Slashdot Mirror
Canon Digital Rebel Hacked Into A Pseudo-10D
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?"
just how many other devices have similar "hidden" features, just waiting to be hacked. I suspect it's a lot.
picture that...
Yes, when they're enforced by the DMCA and jail sentences for those who reverse-engineer them. (Remember DeCSS? The outcry over DeCSS was just a preview; things are going to get a lot worse, not better.)
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
I've been meaning to buy the Digital Rebel/300D ever since it was released, but somehow was held back by the lack of the Mirror Lockup feature. Now that this hack enables that feature, I think I'll go pick one of these babies up very soon. I already have a nice collection of Canon EF and EF L lenses that the 300D can take.
Canon has so far said little on the hack but certainly cannot be happy with its potential effect on sales.
That arguement is rediculous. What part of Canon's market that will shell out for that camera will apply this hack? Probably almost none of it, if they can find it or understand it. So that leaves the likes of the slashdot crowd, and that really isn't a big enough group to put a dent into Canon's sales.
Seriously, why would they not have completely removed the code or made it buggy on purpose just to protect themselves? Owners of this camera can rejoice this time but I am sure that next time Canon won't make the same mistake...
This will be happening a lot in the future... it's a good thing though, if they can make a product more powerful for that amount of money than they should do so. Marking up the same hardware and because you don't have artifical barriers on it should be a crime...
Unfortunately, it's breaking these artifical barriers to make full use of hardware you paid for that a crime in our society.
I touch computers in naughty places
And it's slashdotted already? Sheesh.
Anyway, I've always disliked it when companies charged more money for the same technology, without the crippled-ness of the cheaper version. It seems somehow dishonest.
But, the article, submitter, sure has a thing, for commas.
The Canon 10D is aimed at pros, and what pro would actually rely on a "hack" to turn their Rebel into a 10D? These guys have to be able to trust their cameras completely and having hacked firmware will degrade that trust, no matter what the 1337 h4x0r community says.
Besides, what will happen to these pros when the next Canon firmware obliterates this hack? If the firmware provides needed fixes that they can't get without losing their "Rebel/10D", they're going to be mighty unhappy.
So I doubt Canon will be too worried about this: their target audience for the 10D isn't the hack-using geekerati, it's professionals. People who rely on their cameras aren't about to compromise reliability just to save a (relatively) few $$.
It's not necesarily that programming labour is cheap. I'm my opinion, the increase in connectivity has lead to an increase in efficiency, whereby the same code gets reapplied to many more applications than before the onset of the Internet.
IMO, the per hour cost of programming labour has not really changed. The cost of programming labour, per unit produced, has dropped.
Just to mention that the 10D does have different hardware, so this hack won't give all features,
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.
Post an article on a high-traffic site and wait for the hacker's server to burst into flames.
They can't stop people from trying.
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:kcza_GQsA5MJ:ww w.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tr icks.html+&hl=en
put your 10d on ebay, buy a 300d, and pocket the 400+ dollar difference, thats what I will be doing.
-ashot
not bad, still an expensive purchase to start with ($950US+).
What about hardware hacking? Anyone tried to hack a GPS into a camera? (or vice versa?)
It worked plenty good for me! The feature to be able to make a RAW + Large JPEG is enough to make it worth the effort. That and being able to adjust the Set button to make quick White balance setups? Definatly worth it.
But that's not what will happen. For one, only us Slashdot types will care about the hack, so the real effect will be nil. Second, their legal department won't want to bet on that, so they'll sue the hack into submission - DMCA, EULA violation, or something equally stupid. Oh well.
Firmware update instructions from Canon
10D Instruction Manual (PDF file)
Latest Firmware from Wasia
(Wasia is apparently the pseudonym of the Russian hacker who has developed all these goodies.)
Wasia's site is here:
http://satinfo.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
In Korea, long hair is for old people!
In this particular case the hack involved restoring some capabilities, which while present in the hardware, had been locked or hidden by software. Certainly this individual deserves his due for circumventing the software barriers. However, in software products it is much easier to simply leave sections of code out of the finished build in the lesser versions. If the functionality is not there in the first place then no amount of unlocking will enable it. This incident raises important issues about the sale and marketing of technology products, especially in the digital camera market. It is my opinion that the industry has vastly underestimated the demand among consumers for more powerful "professional" grade digital cameras. It would probably make more sense from both a business and technology standpoint to offer the full camera at a price which is higher than the basic entry level model, but less than the full "professional" model since most of the work was probably in the design of the hardware and software and not as much in the manufacturing. People are generally willing to pay for a well built product as long as they know that the quality is there.
CPU manufacturers have been doing this for a long time - if a chip tests at a high speed but they need more "value" low-speed chips, they'll mark it as slower and crank it down. There have been ways to overclock CPUs (not just things like FSB tweaks but hardware mods on the cpu that make it think it's a faster version) from way back. Intel's only concern is people mass-marketing the slower cpus as faster ones, not individuals OCing their chips.
~Berj
Common, I'm sure Canon had a sense that this was going to happen, eventually. The only question was 'WHEN'. Just like lots of 'trial' versions of software either have a 15day evaluation, and/or some things removed, there's usually always a 'crack' that will re-implement these things. Anyways, just like intel and many (or nearly ALL) of their CPUs in a certain chunk of their roadmap, are the same. Anyways, this could have been a good move for Canon, moving the Canon-10D (EXCELLENT camera, I own one) into more of the consume price range, resulting in more sales!
1. Build a product out of [price] reach for most consumers;
2. Charge a more realistic price for a 'feature reduced' version;
3. Watch as it gets hacked;
4. Then watch sales climb high as people begin to believe (under false pretences) that they have got 'one over' on the company - people love a free ride or a good 'bargain'.
I like it!
When digital rights become enshrined in the hearts and minds of a people from unjust persucution and jail terms then and only then will there be the outcry neccesary to challange such malfeasance on the part of lawmakers who abuse public ignorance of political processes. Viva la mucho direct democracy!
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
It can only be a good thing for Cannon too?
--
"we live in a post-ideological world..." - Billy Bragg.
Scott,
Here's a mindboggling stupid idea from our Marketing Department that you might be able to use. We make [type of machine]. A new version of our product is both cheaper and faster. A great breakthough, right?
Well marketing wants Engineering to slow the unit down so they have a low cost unit to sell. Then sell them upgrades to full speed at an enormous price. These would be physically identical, just one would have the code messed up on purpose to run slow.
So does this mean [type of machine] = Digital Cameras ?
Heh, this sort of reminds me about how video cards, particularly in the last couple years, are disabling a few pipelines in the bios/software, only to have users flash a bios and increase the pipelines (the Radeon 9500 non pro (4 pipes) to 9700 (8 pipes) comes to mind). Inevitably companies will catch up to this, such as ATI did, and the soft-modabble 9500 was discontinued in favor of the 9600 models, which have a totally different core and only 4 pipelines physically on the card.
If you have to ask, you'll never know.
I doubt this particular hack will have too big an impact... Most features does not mean all features, and there are hardware differences.
It doesn't necessarily mean that any significant number of people are going to do it, either. Look at CPU overclocking for example... Both Intel and AMD allow it, so it obviously isn't hurting the sales of their high-end parts too much. Even considering retail seperate from OEM. If they felt like they could make significantly more money by locking the multipliers and FSB, they certainly would have done so many generations ago.
The other thing to consider with Canon is the costs involved... To modify the cheaper model enough to make this impossible would probably cost them more than they will lose with this hack out in the open.
A Rebel turned into a 10D, you're still missing a few of the features but for all the R&D that went into the 10D, the pictures I've seen come out of one makes it worth its price rather than buying a 300D/Rebel and hacking it.
R&D and all things that it took to develop the 10D, Canon definitely deserves the extra they charge for it. As much as I or anyone else wants something for nothing, these cameras are not outrageously priced and I believe it a fair price they ask for it.
I can't get to the article so I have no idea what the hack is, but if it's a matter of firmware, I think they should have pulled a Handspring and used ROMs rather than PROMs in the Rebel.
