300D Firmware Hack: Not If, But When...

[Mashuri]

This is obviously speculation but, based on my experiences with the hacking community, I'd say we'll likey see it within a year or so. Download a file, unlock your 300D and, voila! Instant 10D (in features, anyway.) I'm sure Canon has factored this into their road map as they'll likely have a new product line by then. Any thoughts?

[robertwgross]

You're dreaming.

---Bob Gross---

[CyberDyneSystems]

IF the firmware is all that prevents the 300D from some of the 10D features....

IF there is anyone in the "hacking comunity" that happens to decide of all the Digital Cameras out there this shoud be her or his pet project.....

... I could come up with more "IFs" but I suspect this first two are fairly big hurtles....

[Mashuri]

It only makes sense, from a ROI point of view, for Canon to use the same electronics (since they're using the same CMOS) and just "dumb down" the firmware. Interchangable hardware with simply a different program installed is great for cutting costs. As for whether or not there will be enough hacker interest, I already know of two decent ones working on it. Things like digital cameras have enough "geek demographics" to make a hack more likely. I'm not saying it will 100% happen but I'm betting it's likely.

[CyberDyneSystems]

See this thread here,.


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19423#108285



.....................it has allready begun :D

[Mashuri]

robertwgross wrote:
You're dreaming.

---Bob Gross---


Am I? The plot thickens. Read this thread on dpreview:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=6680774

The fact that Canon is using this OS makes it very crackable indeed. I think we'll see things like FEC, manual selection of focus and metering modes and hot pixel mapping sooner than I predicted.

[vvizard]

I think the 300D is one of the top candidates to be picked up by the hacker-community. It's real popular at the moment, and the fact that it's a high-end (but affordable) probably make it more attractive. We've already gotten opensource RAW-converters for the 10D, D30, D60 in Linux for a long time. And (correct me if I'm wrong) the SDK or other information for doing raw-conversion isn't supplied to individuals by Canon? That means there's at least some hackers out there with the knowledge and willingness to hack on the Canon DSLR-series.

[robertwgross]

I'm not suggesting that it is impossible to hack the firmware in a Canon Digital Rebel. I guess I am just surprised that any camera owner would want to punt off any support or warranty from Canon. Obviously, once you've hacked the firmware, you are skating on your own.

My point is: just because it can be done, that does not mean that it should be done.

---Bob Gross---

[DonCoon]

vvizard wrote:
And (correct me if I'm wrong) the SDK or other information for doing raw-conversion isn't supplied to individuals by Canon?

You're wrong. I have a copy. It's easy to get.

I know of one individual who has managed to change FEC but that was already discovered as a result of residuals from a remote capture program --- Breeze Browser people I think. Anyway the individual who produced the program says that's all that's changeable. Evidently made possible due to a bug(?) in Canon's 300D firmware.

The SDK is good for out-of-the-camera work but I'm extremely skeptical that in any way relates to the 300D's internal firmware.

[vvizard]

No it's probably not related anyhow to the camera-firmware, I just used it as an example to show that parts of this system have attracted hacker-activity in the past. Or weather the SDK is easy to get or not, it at least shows that there's programmers out there who got interest in doing photostuff for free, and then releasing it for free But to be honest, a Camera-firmware probably don't attract as many hackers as an XBOX =) But we can always hope. Some great minds out there.

[defordphoto]

Okay all you Drebel owners, click your heals together and repeat: There's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...

[Mashuri]

robertwgross wrote:
I'm not suggesting that it is impossible to hack the firmware in a Canon Digital Rebel. I guess I am just surprised that any camera owner would want to punt off any support or warranty from Canon. Obviously, once you've hacked the firmware, you are skating on your own.

My point is: just because it can be done, that does not mean that it should be done.

---Bob Gross---


Nonsense. The one way to get in trouble is if you screw up your firmware so it's not recoverable. That is a risk but if I see others using it successfully then I will feel comfortable enough. If I need service done, I simply flash Canon's firmware back onto the camera.

[Mashuri]

RFMSports wrote:
Okay all you Drebel owners, click your heals together and repeat: There's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...

Why so condescending? Do you feel threatened by this or something? 10D's will still be nice cameras so don't worry about it. As a 300D owner I like the idea of hacking my gear to make it better. If you look around you'll find that some of Nikon's Coolpix cameras have already been hacked so there is an interest in the geek community.

[robertwgross]

Oh, in that case, then I think you should proceed. I'm sure that the Canon support folks would be very impressed with your handiwork.

