on a straight manual tranny. Of course, I'm sure that the fact you've done this is recorded all over the ECU, and if you bring in the car for a warranty clutch replacement at 10,000 miles, the dealer will have some pointed questions to ask. Technology, as always, marches on ;).
Re:Stickin' it to the man (Score:2, Informative)
Whether or not they are many enough to be of concern to Canon is a seperate issue, but there has been plenty of interest since day-1.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:2, Informative)
IIRC, by cutting some uncut traces and connecting some cut traces, you could disable some clock-locking mechanism, allowing you to overclock the chip more aggressively.
I think that I read this at Tom's Hardware, but I can't be sure.
Re:Stickin' it to the man (Score:3, Informative)
No, they'll get the 10D, or they'll already have it. A lot of pros skipped the 1Ds because of the weight - if you need to lug around 3 lenses + body weight starts to become an issue. The 1Ds was a studio camera, and a lot of people stayed with the 10D which is an excellent all-arounder. Heck, some of my photopro buddies still use the Canon D60.
Please. (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a film SLR with 90% [canon.com]. That said, the biggest difference between the 10D and 300D's viewfinder isn't coverage but magnification. With same 50mm lenses, the 10D has a .88x magnification, while the 300D has a .8x. Between the 10% magnification difference and inherently dimmer pentamirror construction, the 10D will be much easier to use.
When I'm shooting for a client, I need two things. I need a camera that won't fail, and I need a second camera. In that respect, if I had Canon lenses and my photography doesn't need the 1D/1D2's speeds or the 1Ds' resolution, the 10D/300D combination might be reasonable, if I can get over the severe difference in usability. No, it's not an "attitude" issue.
Your suggestion to get the 1Ds or the 1D Mark II are asinine, though, if they're looking at $800 and $1,000 bodies. Last I checked, the 1D Mark II costs $6,000, and the 1Ds costs $10,000, not to mention the weight increase from even 10D.
No, the skill will remain constant for a given photographer. However, with better ergonomics and specs of the 10D, you're less likely to miss shots with it than with the 300D. That's the whole point of buying say pro-grade over consumer-grade -- you're more likely to get usable results. Is that worth the price difference? I don't know. Ask your wallet.
Re:Ah... the first of a start. (Score:3, Informative)
Not true. 10D has pentaprism viewfinder 300D has a pentamirror. There is nothing to direct the image to the sensor. Both have mirror in front of the sensor to direct image to the viewfinder, thus both have mirror slap. 10D only has mirror lock up feature to alliviate it.
The 10D has a hefty magnesium case, where the Rebel uses a less durable, plastic or composite case.
True.
The 10D also can take pictures at a faster rate (burst of 9 at 3 fps vs. burst of 4 at 2.5 fps, I believe). I think this is due to the fact that the Rebel doesn't use the prism.
The maximum number of images per burst has nothing to do with mirrors, it is just the question of the image buffer size on the camera. 10D has larger buffer.
Re:Not 100% the same (Score:3, Informative)
That said, I don't go around dropping it all over the place.
BTW, just for everyone who thinks this is going to ruin your camera.. all it does is flip a couple bits from saying "don't display this menu" to "do display this menu". All the code for the actual features was done in-house by canon.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:2, Informative)
Also, as I think someone else has mentioned, the VAG group small diesels also do the same.
Failed Equipment this week (Score:3, Informative)
The system locked up during a wedding I was photographing. Why? Water apparently condensed on the contacts in the lense.
The 10D has absolutely the WORST focus on anything other than central point that I have ever seen- and I'm coming from an eight year old A2.
I have shots that would be in focus (you could feel the lense jittering) and then upon depressing the shutter button the focus would jump (out, that is).
All in all I wish I hadn't bought the 10D.
Re:Makes you wonder (Score:3, Informative)
There was no HP 8L. In fact, there was never anything over a 6 in that numbering scheme. The new models are in the thousands.
I'm guessing you're thinking of a 4M/4MP. Those were similar printers to the 4L and were about double the price. They, however, had more differences than just print speed. They would do 600 DPI (4L only does 300dpb), and, I believe, had better paper tray options. The 4L holds very little paper -- 100 pages maybe?
That said, my 4L is still kicking 9 years later. Though avoid at all costs those cheap staples-brand toner cartridges. They suck.
You Recall Incorrectly (Score:5, Informative)
The 10D and the 300D/Rebel have the same sensor. And the sensor is a CMOS not CCD chip.
See the review here. [dpreview.com]
Steve
Re:Both are "ProSumer" cameas really... (Score:3, Informative)
Looks like it's a 1.6 as well.