That's funny ... I remember DeCSS. My friend had the T-shirt. I read and loved the haiku.
I also remember how thousands of hackers won out in the end, and have libdvdcss and libdvdread installed on their systems. And remember how DVD-Jon was aquitted? Twice? That was sweet.
It's too bad that the DMCA brought us all down in the end. Every day i lament the fact that I can't download pirated movies off the internet before they're released in the theatre, and that I also can't watch dvd's on my computer.
It really sucks.
The 1st generation will have the code hidden and can be enabled. The 2nd and subsequent generations will have the code removed. So, enjoy it while you can; buy 'em while you can! :-)
Way back when, the local phone company shipped out these cheap caller ID boxes when you ordered new service. They sent the lowest end model, which only shows the name and had ~50 number memory.
:P
One day bored, I opened the box up and found that there was *1* soider point that would upgrade it to "name" caller ID, and 200+ more number memory.
The difference in price bewteen the 2 models was like $40.
Honestly, I don't think many people will do this change to upgrade there camera. Personally, I wouldn't becuase those damn things are expensive compaired to my $100 digital camera
until (succeed) try { again(); }
... which they will get with the 10D's all-metal body. The Digital Rebel does has some kind of plastic body, and seems less sturdy/durable.
I'm far from a professional, but I've heard about people hacking their Rebel's to unlock the 10D feature set for a while, yet I would still rather own a camera built out of a solid piece of metal and not some plastic/composite body.
To your point about professionals wanting fully functional, fully supported equipment (not hacked), I would expect they'd also want the most durable options out there.
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.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
I can't tell if you're just being a troll, or if you're just weird, or both...
You seem to have bought the line that DeCSS was "just a pirates' tool".
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
I refuse to buy any Sony products because they deliberately cripple the functionality and quality of the still image-taking capabilities in their video cameras in order to sell more still cameras. Screw you Sony. You could make a great video camera that also doubles as an equally-competent still camera but you don't, so don't ever expect me to buy your products.
It was once true (say 10-15 years ago) in the American automoblie industry that the cost difference to build the cheapest to the most expensive car was about $1000, although the resulting price difference between those models was more like $15,000. Even updated for today those figures would probably be $3000 and $25,000.
And how much less do you suppose it costs Intel to make a Celeron verses a Pentium 4, or AMD to make an Athlon64 verses a Duron? It probably costs them more to build two or more different chips than if they designed and built their best chip only!
If I knew how to effectively fight those bastards, I would!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I wasn't trolling, but it probably came around as a bit arrogant ... in general, party-line comments are best responded to in like. I was trying to be tongue-in-cheek, but i guess it didn't work well.
...
/wink
I guess what I meant to say was
Fair use, good. Fire, bad.
Anyone up for hacking Nikons equivalent, the D70? Can't have Canon stealing the market now that this new hack is out. ;-)
Saving $500 is quite a lot, I'll bet a number of normal people figure out how to apply this hack with detail instructions from message boards and the like.
I really thought it was odd of Canon to differentiate the software at all - they should haver just kept the price differential to a resnable cost for a sturdier body.
Both are really prosumer cameras, I think people shopping for one would be thinking about the other - like you say, the real difference is when you are going for a 1D or a 1Ds.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Many other photocopier models offering different speeds were identical except for the controller boards, and swapping those over wasn't uncommon either; in fact, at one stage the distributor used to officially sanction it because the manufacturer was screwing them over.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
While you may be correct in assuming that the difference in manufacturing cost between a $20,000 car and a $60,000 car is actually nowhere near $40,000, there are other costs to consider. R&D that goes into making that $60,000 quieter, more comfortable, etc etc, adds to the costs the corporation needs to recoup.
The celeron is not really a valid example, however. The primary difference between a celeron and a "full-blown" processor is l2 cache - the celeron doesn't have it. No cache means less transistors, less transistors means less complicated/smaller die, which means more cpus per wafer, hence, intel can pump out far more cpu's in a manufacturing cycle.
This is far from the first product with 'easter egg' features that aren't standard. I'm thinking of a Linksys router with another html page of 'features' --data logging where email is automatically sent to local machines about who is connecting and from where--. The html page must be typed in manually, but the features all work. The really wild part is that the 'features' are in Linksys' own new firmware.
Uh, no, the 10D actually has much nicer, better physical hardware than the 300D. It's arguable that the advanced features were locked out because they figured it wouldn't be worth the effort to validate and support them on the 300D hardware, given that most of the people who really wanted them would prefer the 10D anyway. On your other point, there's more costs than manufacturing -- research, development, distribution, liability, etc. By the way, your cost + 10% scheme is a great way to discourage improvement and efficiency -- if it costs me $100 to make something, I get $10, but if I can figure out a clever way to make it for $50, I only get $5.
This reminds me of floppy discs in the 80's. They would have "single-sided" and "double-sided" floppy discs at different prices. They acted as if the double-sided discs were some sort of new technology and released them later at higher prices. In reality, all discs were double sided. The only thing they lacked was a write-protect hole in the side of the disc jacket. Anyone with a hole punch could have had a double-sided disc at "single-sided" prices.
What is wrong about this is that the disc manufacturers were lying to their customers. This is fraud. At the time, I had a hard time believing the manufacturers were not investigated or punished for this sort of actvity. Now, for some reason, some people think that this sort of criminal activity is okay.
It is Canon's customers that should be angry. Both those that purchased the $500 version (for getting hardware they could have gotten for much less), and the those that purchased the "entry-level" version (for getting sold an intentionally crippled camera). Canon lied to all of them.
So, what, then, is the "reality that more corporations are having to confront"? Is it the reality that they need to have some accountability to their customers? Is it the reality that they have to tell the truth?
All data is speech. All speech is Free.
From everything I've seen about the Rebel, it is a much more cheaply made piece of equipment. "As a professional" I would consider the more robust design of the 10D (which is due for a replacement/update by the way) to make it a superior camera, for reasons unrelated to the chip set and its functions. Furthermore, as a professional, I am considering the Rebel as a backup digital body, without any hacking. It just doesn't look like a good bet for a high use high reliability camera, although it has its potential uses. But even with functions hacked, it is unlikely to equal a 10d.
As for the "propriety" of crippling functionality, get a clue. The fact that a company can give something away at no cost doesn't mean that it is evil if it doesn't.
Look at it this way: The price for the low function and high function products is probably lower (over time, ceteris parabus, etc. etc.) because the development cost is amortized over a larger market which includes the low and high function products instead of just the high function products.
Of course the company could distribute the benefits of the larger manufacturing run to different market segments depending on compeitition... but somewhere, if the market is competitive, the consumer is a winner, if the company can sell more of those chips by crippling some of them.
Think about it.
I'm using a Cannon PowerShot A80 digital cam. Any idea what are the hidden menus?
There are tons of devices out there with limitations built in through software. Many of these can be changed through hacks to improve functionality and/or effect. But I feel rather that the question is if people actually will take advantage of 'hacks' to improve the product.
One thing that prevents many from changing their product is the warranty. The warranty might become void if the software is changed. Many customers do not want to void the warranty, the product functions to their need, they weigh the risk and decide it is not worth it.
A related issue is if the 'hack' does not work and actually spoil the product, what then?
It is a trend that service becomes increasingly important, many customers will not risk to lose the service.
Yes it was cheaper for MS to maintain one code base, instead of two, but having developed it already, they could have just given all the functionality to everybody at one price.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Hmm... I'll bid the approximate cost of a 300d on your used 10d.
Here is one google cache of the page.
I'm not certain just how useful this is, but it's all that I saw, as the Wayback Machine didn't have an archive.
I'm not karma whoreing, just trying to see the site (I've been thinking about an EOS digital rebal for fish pics - I need INSANELY FAST shutter speeds, with the option for getting far enough optical zoom on the subject that I can see individual scales and detail on a 0.25" fry).
Hope this helps out a small bit. Why, perchance, is slashdot providing "raw" and direct links to back-end sites, anyway? Sorry if this has been answered, but I'm being serious. Caches exist. They're free. They have massive horsepower and bandwidth.