Personally, I find digital cameras like this to be sufficiently complicated enough when they are operating with stock firmware. All I need is to introduce some errant code to really confuse things.

---Bob Gross---

[Mashuri]

robertwgross wrote:
Oh, in that case, then I think you should proceed. I'm sure that the Canon support folks would be very impressed with your handiwork.

Personally, I find digital cameras like this to be sufficiently complicated enough when they are operating with stock firmware. All I need is to introduce some errant code to really confuse things.

---Bob Gross---


How much have you dealt with hacks and firmware? I've hacked my computer motherboards, my DirecTV, X-Box, etc. and they work great. You seem convinced that a working hack is simply impossible. You don't give these programmers enough credit. Now, if Canon had used some proprietary OS with encryption, for example, then it would be extremely difficult to reverse engineer. The fact that they're using what looks to be an x86 processor with DOS leaves it wide open to even moderately skilled programmers.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yeah,. firmware hacks are pretty common. I've installed a few myself.

My favorite was turning a $50.00 dollar Promise ATA66 IDE card into into a $200.00 Promise FastTrack RAID card for the cost of a resistor,.. some delicate soldering, and simply flashing with the more expensive cards bios. Back then MoBo's didn't come with RAID but I could include it in all the systems I built for $50.00 and a little time.

I bud of mine who does digital Video editing did a similar trick on the $500.00 Matrox Video editing card and turned it into the $3000.00 version!!!! :D

[Mashuri]

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
Yeah,. firmware hacks are pretty common. I've installed a few myself.

My favorite was turning a $50.00 dollar Promise ATA66 IDE card into into a $200.00 Promise FastTrack RAID card for the cost of a resistor,.. some delicate soldering, and simply flashing with the more expensive cards bios. Back then MoBo's didn't come with RAID but I could include it in all the systems I built for $50.00 and a little time.

I bud of mine who does digital Video editing did a similar trick on the $500.00 Matrox Video editing card and turned it into the $3000.00 version!!!! :D

Yup. My buddy currently has a Radeon 9500 he hacked into becoming a 9700 Pro. People, it's not witchcraft we're dealing with here. This code has to follow rigid, logical rules and, as a result, can be reverse engineered.

[EXA1a]

Hi Mashury,

I really appreciate your thoughts and actions on the 300D firmware! It seems like a real challenge and I'll be one of the guys trying it out (maybe not the first ;-). Unfortunately I can't help with hacking though but forums like this one are a good place to find the right people.

What I don't understand is why these 10D owners don't just leave us alone? It's not their business and I'm even wondering why they read posts like "300D firmware hack". At least they could spare their nasty comments. They have a good camera and even with a perfectly hacked firmware the 300D wouldn't match up.

Keep on going!

--Jens--

[Mashuri]

EXA1a wrote:
Hi Mashury,

I really appreciate your thoughts and actions on the 300D firmware! It seems like a real challenge and I'll be one of the guys trying it out (maybe not the first ;-). Unfortunately I can't help with hacking though but forums like this one are a good place to find the right people.

What I don't understand is why these 10D owners don't just leave us alone? It's not their business and I'm even wondering why they read posts like "300D firmware hack". At least they could spare their nasty comments. They have a good camera and even with a perfectly hacked firmware the 300D wouldn't match up.

Keep on going!

--Jens--

I totally agree. I have no illusions that I will somehow turn my 300D into a 10D...but I know I can get damn close! :) I simply want more manual control of features already available on the DRebel. If I can set my camera's metering, FEC and focus modes at will then I'll be a very happy man. Additional cool things like hot pixel mapping will be very useful for 10D owners as well, so what's not to love?

[robertwgross]

Mashuri wrote:
How much have you dealt with hacks and firmware? I've hacked my computer motherboards, my DirecTV, X-Box, etc. and they work great. You seem convinced that a working hack is simply impossible. You don't give these programmers enough credit. Now, if Canon had used some proprietary OS with encryption, for example, then it would be extremely difficult to reverse engineer. The fact that they're using what looks to be an x86 processor with DOS leaves it wide open to even moderately skilled programmers.

Of course it is not impossible, and I stated that clearly. How did you jump to the opposite conclusion?

I've been on the side of the original manufacturer trying to explain to irate customers that we weren't going to support the product that they had tinkered with. Then somebody always tries to argue that they didn't tinker with one feature, the one that is broken, but the manufacturer won't touch it either way.

It is not an issue of possibility, it is more of an issue of practicality.