Re:Not 100% the same (Score:2, Informative)
Nikon is doing its best to do so. The new D70 is $100 more expensive than the Digital Rebel/300D, but it has a big enough performance advantage that the price difference looks pretty small. It doesn't come with cripled firmware and has a tougher body. Nikon also makes DX format (i.e. DSLR only) lenses with focal lengths down to 10.5mm so that you can shoot true wide angle shots with the D70; Canon's only EF-S (DSLR only) lens is the 18-55mm zoom sold as the box lens with the Digital Rebel.
More significantly, the D70 completely demolishes both the Digital Rebel and the 10D (and AFAIK every other camera within the price range of an ordinary consumer) in sustained shooting speed. Its primary shooting speed limitation seems to be how fast it can save data to its flash memory card. It has an intitial burst speed of 2.9 shots per second (a bit faster than the Digital Rebel), and with a very fast memory card it can keep up a rate of 1 per second in raw mode or 2.2 per second in highest quality JPEG mode until the card is full.
The only problem the D70 has right now is that it's so popular that it's very hard to find. I just ordered mine, but it'll be a week or two before it's delievered. If you look online, you'll find that every seller (or every seller who's honest enough to mention these things) describes it as out of stock, deliver when available. I'm guessing that Nikon could probably lower the price to match the Digital Rebel, but there's no sense in doing so when the thing is already selling like hotcakes.
An even simpler example: License changes (Score:3, Informative)
Then Borland went and changed the license of the standard edition to prohibit using it for commercial purposes. You couldn't sell software written with it. You couldn't even use it for internal software development at a place of business. They changed the name from "standard" to "personal." At the same time, the upped the price of the professional edition from $500 to over $1000.
Other than the license change, the sofware was the same. But in doing so, you had to pay an additional $930, essentially killing the Delphi hobbyist market.
Re:One obvious fact is missing (Score:2, Informative)
Get a few prime lenses (ie, fixed focal length) and they'll still blow those $1000+ zooms out of the water in terms of photo quality. In the case of zooms, what you pay for is a fast, constant aperture (and, of course, good glass). Most "pro" level zooms have a constant f/2.8 aperture, while consumer lenses usually have a variable maximum aperture. Plus, most consumer zooms suffer from horrible barrel distortion.
I have and currently use 24mm, 28mm, 50mm, and 85mm lenses from Canon, so I don't really have the need for zoom lenses. And you can pick up this entire set of lenses for cheaper than any L-Series lens and get better results.
Re:Shush, shush, all of you! (Score:3, Informative)
I realize this will probably be an unpopular opinion here, but your post ignores the fact that we do live in a capitalist economy, and as such a company is entitled, nay, expected to charge as much as the market will bear. I don't like getting the shaft any more than you do, but it's never been about the cost of making the product -- it's always been about the perceived value to the consumer. If the consumer views the extra features as being valuable, be they in software or hardware, then the consumer will pay the price. If they don't, then the product fails and the company goes back to the drawing board.
Further (and again this will be an unpopular stance here) even if we ignore the part about what the market will bear, software is a product, too, and there are many people willing to pay for software. Sure, Adobe could sell PhotoShop CS for $100 or less, as the cost of manufacturing is certainly nowhere near that. But they don't. The choose instead to sell PhotoShop Elements at a low cost and PhotoShop CS at a significantly higher cost. Why? Well, besides the fact that they have every right to set the price as they see fit and then succeed or fail at that price point, they have engineering costs to recoup and shareholders to satisfy, just like any publicly held company.
In short, I don't think your complaint about "crippled" products has merit. But that's just my opinion.
Re:Ah... the first of a start. (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, it doesn't:
Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 117 of the United States Code:
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy. -
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner
-- snip --
It is perfectly legal to make copies of software from the CD to the hard disk and from your HD to your RAM since that is an "essential step in the utilization of the computer program".
No EULA needed.
Re:Wow take some marketing courses... or read (Score:3, Informative)
Not always... Sometimes manufacturers get lucky and churn out more high-end chips than they can sell, while they have plenty of demand for low-end chips. So they stamp the high-end chips with lower speeds and sell them.
This happened with the 486 in particular, a I recall. Intel got so good at making them that they didn't have nearly enough of the slower chips to make demand, but they didn't want to risk lowering prices on the high-end chips that some consumers/businesses would be willing to pay a premium for, so they stamped the chips at a slower speed and sold them that way.
I believe that overclocking circles will often share their successes with particular lots of chips (the lot number is usually stamped on the chip). If you get a chip from a lucky lot you can often crank up the speed significantly.
However, you are correct that in general chip makers prefer to label chips at the highest speed they can handle - this clearly is the most efficient use of materials assuming the high-end chips are scarce.
500$ price difference (Score:1, Informative)