I've got to admit this isn't really news to me. I've known some folks were working on hacking the software since about October of last year... those cameras run DOS and the software changes aren't that difficult (the hooks are all in place), though it is still an impressive hack. However, as someone who has owned both the 300d (for about a month) and 10d (for most of a year now), I really don't think it will change 10d sales all that much. It will bump 300d sales by some unmeasurable amount, which is cool, but the 10d has a whole different feel. Some may not like the feel (heavier) but when you hook a 400mm telephoto to each, the difference seems very very obvious. BTW: The 10D isn't sold as a pro camera. That would be the 1D, 1Ds, and so on. The 10D is pitched to advanced amateurs.
The differences between the Rebel and 10D weren't all that great to begin with. See the chart a little way down this page. Mostly button customizations and whatnot. And how often do you really need "release without a CF card"? And that firmware crippling (plus the plastic body) does come with a $600 reduction in MSRP, so it's not as if it was a completely bum deal.
Granted, Canon just priced to Rebel low to grab up market share in the prosumer sector (and encourage loyalty to its lenses, especially since a lot of the old third-party compatibles won't work with the Rebel), but it's still not bad.
A certain company I have worked with in the past that is one of the top 3 firewall manufacturers, puts limits in their software to disable certain functionality that is present in the hardware on lower end models.
Those same low end home-use models that you can pick up for $500 to $1200, have the same encryption chips as their $100k behemoth. The really haven't done anything as far as encryption goes, just put slower interfaces on the low end ones (which can be replaced by soldering in one chip that's available for about $17. But the other stuff that's handled in hardware, like trunking, and some of the routing features, have explicitly been disabled via software.
HOLY SHIT.
now that was funny.
cleverness abounds!
You got something against dead people?
nt
I think all this arguing ya'll have over this is crazy. It brings us back to the issues we have been discussing time and time again. Why on earth would you pay $1500 for a camera, if you are not going to get $1500 usage out of it!? I understand if you are like a wedding photographer or something, but shesh.
Same deal with software like photoshop or office. Sorry microsoft, but $500 for me to write a school paper every few months isn't practical. Sorry adobe, $700 or whatnot to play around with digital photos now and then ain't worth it. Sorry cannon, $1500 to take a picture? What ever happened to disposable cameras?
For those who can't afford, or don't use $1500 worth of digital camera, they can at least hack and enjoy the extra features that they wouldn't pay for anyways, and which wouldn't hurt anyone to give them.
Yea, $700 or whatever for the rebel is enough for me, and I will gladly hack it if I can, because its the American thing to do.
Hearts afire,
- Andy
I know a lot of companies are going to get upset about people doing a kind of arbitrage pricing. Enough other people have ranted about that.
A more interesting point is the positive opportunity this offers for camera manufacturers. Who will be first to ship a programmable and hackable camera, with at least partially open source firmware?
I don't think it's such a crazy idea. There is a fair degree of overlap between digital camera buyers and programmers, or at least people likely to have access to programmers. A pro photographer or press agency might well want to invest a couple of days of programmer time to add some feature they really need. I'm imagining something like the old HP programmable calculators.
There are some ugly edges in the UI of my Minolta camera. It's a great camera in many ways, and the problems are perhaps not serious enough to warrant an official patch from Minolta. But they could be fixed purely in software, and if it were reasonably easy to change it I might do it myself.
There are a few issues you'd need to sort out: hopefully the software shouldn't be able to physically damage the camera, and there needs to be some way to easily get back to the default if you screw it up. I don't think those are impossible to overcome.
What could you add?
- rebind keys to suit the features you most often use
- digital effects on the camera, such as multiple-exposure
- capture coordinates from a GPS or notes from a PDA by bluetooth
- better downsampling
- Probably many more I haven't thought of yet. Look at all the diverse things people have done with Palm devices or MP3 players.
The potential of programmable devices is much larger than even the best hardcoded device.
On another note, open-source/libre spell checkers are common; but where are the grammar checkers? OOo is a decent product, but I was half-expecting a grammar checker. There's gotta be academic research in the area.. but simple searches didn't return anything promising.
Unlikely. Not only will an extremely few number of people actually do this (i.e., three people who read it on Slashdot), but it could actually increase sales. Whereas many people may have overlooked the Rebel for another camera with more features for a smaller price, folks that know about this hack may be willing to get the Rebel instead. The end result is that very few people who would have bought the high-end unit in the first place will go for the cheaper model and a mod, but many people who wouldn't have considered the cheaper camera may give it a second look.
No comment.
Aren't they doing the same?
What about now hacking the Nikon D70 (Nikon's EOS300D equivillant) into a D100?
--Coops
zadok.org.uk
Some of the stuff in this thread is just insane. And far and beyond normal idiocy.
1.Since this camera was announced we knew it would be hacked it was just a matter of time.
2.Canon knew it would be hacked.
3.If you only knew how many times products are crippled/disabled and priced lower so that high end stuff still sells? anyone remember 3.5 single sided floppies? Companies do what is in there own best interest.. err in the stockholders best interest. Do some of you really think Canon is doing this to pull one over on you? No they are doing what will make the most money for their shareholders.
4.I think the anaology to overclocking is not valid. Chips are clocked at set speeds becuase they are stable at that speed, If AMD/Intel sold the 2.4 rated chip as a 3.0 which it is in some cases IDENTICAL, people would complain since the 2.4 rated chips can't really handle those speeds and crash. AMD and Intel love overclockers cuz they buy more chips then anyone else, since they fry things all the time.
5.All in all this will not really affect 10d sales, for all the reasons listed above, stability, ability to interface with higher end equipment, better case, higher quality parts, and certain features that the 300d can't so at all.
6.300d sales will go up since this just became the geek camera of the year.
Also on a side note no one has mentioned that people have been hacking the Canon lenses to get more f-stops and zoom out of them for awhile. Canon restricts some lenses since the quality becomes adversly affected at min and max. So some people have removed the stops and taken the quality hit for more versitility.
---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
it's a good thing though, if they can make a product more powerful for that amount of money than they should do so. Marking up the same hardware and because you don't have artifical barriers on it should be a crime...
Unfortunately, it's breaking these artifical barriers to make full use of hardware you paid for that a crime in our society.
A few years back there was a hack that, by setting a few registry keys, you could turn Windows 2000 Professional into Windows 2000 Server. So if I buy a computer with Windows 2000 Pro on it, do I have the right to run that hack to "make full use of hardware [I] paid for"? Should Microsoft be charged of a crime for creating "artificial barriers"?
No, and no. For the same reason, Canon is well within their right to charge extra for the camera which has more features. And you've no right to try to use those features without paying for them.
Seems like a pretty boneheaded move on Canon's part, but even if they did the software equivalent of leaving the cash register open, reaching over the counter and grabbing a handful of cash is still stealing.
--Bradley
You're saying that this camera has no market because the average person wouldn't spend this kind of money on a camera? Well it's not meant for the average consumer. They have the rebel for that. This is a professional model.
Is this something new? A professional model camera that is expensive but worth every penny to a professional photographer.
"Sorry cannon, $1500 to take a picture?"
What about "sorry mercedes, $75,000 to drive to Taco Bell"?
You're argument is baseless because you're implying canon only makes expensive $1500 cameras when this is clearly wrong. Companies like canon have been in photography for years and their higher price comes with years of quality and service.
Or you were joking, I can't tell. It's too late for sarcasm.
Does applying the hack void the warranty?
I remember readinig some years ago some details about how to turn Windows NT4 Workstation into NT4 Server by switching a few registration keys.
Of course, we can also think of the 486SX which was a copro impaired version of the genuine DX...
Trolling using another account since 2005.
That and the price difference between 10D and 300D add up to quite a lot.
Software hacks and the price differential of a few hundred bucks are fairly irrelevant when the camera's power can really only be unleashed with pro lenses costing $1500 or $2000 (and up) rather than the cheap crap lens that comes with a stock Rebel unit. It's not uncommon for a serious photog to have tens of thousands of bucks invested in lenses. Do you really think that this sort of pro would balk at the 10D's price and get a hacked Rebel instead?