---Bob Gross---

[ryleung]

In response to the 300D firmware hacks, how likely do you think Canon will unlock at least some of the features in future firmware upgrades for the 300D? If they don't do it, tech-savvy photographers will hack it anyway and the 10D lose a bit of market share. But if they do it, then they are encouraging everyone not to buy the 10D.

Seems like a bit of a difficult situation for them? or would they not care at all?

-Rick

[Mashuri]

robertwgross wrote:
Mashuri wrote:
How much have you dealt with hacks and firmware? I've hacked my computer motherboards, my DirecTV, X-Box, etc. and they work great. You seem convinced that a working hack is simply impossible. You don't give these programmers enough credit. Now, if Canon had used some proprietary OS with encryption, for example, then it would be extremely difficult to reverse engineer. The fact that they're using what looks to be an x86 processor with DOS leaves it wide open to even moderately skilled programmers.

Of course it is not impossible, and I stated that clearly. How did you jump to the opposite conclusion?

I've been on the side of the original manufacturer trying to explain to irate customers that we weren't going to support the product that they had tinkered with. Then somebody always tries to argue that they didn't tinker with one feature, the one that is broken, but the manufacturer won't touch it either way.

It is not an issue of possibility, it is more of an issue of practicality.

---Bob Gross---





Canon would only know I tinkered with it if I leave the hacked firmware on it. Anyone with any common sense knows that hacks will not be supported by the manufacturer. Caveat emptor. Me? I'm comfortable dealing with the techie side of things and reap the benefits as a result.

[robertwgross]

Mashuri, I noticed that you did not answer the question.

I will offer my wild guess that 90% of the readers of this newsgroup would be uncomfortable with hacked firmware in their camera.

Most would rather spend their time furthering their photographic skills and not sweating the firmware code.

In another industry, our product came back to the factory for "warranty service". Right away the factory technicians could tell that the customer had been fooling around with it. It became apparent that the original firmware had been overwritten, something else had been there, and then the original firmware had been restored. In fact, it was almost a perfect job. The hack had botched only one single bit in error checking code.

The factory ended up sending the product back to the customer un-repaired. And that was a $9,000 item.

---Bob Gross---

[Mashuri]

robertwgross wrote:
Mashuri, I noticed that you did not answer the question.

I will offer my wild guess that 90% of the readers of this newsgroup would be uncomfortable with hacked firmware in their camera.

Most would rather spend their time furthering their photographic skills and not sweating the firmware code.

In another industry, our product came back to the factory for "warranty service". Right away the factory technicians could tell that the customer had been fooling around with it. It became apparent that the original firmware had been overwritten, something else had been there, and then the original firmware had been restored. In fact, it was almost a perfect job. The hack had botched only one single bit in error checking code.

The factory ended up sending the product back to the customer un-repaired. And that was a $9,000 item.

---Bob Gross---

I understand your point and, in fact, depend on it. The reason Canon goes ahead and makes a camera with "dumbed-down" firmware is because they know, when it gets hacked, most people will not utilize it. This message is for the 10% who want to do it. BTW, this message was sent from a computer with a hacked BIOS, overclocked processor and hacked video card, all running flawlessly since July. Have fun y'all!

[Tom W]

ryleung wrote:
In response to the 300D firmware hacks, how likely do you think Canon will unlock at least some of the features in future firmware upgrades for the 300D? If they don't do it, tech-savvy photographers will hack it anyway and the 10D lose a bit of market share. But if they do it, then they are encouraging everyone not to buy the 10D.

Seems like a bit of a difficult situation for them? or would they not care at all?

-Rick

Maybe they'll unlock some features after the 10D's replacement is safely on the shelves. Given the somewhat different control layouts, there may be some functions that aren't obtainable. I really don't know.

It doesn't matter much to me yet, as I haven't gotten my DSLR yet. I'm open to new ventures though!

[vvizard]

Now this is gonna be a looong post, which likely will make me hated by most guys on this forum (both 10D and 300D owners)

EXA1a wrote:
Hi Mashury,

I really appreciate your thoughts and actions on the 300D firmware! It seems like a real challenge and I'll be one of the guys trying it out (maybe not the first ;-). Unfortunately I can't help with hacking though but forums like this one are a good place to find the right people.

What I don't understand is why these 10D owners don't just leave us alone? It's not their business and I'm even wondering why they read posts like "300D firmware hack". At least they could spare their nasty comments. They have a good camera and even with a perfectly hacked firmware the 300D wouldn't match up.

Keep on going!