That's not exactly "high tech", you can get the same effect by adding a bleed valve in the pressure line to the wastegate diaphragm for a dollar's worth of parts from the hardware store.
You can also disconnect the wastegate actuator and maybe get an extra 100HP for a few moments.
The problem with this kind of mod is that folks see how easily the turbo controls can be modified and think "a little is good so more is better", leading to melted pistons, blown head gaskets (if you're lucky), etc. Sometimes these things are programmed conservatively so that next year's model can boast ten more horsepower, sometimes it's because there's an inherent weakness in the engine or transaxle and they don't want to have to do a lot of warranty work.
Often these power increases come at the expense of reduced engine life, like turning up the voltage going to a light bulb to get brighter light where 10% more light can equal 50% less life expectancy.
One thing though, the 1.8 makes 250HP stock? That doesn't seem right (just going by your figure of 25HP being a 10% increase).
Putting moderation advice in your
Often times it's cheaper for a manufacturer to do this.
I mean, they've already got production on the higher end model. It's a professional unit and is in line with competition prices.
So, they swap out some metal with plastic, remove some features in software, and sell the camera for a lower priced segment.
It's likely that they wouldn't have been able to do that at all if they had to design a whole new unit from the ground up for the lower market segment. It would have been too expensive for all the R&D and the new production line. In the end, the new lower cost model would have cost too much.
So what would you rather have? An inexpensive camera mostly based from a high end model or a low end camera built from the ground up and costs more with less quality parts?
I think it's an acceptable practice and it works out for the consumer in the end. Better product and less money.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
I also bought my 10D for reasons more than software/firmware capabilities. I knew the 300D (Digital Rebel) was crippled in some ways, including focus modes, but I still prefer the 10D for its overall build quality, the 10D has a magnesium-alloy body as opposed to the 300D's plastic body.
Other issues include the 300D's increased "mirror slap" which can cause some camera shake, not good for those long exposures. Also a slower shutter time and longer viewfinder blackout time.
This isn't to say the 300D isn't a good body, it's going to do wonders for those aspiring pros who can't quite afford higher end gear yet, but it still isn't a 10D.
------------ Ben Chroneos
I know that companies believe that they're protecting their revenue by making cheap crippled products, but ultimately how can this be a better approach than making the best product you can make at the best price you can make it?
Why don't you have a right to hack something you bought? or are you just being a troll?
If I bought it, I can do whatever the fuck I want to it. I may void my warranty, but that's my problem.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Having played with both the 300D and 10D, I don't think the plastic body is really an issue (except, maybe, for poseurs, or for people who bang and bang and scratch and bang their cameras around ;-). I found it to be surprisingly solid (I was expecting flimsy, cheesy plastic), and lightweight, compared to the rock-solid and rock-heavy 10D.
(However, if you're prone to banging around something as expensive as a 300D/10D, I think you have bigger problems. ;-)
I think the only real complaint about the plastic is that it is not black, which means that you are likelier to see the reflection of the camera when shooting through a window or something similar. However, Canon is selling a black 300D in Japan (I don't know if and when it'll hit the US).
While there may be valid reasons for a person to get a 10D over a 300D (lack of FEC, no independent AI servo focus, etc.), I don't think the plastic case is one, unless color is an issue.
Even aside from the fact that 99% of the market is going to be scared to do something like this to a $1000 DSLR, this really isn't that big a deal. How many of you have held a Digital Rebel?
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.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I believe the 10D also has a larger viewfinder (92% versus 86% for the 300D)
/. 'pros' would claim. Mostly it's just an attitude problem.
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?
With DeCSS, there was a reasonable argument made that the decrypted data could be copied (and for some reason the defence didn't point out that so could the encrypted data).
The last time the DMCA was used against hardware manufacturers (Chamberlain garage door openers), the case was dismissed.
I recall there being some sort of lawsuit about Acuvue selling there 3 week contacts as disposables (1 day)... I really don't see what's wrong with this... but apparently a lot of people do, so I dunno...
If it doesnt' cost more to make the high-end one (and it obviously doesn't if they the same damn camera), why not sell it full featured for cheap, while customers flock to it for it's awsomeness among rave reviews and compeditors struggle to keep up with the feature/price level? Raise that bar and stand out that much as a company, even if your lower end model has to have a slightly higher price then you planned.
It's like selling a Mack truck with a torque limiter for cheap. Why not just whoop everyone's ass with your superior product for less than all the other guys?
Plus, there will always be hacks like this, no matter what. People where willing to chip their beloved video game consoles since the first PlayStation (before?), no one holds a digital camera in as high a regard as their video game console. Or their DVD player, or their Stereo, or maybe even their cel phone (which can back up all the important stuff onto the computer anyway). I mean, no one wants to loose a device but we're talking risk here.
It cheapens the image of a company, that's for sure. Now, if they keep their mouths closed about this hack, and just say "If you're enough of a geek to do this, go for it, we'll still get rich off the suckers", that's acceptible. However, I dont' think they have the right to sell someone a product which can do everything, "secretly* lock it off and someone finds a way to enable it. If you dont' want someone to have it, you can't sell it to them. Not locked off by software, not even locked off by hardware. You can't build the capability in at all.
Imagine the uproar if it was found out that Windows XP Home was the same as XP Pro with hidden options and a throttle control?
I dunno, just my humble opinions.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
What does not fit the picture is that nobody else can match the features-per-price index. All Nikon has is the D70, but it's about $400 more than 300D (both full kit).
Also, remember the 'feature reduced' version has the EF-S lens; for the 10D an equivalent EF would cost you about $700 more (so 10D body+equivalent lens > 2x the price of 300D with lens).
Something is really wrong with this picture, right? It actually looks like a baragain.
the 10d has a metal body while the digital rebel has a cheap feeling plastic one,
the hack is neat but for a serious photographer, its all about feel. I've played with a Cannon d60 and it beats my Rebel 2000 in feel hands down. if I had the extra money, i would sack up and buy a d10
sorry 'bout the mess...
Then say the EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM for about $400. Still a big difference.
... ups and downs, depending on what other lenses you already have each might be a better deal).
Besides, the 300D default lens is a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, wider interval (yeah, 5.6 instead of 4.5, non-USM
The 10D is a 'backup camera' for a pro - it's a main camera for a prosumer.
A pro using Canon would go for the 1D series, no contest. Especially with the last Mark II being on the 'affordable pro' side.
They DO lock multipliers. It's a pain in the ass actually. I have a P4 2.4ghz chip that runs on the 400mhz bus (100mhz quad pumped) so 24x multiplier. Well my motherboard and RAM can handle 800mhz (200mhz quad pumped), which would give me better performance. No can do though, I'd need to step down to a 12x multiplier and the chip won't allow that.
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.
"In an era where programming labour is relatively cheap and computer connectivity more frequent, can artificial, marketing-driven barriers between technology products last?"
We now return you to your regularly scheduled pedantry. ;o)
$1.5k is not expensive in the pro market. Actually, it's the very low limit. Check the prices for the top Canons (up to $8k body only) and add to that the lens price - heck, professional Canon lenses can cost way more than the 10D body.
People, the 10D is an entry-level pro camera, barely above the 300D! Get some perspective here!
Professionals aren't likely to want to trust their bread and butter to a hack. They might buy a Rebel as a second body (which they might have anyways), and try the hack on that (as a second body). On the other hand, the few lost sales are likely to be offset by the increased sales that this article on Slashdot is likely to generate.
Case in point: Back when the APEX AD-600A Region hack was referenced on Slashdot, I (and about a half-dozen of my workmates) was one of the many people who went out to buy one specifically for this reason. To give you an idea as to just how likely I was to buy one otherwise: When I got home, I realized that I'd have to get my TV working again (it had died about 2 years previously, and I hadn't been bothered to fix it).
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
> "they did the software equivalent of leaving the cash register open, reaching over the counter and grabbing a handful of cash is still stealing."
Not if they sold you a cash register and left the cash in by accident. Ethically you should return the cash, but if you don't, you don't.
So ethically, you shouldn't hack the firmware. But I don't have a lot of money to buy better stuff with so I'm going to be unethical. I'm a terrible person.
My other car is first.
how about "Consumer surplus driven?" When comapnies can offer a range of products, then customers can choose the model that best suits them. Of course, in order to keep everybody's costs down (including ultimately the consumer), there are bound to be similarities between a family of products. By forcing companies to spend more time on locking mechanisms to prevent this sort of shenanigan, you ultimately increase the price for everybody without increasing quality one bit.
From 60 to 150 extra horsepower just by reprogramming the computer module on the fly. No other parts are required, but sure can be fun. http://www.edgeproductsinc.com/index.html
I don't even see how it's unethical. It may be against some licensing agreement somewhere, but who really cares?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
well, that may well be true, but I wouldn't say you're getting screwed. Your insurance rate is down, the environment less heavily polluted. So, in fact, the insurance companies are getting screwed in the U.S.!
There's a difference between "disabled" and "impaired".
I've got Nissan Maxima 1998, the cheapest GXE version(I like stick shift, but at the time I could't spring up for the SE). My car's got a built-in speed limitation - it won't go over 110mph(or 120mph- sorry, I haven't tried it lately). The only way to do away with it is to replace the current car computer with one picked out from SE(or may be GLE) Maxima from a junkyard or someplace else. Now, GXE, SE and GLE are virtually the same short of cosmetics and few features(ABS can be optional). The fact that the car won't go over certain speed limit PREDETERMINED BY THE MANIFACTURER was/is not advertised of course. This whole thing pertains directly to the market strategy where the flagship model is being downsized by chopping off features from otherwise perfectly good product. I'm not talking about cars only. I am quite leery of anything which I perceive to be even remotely Kmart-ed/WalMart-ed in order to bring "value" to the customers. Windows XP Home edition comes to mind. RedHat/Suse "personal"?! -I'll pass.....Not that I'll ever use all the features, but buying artificially crippled version of anything is really a choice of last resort.
And have finally answered the age old question (oh, and step four should read Profit!).
;o)
Finally, with this question answered there will be one less annoying slashdot cliche to contend with
I am NaN
But, I think the line I would draw is about will. Someone doesn't leave money in the till on purpose. Canon don't accidentally put these features in the cameras.
30 years when you wanted IBM to upgrade your mainframe a tech guy came and unsolded a connector.
You gained a few memory and lost a lot of $$$.
The world belongs to those who get up early. - I'm far from being the king of Earth then
Ehh, obviously the features was in the camera you bought and payed for. If they didn't want you to use it, they should not have included it to start with.
the more robust design of the 10D (which is due for a replacement/update by the way)
The grapevine is putting the release date for the 10D replacement around autumn of this year.
It's great that libdvdcss et al are still out there, but not a single Linux distro (that I am aware of) ships able to play encrypted DVDs so while you think the hackers won, I say they lost as newcomers to Linux who just try and play a DVD have problems.
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
MIP writes:
This is not an Easter egg. Its in the SMG manual. I have one (the car and the manual). This is "launch control".
Perform opperation as noted above and the car will launch from the line at maximum possible acceleration without wheel spin. It is noted in the manual that has an adverse affect on the transmission components etc...
4 of 4 people found this comment helpful. Did you?
Here's a film SLR with 90%. 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.
If you buy a cash register it and every thing with it i.e. in it is yours. The own left 1k worth of cash in it? Tough $#!%, life sucks you shouldn't have sold it to the costomer with out looking in it first. A similer incedent happend with an old legal document. It was shoved inside of a panting. A Couple bought this painting from the origal owners found the document and in tern sold it them self. It was taken all the way to the suprem court were it was ruled that the seller gave up all rights to the object after sale, even to rights he didn't know of i.e. the document.
After much thinking and looking, I got my self an Olympus E-1. So much better than the 10D anyway. Spot meter, lenses that actually fit, weather sealing (You aren't a nature photographer until you have photographed in blinding storm), predictable focus and better colours straight from the camera.
If you think you have yourself cheated, check out the mobile phone market. I'll bet you could turn few $100 teen-phones into $300 exective version by firmware update.
I'm not saying this is the same case, but with Digital Camcorders there's legislation in Europe that puts an extra tax on if the camcorder has a DV In enabled (because technically it becomes an "editing system") so companies ship with the port physically there but disabled (either in software or with a dip switch equivalent) so that the customer can save money. The manufacturer is helping you avoid EU tax, in this case. Okay, they get more sales for only a cheap modification for them, but it isn't an evil marketing ploy.
I'm all for artificially imposed limitations, owning both a Minidisc player and a Radeon 9800SE. Let's all keep this nice and quiet and pretend we know nothing about the disabled functionality. If we're lucky, they'll keep putting more of said functionality in without charging us for it.
My friend told me that A52 can be turned into A55 by firmware upgrade. I think that it is still possible with more expensive phones too.
Just purchased a 10D and a 16-35 f2.8L lense (about 2700$ total).
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.
I've got so many options as it goes right now that I will take ages to figure out all of them. I'm way too pleased with the results that I don't think I'll even bother with the hack expect maybe one day if I understand everything about my Rebel and I don't care about ruining my warranty.
I saw the same thing way back when with VAXen -- I remember when my school bought an expensive CPU upgrade, which was "installed" by having the tech reboot the VAX from a (8") floppy disk that loaded new firmware, making the machine 30% faster!
I ran into the same thing with my TI calculator -- I bought the base model, and took it apart and found out that it was identical to the high end model with all the fancy trig functions, etc., except that there were no plastic buttons on the front panel -- the contacts underneath were complete, etc. So I cut a few holes in the front of the calculator and added my own 'buttons'. Worked great!
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
The 10D and the 300D/Rebel have the same sensor. And the sensor is a CMOS not CCD chip.
See the review here.
Steve
How about recording RAW and JPG at the same time? I find this to be one of the most useful features. The JPG for its speed in displaying at a shoot and the RAW for working on later.
No one is going to waste money knowing they may bork their camera, and Canon will sure give you hell if you send it to them with a borked firmware image. Photographers who want quality will purchase quality. If there is one thing a photographer will not skimp on it is their farking camera. That would be like a race-car driver buying the best tools, hiring the best mechanics, then buying an 92 Ford Escort at an auction. The 10D has a metal body, and is just plain better. Some of the features in the firmware won't even work on the 300. It does not surprise me that they would use the same guts on multiple models, motherboard manufacturers do it all the time. My Asus A7N8X-Deluxe is just the base model with a few optional parts soldered on, the places for these parts are there on the base model, but the hardware itself is not. If I hack the BIOS, that will not replace the missing hardware.
I hate sigs.
Shopped long and hard for a digital SLR, have been a Canon
user for quite some time (S20, S40 G3) and when they
released the 300D and 10D I looked at both and purchased
the 300D based on its user interface, weight and appearance.
Why not photographic quality? After looking at RAW mode output from both models it was truly a toss up; I suspect that
a lot of 'pros' will by the 10D based on looks and price, magnesium body and its *black*. I personally have never been a fan of black cameras but thats taste. What I think in regards to this is that 500 saved on the body is 500 more I can spend on a lens, which I believe is where the real difference is made.
After using the 300D for a while a couple of things bothered me.
1. selected focal/metered locations as defaults, you can select them but it involved a trial and error and then a focal lock.
2. while using RAW mode a jpg is embedded in the image for preview and use. Being able to increase or decrease this would be great (flash savings or for comparison in processing).
3. Being able to change the settings of the flash comp.
After reading up on the firmware I found that it is truly 300D firmware with a few bits turned on, as I have a copy of the unaltered firmware this was a no brainer, I applied it; and began using the added 'features' right away. Do I have a 10D now?
not a chance, the 10D has a faster shutter, more cache for burst (I can take 4 rapid shots, the 10D I think at least doubles this)
and a higher (directly adjustable) iso sensitivity (3200, to get this on the 300D you would have to set exposure adjust +1)
But I do have the features that I was missing (mirror lock, 1/3 stop adjust, etc). And after proving to several of my friends that this doesn't cook the camera they have done the same.
JMHO, YMMV
Unix, an obscure operating system developed by bored researchers in an attempt to get a better game playing experience.