--Jens--

First off, I'm a 10D owner, not a 300D owner. I bought the 10D because I wanted it's features (and specially the body). If some of you guys felt like buying the 300D, and then petition Canon or wait for a cowboy to flip his own firmware to make it match the 10D, I feel sorry for you. Chances for Canon doing this is about zero. Chances that a hacker will do this anytime before both of those cams are only worth their weight in Magnesium (or plastic) is pretty small too :/

On the other hand, I have a great interest in this topic, because I'm a computer-geek, and love topics like reverse-engineering. If someone could improve the 300D with their own (opensource preferably) firmware, I would love to see that. Would be awsome! But I don't think it'll happen anytime soon. Maybe, if you manage to attract much attention to this issue, you will maybe pretty soon see an example-firmware. A hacker making a small OS for it, just to show that it can be done. Heck, we've already seen webservers on the Gameboy-advance, Linux on the XBOX, another webserver that fit's into the body of a dead fly! (yeah the small ones that sum, and you usually slap when you get the chance). I don't see it unrealistic that a hacker wan't to show off by doing an example-firmware just to show the rest what can be done. He might even not have interest in photography, and the firmware might even not manage to operate the shutter, but maybe it'll let you play Tetris on the LCD. Whatever actually, it's still an operating-system for the cam, and it shows other that it's very well possible (and it probably is). Then you can hope, that this first project will give you another slashdot-story (and other tech-sites), attracting other people who want's to improve the system. Maybe even some of them know a bit about photography, or at least they can team up with some. They could actually make an OS able to control the shutter/aparture, focusing etc. It's a great hobbiest project for those up to the challenge. From then on, you might start to see some steady progress, and in a (distant) future, maybe it will rival Canon's own firmware. But again, I think most P&S cam's would rival the 300D before this happens, and then the 300D wouldn't be great enough for the hackers to work on.. So don't keep your fingers crossed. But by all means, I hope I'm wrong, and that soon you'll have a competitive firmware from non-Canon.

On the other hand, what I really don't like about (some of) you 300D-owners, is the idea of petitioning Canon to actually implement the 10D features. Ok, the idea isn't to bad, of course we all wan't most for our money, but you should realize even before you hit submit, it won't work, take a cold shower, stop whining please! There's a reason (other than color) for the 10D beeing more expensive than the 300D. If some of those gaps could be filled by software quite easily, it won't happen, simple as that! It wouldn't be profitable for Canon. And I seriously don't hope you guys think Canon are making theese cams for any other reason than money?

And in the danger of repeating myself from another post, think of this: You're out to buy a new car. You're thinking about either the Subaru Impreza 2,0 4D WRX STi, or the Subaru Justy 1,3. Out of price (or other practical reasons) you choose the Justy. You take it out for a spin, and you get dissapointed. The handling wasn't as precise as you wanted, the suspension is to soft, it's accelleration isn't good enough, and the brakes weren't really "that" good. Heck, it even broke down when you took it out on the field for some off-road rally-racing. So what do you do? Do you join in with other Justy-owners to sign a petition against Subaru? Would you say:


Hey, listen up Subaru! I bought your Justy-model and I seriously don't think it could win the WRC! Now here's a list of my demands:

Bigger engine (2.0 litre version)
Better brakes
better handling
stiffer and more robust chassie
Pirelli tires (yeah, and those Pirelli-girls to go with it)
A big phat spoiler
Faster accelleration / top speed
better suspension.

And for good measure, (since you actually cheated me in the first place) paint it blue and yellow, with golden rims.

Yours sincerly, truthfull Justy-owner

PS: What web-address could the changes be downloaded from?


Subaru would probably decline your demands in a friendly tone, and ask why you didn't buy the Impreza WRX with a custom paint-job instead, since it actually sounds like that's the car you want! Do you blame them for not granting your wish? Do you understand that it's really nothing to whine about? It's not gonna happen, and although it probably wouldn't have costed Subaru "too" much money to put a better braking-system in the Justy, they didn't, cause that's preserved for their Impreza model!

Sooo. Now I guess the 10D owners will hate me for taking side with the 300D owners when it boils down to that I really wish for a non-Canon firmware for the 300D, while the 300D will probably hate me because I obviously haven't got a clue (or something) and then tell me that it's actually me that is the whiner here, and that my only reason for this post, is that I (as a 10D owner) only wan't those 300D-owners to still look at my gear with envy.. Good night from a happy 10D owner, who still haven't petitioned Canon to get 1D(s) features in the next firmware.