Your pet monkey spoke in Spanish after you played with the remote? Whoa.
Oddly enough, I was thinking about this topic just this morning. My Nikon F5 was worth the multi-kilobuck price tag because it was built like a tank. It'll last for thousands and thousands of rolls of film. But it won't take any better pictures than the cheapest 35mm that Nikon makes.
Pros have always accepted this. A good photographer can take a cheap camera and turn out the same wonderful work he can do with an expensive camera. The difference is that the more expensive camera makes things more convenient and is built better to last longer under the rough conditions pros must endure.
That's why pro cameras are more expensive. They don't *really* have any secret technology that makes better pictures. They're just tougher and more capable of accomplishing a given task more readily under deadline.
But digital changes all that.
When the Nikon D70 appeared, Nikon officially said it wouldn't replace the prosumer D100. However, the D100 immediately dropped out of the sales catalog of several large camera vendors. They know that the cheaper camera will cannibalize the sales of the more expensive one because the cheaper camera, while probably less well built and slightly less convenient, has better image capturing hardware and software. And that's the one thing that will make a pro change cameras faster than you change your shirt; Show 'em something that takes better prictures and everything else be damned, they'll go for the better output quality.
So if you're a pro and you're shooting digital, what do you do? Stick with the better made, more convenient pro cameras? Or just buy the latest cheap thing because it has more megapixels and better quality? The answer is that better quality almost always wins. (Yes, in some situations speed is important and pros will use a lower megazixel count if they get faster shutter response, but that is becoming less and less of an issue every day. Consequently, the Nikon D1 series that was built to capitalize on that need is being marginalized.)
Now, with film, output quality was a constant and pretty static, to boot. Therefore, it made sense for pros to get a camera built to last forever and paying through the nose for it was no big deal. With digital, though, the camera that will be introduced next year will have better image quality than whatever you're holding in your hands now. So what's the point of paying for high-quality construction made to last 20 years? You're gonna wanna dump your camera in two years, tops, to get the better image quality of the new gear.
This turns the whole professional camera selection criteria on its ear. I predict that "pro" digital cameras will soon come to be treated by their users as virtually disposable, something to be used hard for a year and then upgraded. When that happens, pros won't want to pay as much so they'll just buy one more spare than usual.
In the future, cameras will come to be treated as what they have become: computers. The pro photo industry has always taken great pride in their well-built cameras that were made to last a lifetime. (Hell, I still love my Nikon F.) That attitude arose because mechanical refinement was the only market differentiator when everyone uses the same film and gets close to the same output quality. But now digital has changed the rate of change. Now cameras will be obsoleted in months instead of decades. How will the industry adapt? How willing will pros be to give up the snob appeal of their ridiculously expensive cameras and use the same equipment as regular folks? Or will they be so wedded to the need to pay extra money for prestige brands and models that they will continue to pony up big bucks for ridiculously small differences between models?
These are highly interesting times in the photo world. I'm not willing to predict the death of the pro camera, but I predict the pro digital camera of the future will be far close to the what regular consumers use than has previously been the case. And that's a big change.
Well when it isn't a consumer product pricing it out of the consumer market makes sense.
When I bought my SLR, I played with new consumer cameras (Rebels), and used mid range/ pro bodies.
The feel of the upper end cameras, even used is much better then the consumer cameras.
Until you go and try both it is hard to understand how different they really are.
I forget the exact company
uh, Intel has done this.
Actually many chipmakers do this, take a partially defective chip, disable the defective portion, product from scrap.
Or if it doesn't meet high performance specs, downgrade it (this was well known in the pentium days)
Not entirely, people just would have to take care to not publish their reverse-engineering results in a way traceable back to them. Friends in less oppressive jurisdictions, email anonymizers, anonymous networks, and pseudonymity mechanisms (to keep the reputation for next such projects) are helpful.
The programmers are too smart to be caught all. The adversary would have to go after the end users, which could alienate the customers.
I think this is a good thing. I just installed Mandrake 10 Official and tried to play a DVD. When it wouldn't work, I went online to find some answers. It's then that I discovered libdvdcss. I installed it, and now the DVD plays, albeit really choppy. My next goal is to get it to play smoothly, and to edit content and make backups of my DVDs.
If a mediocre hacker like me with a modicum of tech skills can get it to work, others like me can too. By not being able to play a DVD in linux, the MPAA has created one more person with the knowledge and ability to get around their silly and unfair copy protection scheme. Chalk one (more) up for Fair Use.
But even with functions hacked, it is unlikely to equal a 10d.
I have a 10D a friend has the rebel.
with the SAME LENS we can not tell the difference between the shots taken on both cameras with the highest quality settings (I.E. a RAW uncompressed photo)
yes it DOES equal a 10D unhacked. the 10D will survive a fall and regular use in a prfessional's hands. the rebel will not
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
If my budget was $900 for a new camera and not $500, I'd seriously consider the Rebel with this hack to supplement my Canon A40. I'm not earning my living by my camera so it doesn't have to be as physically robust or life-or-death reliable as buying the +$500 model.
But then again, if I was a professional photographer - I'd probably have a backup, right?
Reviews with a twist! http://www.sardonicbastard.com
you can have your heads shaved (metal removed from the bottom of the head to increase compression ratio) if you always run high octane gas. This works. Don't try using cheap gas after doing this, the predetonation will destroy your engine.
Crushing my karma one post at a time.
The company must also care for review and article about the product. If they had enabled all the feature on the 300D, then reviewers would probably blasted a bit more about usability as users have to go to more menus to access the same functionality that can be done with a turn of a dial on the 10D.
It must be noted that right now, the price difference is about 500$. But when the 300D came out, the price difference was over 1000$. The hack would have been a much better deal at that time and it would have probably affected the sales of the 10D a lot more than it will today.
BMW is one example. Check out some of the numbers. Jim Conforti is THE man in BMW tuning, which is no small feat. Some engines get better gains than others, and some have quite impressive results with JUST a chip. Well, nowadays it is a flash upgrade, but it used to be a chip. And what he offers is safe upgrades. With some other makes you have the potential to significantly shorten the life of your engine/components by modding them. My 88 M3 has had a Conforti chip in it for about 10 years now, and has 136,000 miles on it. And it has been driven on the track a few times. Solid as a rock.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
the 1.8T unit in a seat cupra R and a pre 2003 mk4 vw golf. one 180BHP, one 150BHP. note that the audi TT 225BHP 1.8T *does* have a bigger turbo: the seat doesn't. it has a different ECU program.
this is why for 400UKP companies like www.jabbasport.co.uk will chip your 150BHP car up to 200-odd BHP.
There's already plans to port NetBSD!
First of all, some of the cars you mentioned have transversely mounted engines, and others have longitudinaly mounted engines. Their exhaust piping among other things is different even if the block and the head is the same.
Secondly, there are several 1.8T engines denoted by their engine codes: AEB, AWM, ATW are just a few.
Some are drive-by-wire, some aren't. Some have different intake manifolds. Newer models have slightly different turbos.
So "no changes what so ever to the hardware side" my ass.
Duh... that's what you get for calling your product "Digital Rebel". Suckers.
Look, most of us agree that under our capitalist system artificially teering the market is not only legal and widespread, but also possibly sensible given the profit incentive. It's not just limitted to software; I remember first noticing this when looking at Kayaks. The same company produces tubby low end models and sleeker higher end models, with apparantly just the mold being different. The cost difference seemed likely to reflect the different marketing segments more than the different manufacturing costs.
But its important to keep track of these things! Most of us find these artificial limits on quality repugnant, and I think we are justified to list this as one of the negative consequences of a capitalist system. And complaining about issues like this isn't merely whining! Keep in mind that widespread pressure forced drug comapanies to allow generic versions of AIDs medication in poor countries. These issues seem like whines when we are talking about non-essentials, but these are very same mechanism that keep people hungry and sick unnecessarily. You may believe capitalism is worth this price, but you can't deny it is paid.
My handle breaks slashcode, what does your handle do?