[defordphoto]

Mashuri wrote:
RFMSports wrote:
Okay all you Drebel owners, click your heals together and repeat: There's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...

Why so condescending? Do you feel threatened by this or something? 10D's will still be nice cameras so don't worry about it. As a 300D owner I like the idea of hacking my gear to make it better. If you look around you'll find that some of Nikon's Coolpix cameras have already been hacked so there is an interest in the geek community.

Threatened by it? Puhleeze, I have better things to do with my camera than try and hack it. I watch with interest and also humor. Try it. This is all tongue-in-cheek. Just make sure that the person writing this so-called hack isn't the same one that hacked that S-series lens. Literally hacked. Like with a chainsaw.

I just hope that no one is hurt by all this and mis-hacks their camera and then is out $1,000 cause Canon won't fix it. Canon reads these forums and will find out if a hack is out there. It just seems to me that it's an awful expensive toy to be taking that risk with.

And don't take everything on these forums so freaking personal.

[Sketcher]

Mashuri,

Some of the heat directed toward the "dumbed down" 300D misnomer is that there have been ridiculous threads 'petitioning' [Canon] to give them in firmware what is standard 10D functionality. It was one thing for the question to be raised; yet another thing to accuse Canon of cheating the 300D owners out of a 10D. The product is marketed with specifications and just because one might not be able to afford the product with all the specs doesn't mean one deserves it anyway. Further, not everything petitioned for was firmware restrictive so the issue became even more off base. So it was pretty much a "Canon owe's us" kind of thing rather than what you're getting at.

The point of 'hacking' the firmware is a different aspect altogether than what I described above. I figure though; you should have an explanation as to why there's heat on the topic. For the readers who jumped on the previous 'petition' threads, note that this topic of hacking the firmware has nothing to do with 'getting' Canon to do anything.

1. Warranty is void.
2. Re-flashing firmware to first imprint can be detected.
3. The intent is to figure out what 'can' be done not whether it should/shouldn't be done.
4. It will be done irrespective of whether the tech is capable of taking a photographically valuable picture.

Those who have the interest and ability to go this route will not likely b!tch at Canon if they screw up. It's not a "shoulda bought a 10D" issue. It's a challenge and interest to see what can be done with a particular product - having the 10D as a reference in processor design only helps determine a benchmark or reference to what 'might' be possible.

Though there are significant technical reference in this forum I would say that less than 5% of this forums members here are interested in really learning the potential code value of the firmware. Of those truly interested, perhaps 3% would know what to do with a compiled hack and mabye 1% if that would have a clue on how to roll their own. Most here are interested in photography itself, with digital camera's being a first venture into photography or digital being a segue from years of film. So, when someone touts a line referring to "get out and actually take some pictures" it's a reminder to keep the big picture intent of this forum in mind. Perhaps those people who aren't interested in this topic shouldn't post in it - but this is a photography forum with little if any underground tech ethos.

I know that if I'm interested in running emulation on my X-Box I don't surf moderated MS forums for the hacks. When I bumped my Palm V's RAM from 2MB to 8MB I didn't go browsing the Palm user's forums for the bits. And though AMD has gone to great lengths to cater to the modding community, their own forums aren't the most intelligent place to go pandering for graphite trace knowledge. My point is that this isn't a 'modding' forum and significant venture into that arena will likely be moderated to only a passing interest or linkfest instead of a repository for home grown firmware.

There's plenty to learn about photography as it is and "Digital" SLR though quite advanced really is still in its' infancy. So most of the ears here who will hear your requests for clandestine firmware or call to coding arms will not recognize your interest for it's propriety rather for the lack thereof.

[dtrayers]

I want to throw in my $0.02 here...

There are several precedents for a manufacturer offering to upgrade firmware for a fee... Panasonic (http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1068589889.html) may do just that for the Limux line of cameras, at least in Japan.

I have personal experience with Samsung offering a one time system board/firmware upgrade for their line of DLP HDTV's. I was one of the early adopters, and watched as the HLM line became the HLN, and there were improvements in video processesing circuitry, descrete codes, and other improvements in the functionality.

Enough people petitioned and squawked about it, mainly in the AVS forums, and got the ear of someone at Samsung, that finally over the summer Samsung offered for a flat $200 to upgrade the system board with the latest in video processing chips and firmware. It was like getting a brand new HDTV in a year old chassis.

Granted, this HDTV situation is a little different, as some felt that the orginal version of the TV's were deficient in some way, but my point is that Samsung (a very large company) didn't have to do anything. The fact is that the early TV's worked just fine. It's just the later ones were better and offered more features. And to draw one more parallel, the model I purchased didn't have a feature called DNIe. But this feature was offered on a higher end model for about $1300 more. After the upgrade, my HDTV now has DNIe, and for only $200.

I'd be willing to pay $200 for firmware that offered many of the functions of the 10D, like custom functions, mirror lockup, focus mode, etc. I wouldn't pay the full 300D to 10D difference, because no firmware upgrade will give a command dial or magnesium chassis.

I have a handheld GPS that has gone through several free firmware upgrades from the manufacturer. The new firmware upgrades added significant enhanced functions.

Although unlikely, it isn't unknown for a large manufacturer to offer goodwill upgrades for its customers.

[Mashuri]

vvizard wrote:
Now this is gonna be a looong post, which likely will make me hated by most guys on this forum (both 10D and 300D owners)

EXA1a wrote:
Hi Mashury,

I really appreciate your thoughts and actions on the 300D firmware! It seems like a real challenge and I'll be one of the guys trying it out (maybe not the first ;-). Unfortunately I can't help with hacking though but forums like this one are a good place to find the right people.

What I don't understand is why these 10D owners don't just leave us alone? It's not their business and I'm even wondering why they read posts like "300D firmware hack". At least they could spare their nasty comments. They have a good camera and even with a perfectly hacked firmware the 300D wouldn't match up.

Keep on going!

--Jens--

First off, I'm a 10D owner, not a 300D owner. I bought the 10D because I wanted it's features (and specially the body). If some of you guys felt like buying the 300D, and then petition Canon or wait for a cowboy to flip his own firmware to make it match the 10D, I feel sorry for you. Chances for Canon doing this is about zero. Chances that a hacker will do this anytime before both of those cams are only worth their weight in Magnesium (or plastic) is pretty small too :/

On the other hand, I have a great interest in this topic, because I'm a computer-geek, and love topics like reverse-engineering. If someone could improve the 300D with their own (opensource preferably) firmware, I would love to see that. Would be awsome! But I don't think it'll happen anytime soon. Maybe, if you manage to attract much attention to this issue, you will maybe pretty soon see an example-firmware. A hacker making a small OS for it, just to show that it can be done. Heck, we've already seen webservers on the Gameboy-advance, Linux on the XBOX, another webserver that fit's into the body of a dead fly! (yeah the small ones that sum, and you usually slap when you get the chance). I don't see it unrealistic that a hacker wan't to show off by doing an example-firmware just to show the rest what can be done. He might even not have interest in photography, and the firmware might even not manage to operate the shutter, but maybe it'll let you play Tetris on the LCD. Whatever actually, it's still an operating-system for the cam, and it shows other that it's very well possible (and it probably is). Then you can hope, that this first project will give you another slashdot-story (and other tech-sites), attracting other people who want's to improve the system. Maybe even some of them know a bit about photography, or at least they can team up with some. They could actually make an OS able to control the shutter/aparture, focusing etc. It's a great hobbiest project for those up to the challenge. From then on, you might start to see some steady progress, and in a (distant) future, maybe it will rival Canon's own firmware. But again, I think most P&S cam's would rival the 300D before this happens, and then the 300D wouldn't be great enough for the hackers to work on.. So don't keep your fingers crossed. But by all means, I hope I'm wrong, and that soon you'll have a competitive firmware from non-Canon.

On the other hand, what I really don't like about (some of) you 300D-owners, is the idea of petitioning Canon to actually implement the 10D features. Ok, the idea isn't to bad, of course we all wan't most for our money, but you should realize even before you hit submit, it won't work, take a cold shower, stop whining please! There's a reason (other than color) for the 10D beeing more expensive than the 300D. If some of those gaps could be filled by software quite easily, it won't happen, simple as that! It wouldn't be profitable for Canon. And I seriously don't hope you guys think Canon are making theese cams for any other reason than money?

And in the danger of repeating myself from another post, think of this: You're out to buy a new car. You're thinking about either the Subaru Impreza 2,0 4D WRX STi, or the Subaru Justy 1,3. Out of price (or other practical reasons) you choose the Justy. You take it out for a spin, and you get dissapointed. The handling wasn't as precise as you wanted, the suspension is to soft, it's accelleration isn't good enough, and the brakes weren't really "that" good. Heck, it even broke down when you took it out on the field for some off-road rally-racing. So what do you do? Do you join in with other Justy-owners to sign a petition against Subaru? Would you say:


Hey, listen up Subaru! I bought your Justy-model and I seriously don't think it could win the WRC! Now here's a list of my demands:

Bigger engine (2.0 litre version)
Better brakes
better handling
stiffer and more robust chassie
Pirelli tires (yeah, and those Pirelli-girls to go with it)
A big phat spoiler
Faster accelleration / top speed
better suspension.