Consumer equipment software hacks are more common than you might think. Of about 10 pieces of consumer electronics I possess, I have found that 5 of them all have extra features that you can access if you know how. One in particular, my wide screen TV has things like picture and picture which aren't supposed to be available except on the higher end model. How did I access it? By buying one of those fancy universal remotes. Voila!
At least our women do not ware mustashes and have big fat bellies.
American women don't have fat guts? You're kidding, right? The worlds most obese nation and you're telling us that the women arn't fat? Whatever, fatty.
P.S: Unlike the educationally sparten United States our women are educated and can spell the word "wear" correctly, too.
You can bitch all you want, but if Cannon hadn't been able to release the crippled camera, they might not have made the thing in the first place.
You are the only sensible person to have replied. Of course, contrary to the clueless submitter's comments, this won't necessarily affect sales any more than console mods or overclocking does, because it will always be a minority activity. But such hacks will result in increased prices and delayed introduction of new material or pricing structures. Doing something like this in private is fine, but in public it's an incredibly selfish act, and actually malicious vs. the consumers of these cameras. They're the ones that eat the high prices that will inevitably result.
But, information wants to be free... right... so if Canon has to invest another $2M in R&D as a result of this, and the successor to the 10D comes out in 2008 instead of 2006, that's just fine, it's Canon's fault for trying to recoup costs using an artificial barrier and they deserve this... regardless of the fact that consumers are agreeing to pay the requested price for the listed features... right?
I bought a 10D but it wasn't really the software capability that made me do it. The 10D is 100% metal frame and body/skin as well as the lens mount it is 900% more durable than the flimsy all plastic digital rebel ... I could drop this thing off a truck and still use it. The 10D also has a pc flash sync for studio strobes. I guess what I am saying is that no amount of added features in the software can make it as good a camera as the 10D
It's the distribution of it. Even though all of us Canon 300D owners have a copy on our camera it is still illegal distibution. I know it is all semantics... but if someone told me how to hack my firmware and I did it fine, but hacking the code and redistributing it without the owner's permission is NOT legal.
Consider Borland's once-flagship product Delphi. You used to be able to buy the standard edition for ~$70 and the professional edition for ~$500. The pro version included some more stuff in it, but it didn't matter for the vast majority of development. Naturally, the $70 product became popular among hobbyist programmers.
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.
The two cameras are not the same the more expensive one has a metal case whereas the Rebel has a crappy plastic case plus a pentamirror instead of a true pentaprism. If you ask me it is Canon themselves who have released the hack in order to increase sales of an infrerior quality product.
Yes, when they're enforced by the DMCA and jail sentences for those who reverse-engineer them
Why does the DMCA have anything to do with this? There's absolutely NO copyright issues in hacking the OS of the camera, you're not planning on making your very own digital camera and installing the Rebel's OS, are you? You're not trying to use the Rebel's OS to play illegally copied DVDs, are you? So where are the similarities with DeCSS?
Yeah, Canon may be able to sue Minolta if Minolta reverse engineers the OS and uses parts of it in their own cameras, but as an end user there's nothing in the DMCA that prevents you from mucking around with your own system.
-- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
The 10D also has a crop factor of 1.6, in fact it uses the exact same CCD as the 300D. That's why crippling the software seemed like a wierd choice to me.
The 1D has a crop factor of 1.4, and is also far more expensive. I think that's what you're thinking of, but it's far more than either the 300D or 10D ($4500 at bhphoto.com). That's why it's really in a different category from either the 10D or 300D.
From DPreview.com:
10D sensor:
22.7 x 15.1 mm CMOS sensor
300D sensor:
22.7 x 15.1 mm CMOS sensor
1D/MkII sensor:
28.7 x 19.1 mm CMOS
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Just look at the DPReview message boards for the 300D.
You underestimate the dramatic rise in intelligence (or at least willingness to invalidate warranties) of someone trying to save a buck. Not to mention that digital SLR users are, at least at the moment, a bit more technically inclined than your average 7-11 counter worker.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Technically yes, it violates your warranty. So write down which byte you are changing on a napkin and if the need arises to service the camera, change the byte back.
Honestly, DUH!
at both cameras and the Rebel feels like a toy comparec to the 10, I spend the extra just for the construction quality of the big brother. That is if I wasn't buying the Nikon D70
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
Let me just interject one thing:
I LOVE MY 300D!!!!
It's a fantastic camera. I've heard a bunch of badmouthing of it being "not good enough" for pros. I get paid to shoot portraits and do technical photography with my 300D all the time. I guess I'm a "professional" since I get paid real money to take high quality pictures.
I know someone who has a 10D and having compared them side by side, I personally would not pay the extra money. I know someone else who took his Rebel to Antarctica and took over 5000 flawless pictures.
So it may not equal a 10D, but it's pretty damn close and 99.9% of users, professionals included will not notice the difference.
in that it would cost more for them to design the less expensive model differently. While seemingly illogical, maybe if this trend continues, we will end up paying more for the same thing, so that it can't be hacked. However I imagine these companies don't see this as much of a threat, as the hacker element represents a tiny portion of the consumer market.
My parents VCR that they purchased in 1987 was a cheaper model minus some features of the top of the line VCR. Well my Dad, being the kid of guy he is took it apart for some reason that I no longer remember, and inside found a hidden switch and after moving it, it became the higher end model. We even went and purchased a "replacement" remote for the better model to make some of the new features easier to use.
==>Lazn
They do care, for all of the reasons they care about it for film camera work:
1) interchageability of accessories (lenses)
2) ego/appearance/perception (depends on how much customer interaction there is while shooting and how many other photogs there are at the same time. Also depends on the market and the customer - high end gigs = high end cameras (plural.)
3) reliability, battery life & changeability (no time to recharge during events)
4) function (higher end=more features) not that they use them all, but they are able to customize for thier style
5) Less digital work to make the product (photos) useful/beautiful.
6) photo capacity
In the case of digital, if they care less about these things than for film, they simply haven't done enough of it, or prefer to work on the computer than spend a very few dollars on a proper camera.
The cost of a camera body is almost irrelevant to the pros. The real money is in the lenses and other things. And with the use of digital, cuts out the film and processing costs, unless they do digital-to-film-to-print thing.
Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
10D is going for about $1300 on eBay, 300D for about $850. So the plan makes some sense.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That's the great thing about technology - relentless upward pressure on features and downward pressure on price!
Adding a spoiler to a civic DOES NOTHING!
I know this is entirely off topic but where i live, every other car is a civic, and eveyr other civic has been moded more then the average slashdotters tower
But, no matter how stupid your $100k civic looks, a spoiler won't do anything...
Why? You see, a civic (as with many imports with fancy plastic on the back) is front wheel drive. A spoiler helps a rear wheel car by, at very high speeds, negating rear lift by pushing the car to the ground and increasing traction. Now, in a rear wheel car this is wonderful (my buddy has to put bricks into his T-bird if he wants to reach any decent speed) but in a front wheel drive? that's right, the effects are border line neglegable.
*takes breath* thank you
The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
Whether there are different codes (which could correspond to manufacturing facilities, amongst other things) - it still applies that you can reflash 40 hp out of the 1.8t, no mechanical changes. It increases the aggressiveness of the timing curve, increases booost, and increases fuel flow rates. Those things alone (computer-controlled) are enough to increase the power. Most turbo-charged cars have turbines with trim rates that flow a lot more than what the engine "needs" because it gives the auto manufacturer more leeway in tuning the engine. Thus, just turning up the boost (electronically) is not only feasible, but easy.
But, of course, you knew that, didn't you?
The copper bosses killed you, Joe. 'I never died', said he.
Because you cannot tell the difference between the difference between two shots that you took does not make the cameras the same.
It must use some real alchemy to be able to change the plastic body of the Digital Rebel into the magnesium alloy of the 10D!
Not everything is just a simple matter of programming.
There is much pleasure to be gained in useless knowledge.
You wish. But as it happens, DMCA is about MORE than copyright. (If it's only purpose was to protect copyright, then it wouldn't have had to be a new law). The DMCA outlaws things permitted by copyright.