And for good measure, (since you actually cheated me in the first place) paint it blue and yellow, with golden rims.

Yours sincerly, truthfull Justy-owner

PS: What web-address could the changes be downloaded from?


Subaru would probably decline your demands in a friendly tone, and ask why you didn't buy the Impreza WRX with a custom paint-job instead, since it actually sounds like that's the car you want! Do you blame them for not granting your wish? Do you understand that it's really nothing to whine about? It's not gonna happen, and although it probably wouldn't have costed Subaru "too" much money to put a better braking-system in the Justy, they didn't, cause that's preserved for their Impreza model!

Sooo. Now I guess the 10D owners will hate me for taking side with the 300D owners when it boils down to that I really wish for a non-Canon firmware for the 300D, while the 300D will probably hate me because I obviously haven't got a clue (or something) and then tell me that it's actually me that is the whiner here, and that my only reason for this post, is that I (as a 10D owner) only wan't those 300D-owners to still look at my gear with envy.. Good night from a happy 10D owner, who still haven't petitioned Canon to get 1D(s) features in the next firmware.

That rings somewhat true. Making a 300D run Tetris is a major, major project. Getting it to allow manual selection of features it already has is very simple by comparison. It won't take much work.

[Mashuri]

RFMSports wrote:
Mashuri wrote:
RFMSports wrote:
Okay all you Drebel owners, click your heals together and repeat: There's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...there's nothing like 10D firmware...

Why so condescending? Do you feel threatened by this or something? 10D's will still be nice cameras so don't worry about it. As a 300D owner I like the idea of hacking my gear to make it better. If you look around you'll find that some of Nikon's Coolpix cameras have already been hacked so there is an interest in the geek community.

Threatened by it? Puhleeze, I have better things to do with my camera than try and hack it. I watch with interest and also humor. Try it. This is all tongue-in-cheek. Just make sure that the person writing this so-called hack isn't the same one that hacked that S-series lens. Literally hacked. Like with a chainsaw.

I just hope that no one is hurt by all this and mis-hacks their camera and then is out $1,000 cause Canon won't fix it. Canon reads these forums and will find out if a hack is out there. It just seems to me that it's an awful expensive toy to be taking that risk with.

And don't take everything on these forums so freaking personal.

Thank you. Your post speaks for itself. :)

[Mashuri]

dtrayers wrote:
I want to throw in my $0.02 here...

There are several precedents for a manufacturer offering to upgrade firmware for a fee... Panasonic (http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1068589889.html) may do just that for the Limux line of cameras, at least in Japan.

I have personal experience with Samsung offering a one time system board/firmware upgrade for their line of DLP HDTV's. I was one of the early adopters, and watched as the HLM line became the HLN, and there were improvements in video processesing circuitry, descrete codes, and other improvements in the functionality.

Enough people petitioned and squawked about it, mainly in the AVS forums, and got the ear of someone at Samsung, that finally over the summer Samsung offered for a flat $200 to upgrade the system board with the latest in video processing chips and firmware. It was like getting a brand new HDTV in a year old chassis.

Granted, this HDTV situation is a little different, as some felt that the orginal version of the TV's were deficient in some way, but my point is that Samsung (a very large company) didn't have to do anything. The fact is that the early TV's worked just fine. It's just the later ones were better and offered more features. And to draw one more parallel, the model I purchased didn't have a feature called DNIe. But this feature was offered on a higher end model for about $1300 more. After the upgrade, my HDTV now has DNIe, and for only $200.

I'd be willing to pay $200 for firmware that offered many of the functions of the 10D, like custom functions, mirror lockup, focus mode, etc. I wouldn't pay the full 300D to 10D difference, because no firmware upgrade will give a command dial or magnesium chassis.

I have a handheld GPS that has gone through several free firmware upgrades from the manufacturer. The new firmware upgrades added significant enhanced functions.

Although unlikely, it isn't unknown for a large manufacturer to offer goodwill upgrades for its customers.

I agree but this seems to have generated plenty of interest. I don't mind the flames at all. I sure as hell am not going to petition Canon. I completely understand why they designed the 300D the way it is...and welcome the challenge to improve on it. It's just too damned tempting when Canon makes it so easy to hack into.