There's no substantial difference between those two scenarios. You can obviously see that the authorities will come after you in the first case, so why not in the second?
Is this really that big of a problem right now? How many people know about the hack vs how many people have said cameras vs how many of those owners have "upgraded" their cameras? In the future there might be more widespread publicity, but for the time being this seems like a minor risk. Besides, one really needs to look at how many people were going to buy the 10D and chose not to for a real test of how much such a hack "costs" cannon.
:) )
I for one, am off to upgrade my minidisc player (didnt know there were potential upgrades
If a pro plans on doing a lot of digital, the 1D is a far better choice:
- Full frame sensor: very big feature since it doesn't introduce the focal multiplier
- Continuous shooting is far better
- Better light measurement, AF speed, AF sensors
- Rugged, weatherproof design where all joints are lined with o-rings
A body is just a body, the real investment for any professional is the lenses, especially Canon L-glass.Okay... I'll do the stupid things first, then you shy people follow.
[Zappa]
What a lot of you are forgetting, in your rush to rant and rave about canon unfairly ripping consumers off for the 500$ extra the 10D costs, is that the 10D has a prism viewfinder, and the Rebel has a mirror viewfinder. That's a signifigant difference in price from a manufacturing standpoint, a good optic quality prism of that size is worth a few hundred dollars all on its own, while the mirror in the roof of the Rebel is worth probably 5$. Anyone who's bought a metered prism viewfinder for a hassleblad or something like that can tell you how much those things cost.
Having been in large, small and mediaum sized towns, working as a photographer at one point and now having a sister & brother-in-law in the wedding photo business, I was still amazed at the Sport Illustrated editor comment about the 16,183 photos taken by their photogs during the Super Bowl.
As far as the number lenses used during a single event, three may be accurate, especially with the current crop of zoom lenses (like 18-70mm) The low light capability of the better digital equipment removes the f-stop limitations for some previously unusable light/aperature combinations, with less resolutions problems found with high speed films - back in the day, we used to push Tri-X to 1600 ASA with special processing and might get a b&w print usable for a newspaper.
HEY - did anyone notice if the hack allows the use of "normal" Canon lenses with the Rebel - Canon has a limitation about some lenses for the Rebel not working with other bodies and vv?
Amen to the digital revolution removing the selectivity of which shots to take - but let's hope the photogs training today still learn composition and quality v. quantity (although, if enough shots are taken, something good often shows up, so long as you don't cut of the groom's head in every shot.
Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
...with an utterly nonessential good like a camera, I don't have a problem with the morality of capitalism at all, and if a corporation can sell more of a chip by selling it as a full function device, and as a limited function device, and make more money doing that, that
1) is good for the shareholders
2) good for consumers.
I just don't see that the people are screwed by a low function chip. I see that lots of people who couldn't afford the full function device have an opportunity to get some of the functions at a lower price. How are they losers?
People who object to this strategy probably think that Microsoft should sell stuff for the cost of the media since the money has already been spent and the marginal cost is 0. That's ridiculous, for too many reasons to describe here. (My objections to Microsoft have to do with it being a monopoly, not that it sells software for a profit.)
If you are in the business of selling something in which the marginal cost of producing an additional unit approaches zero, that doesn't create an obligation to reflect that marginal cost in the price!
Pricing should reflect demand and different levels of functionality, with an eye to maximizing profit - that's a core obligation of a company to its shareholders. That said, OF COURSE, governments have an opportunity to tax those profits sufficient to build social capital and create a humane society.
The 10D does not come with a lens, so if you buy the rebel without the kit lens it's only $899. lens...
$1499 - $899 = $600.
The film would have swollen due to the humidity and gotten stuck in the case.
Not being able to process it promptly it would have suffered xray damage.
Lastly I would have had to haul approximately double the weight I took and invest 300$ in film.
Yes, I work for Kodak.
In use they're two very different machines, with or without the features.
A friend of mine used to sell servers back in the late 80s. He told me about how his company had two hard drive sizes. The only difference was a screw that prevented the drive head from using the rest of the hard drive.
Can't pass up the opportunistic joke about getting scr*w*d.
I seem to recall the difference between NT workstation and server being a registry setting.
Car makers have known that their hardware and software chips have been tweaked since forever.
At the same time, warranties get voided.
That test involves shooting portraits in jpeg auto mode at iso1600. Hopefully someone who plonks down $2k for a camera will realize that is a very silly comparison. I could take better pics than those with a decent point and shoot.
Also they guy in the article says he is paid by fuji to advertise their cameras.
Rewriting the IBM 7094's printer driver (by decreasing a idle loop count) worked in 1967. The cheap Dec PDP-8 could be turned into its faster sibling by clipping the proper wire (this in I think 1974). I don't think the difference engine was crippled except by then-current technological considerations.
OK, I had not really looked into it, but I did note the single incompatibility and thought it a symptom of the same issue.
Thanks - I'll check before making such an assertion next time.
John
Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
He was being sarcastic, I think. He was saying, "Gee, it's a shame that I can no longer do all this stuff," when you know perfectly well that it can be done, and is done... just illegally. I'm personally bemoaning the fact that Fedora Core had to yank a bunch of packages or otherwise cripple them so that they won't run afoul of the law. (Since Fedora Core is being given away for free, not sold in a box, non-free software just can't be included, nor can software that might violate someone's draconian IP laws.)
Well, Gentoo ships with the ebuilds for libcss and other stuff already in Portage, and since it doesn't impose limitations on emerging builds based on the locality of the user, it's up to the user to decide whether they want to break the law by building VLC or mplayer with the DeCSS code linked in.
It does suck, though, that most distributions won't provide DVD playback "out of the box," at least here in the States. But since distributions like Gentoo are meta-distributions, they don't have to ship any offending code or binaries on the disc, so they're covered. Just emerge mplayer (or emerge vlc after enabling the experimental ebuilds) and go to town.
Presumably, some company that provides a Linux distribution for commercial sale could pay the appropriate licensing fees to Frauenhofer for Lame and to the DVD-CCA for DeCSS (or some other crypto) so they could ship all these libraries in the box... but these entitites would probably balk at allowing the source code to ship as well, and that is a deal-breaker for most Linux advocates.
Just to nitpick your last point, the Nikon lens mount hasn't changed in decades. You can use the same lenses on any Nikon SLR made in the last 30 years or so. FYI
Now im not a big fan of Bill Gates, but this does bring up an important point about what he said about 'free hardware'.
Now i dont completely agree with that, but there is some truth to it. See here, companies are selling the same hardware but limiting the software. So what do we have here?..we pay for the software.
As time goes on, we will pay more and more for software and less and less for hardware. This will make hardware prices insignificant to software prices.
The most important feature of a camera, any camera, is it's usability. The photographer has to be able to operate the camera intuitively so he can concentrate on the photos. If the 'feel' of the camera isn't right, this gets in the way and the photographer is not as effective. Yeah right, the camera is 'just froth'.
Get a life, for a serious photographer the final image is what it's all about and the hardware has to work like an extension of the photographer's body.
I meant to mention this in my original post. Flashing the firmware to factory original, which is explained on the page, should make this modification completely invisible to Canon should you need service.
p
In Korea, long hair is for old people!
I personally find it both fair and clever. It's also fortuitous for me because as most junk-hunters know, just because something has failed QA doesn't mean it's useless. I can live with five dead pixels, occasional rendering errors, paper jams, and imperfect audio because I don't rely on these things for work, just for pleasure.
I had to read the last sentence 4 fucking times to figure out what the hell you meant.
Use punctuation, fuckers!
I'd just like to point out that there are many hardware differences between the EOS Dig-Rebel and the 10D.. for one the body construction... and a couple others..
:]
but anyhow.. the list of what you are willing to pay extra for just got shorter
----- The internet has given everyone the ability to have their voice heard equally as loud.. even if they shouldn't be
quick search here google search.
Take the lower voltage requirement, and the clock multiplier together, and you have yourself a highly overclockable Athlon CPU. Average simple overclocks, even without voltage bumps, move the processor to 2400mhz (3200+ PR rating). Add an enthusaist cooling system, bump the voltage, and you can reach higher of course.