[mjordan]

This takes me back to the good ole Apple II+ days when all software was fair game.

Usually, someone that logged onto one of the BBSes or messages forums (Qlink was a good one back in the early 80's) and started talking about hacking was either looking for a source, hoping someone would contact them, or else were undercover investigators, hoping someone would contact them and lead them to those actually doing the hacking.

There are always people willing to take up a challenge and do what people say can't be done. But other than to show it could be done and put another notch on the ole hacking trophy, I doubt it's going to affect any of Canon's sales. If anything, they might sell a few more 300D's so people can try it. LOL!

Ah, those were the days, Applesoft, C-64 and then DOS. I went kicking and screaming into Windows... and I still scream at it from time to time. ;D

Mike

[John-M]

robertwgross wrote:
Mashuri wrote:
How much have you dealt with hacks and firmware? I've hacked my computer motherboards, my DirecTV, X-Box, etc. and they work great. .

Of course it is not impossible, and I stated that clearly. How did you jump to the opposite conclusion?

I've been on the side of the original manufacturer trying to explain to irate customers that we weren't going to support the product that they had tinkered with. Then somebody always tries to argue that they didn't

---Bob Gross---






Mashuri....Direct Tv hacks, overclocking, enabling locked features? It's just another day at the beach for a techno geek. My Direct TV is "tweaked" and my MB overclocked, no problem just make sure you cool it ;)

Bob,

When my Suburban gets taken to the dealer I reset the computer to the stock setting BEFORE it gets service. I get better gas milage and more power as well as crisper shifts from a reprogramed ECM. If I can mess with the ECM of a $42,000 SUV you think I won't flash an $800 camera?

The world is a great place for those of us with knowledge and big brass b...s


John Meara

PS. I own a 10D...now if I could hack that into a 1Ds it would be smokin ;)

[James01]

LOL this thread rocks.

[Mashuri]

mjordan wrote:


This takes me back to the good ole Apple II+ days when all software was fair game.

Usually, someone that logged onto one of the BBSes or messages forums (Qlink was a good one back in the early 80's) and started talking about hacking was either looking for a source, hoping someone would contact them, or else were undercover investigators, hoping someone would contact them and lead them to those actually doing the hacking.

There are always people willing to take up a challenge and do what people say can't be done. But other than to show it could be done and put another notch on the ole hacking trophy, I doubt it's going to affect any of Canon's sales. If anything, they might sell a few more 300D's so people can try it. LOL!

Ah, those were the days, Applesoft, C-64 and then DOS. I went kicking and screaming into Windows... and I still scream at it from time to time. ;D

Mike

I was a die hard Amiga man myself. They had so much copy protection on their software that hackers took to it like moths to flames. They love a good challenge. ;)

[karusel]

Okay, how sure are we that 300D from hardware point of view equals 10D and the only difference is software?


Next, to all those, that think hacking something that has been dumbed down - so that 'tech freaks' get really hot for double priced 'real thing' and look down on the crowds grabbingly buying the idiotized apparatuses - isn't cool or moral, chill and get a banana daquiry with an umbrella in it, get on with your life and just don't bother.

I totally support hacks lilke this, I mean, the 300D and 10D are almost textbook examples:

price: camera A $900, camera B $1500
looks: A crappy, B cool
features: A gee-wish-they-were-like-camera-B's, B almost non plus ultra
electronics: (presumably) the same

D'oh! Could a marketing trick be even more obvious and a hack even more justifiable???

[alan-G3]

Here is another thought

Depending upon the manufacturing system, there are likely to be a significant number of circuit boards that do not reach (when tested) the appropriate specification.
Do you:-
Bin them
Use them in a different product with a specification that they do meet.

Obviously this depends upon the relative quantities of " rejects" and the quantities of the alternative, lower speced product.

Regards

Alan

[karusel]

Not very likely. Then the number of malfunctioning boardy would have to be bigger than those that function normally, since I logically assume there will be more 300Ds produced than 10Ds.

[RichardtheSane]

OK, first, I am definitly a supporter of those who want to get more for their money. If I bought a Drebel and a hack came out I would give it a go!
Hacks like this will never harm the industry because only a smaller percentage would know about it and an even smaller percentage have the balls to try it.
Good luck to whoever does it :)

[Belmondo]

RichardtheSane wrote:
and an even smaller percentage have the balls to try it.

Richard (the Sane):

We in the Southwest U.S. prefer the term huevos. Balls are for kicking, throwing, and knocking into holes on golf courses. In your context, that is a most distressing prospect to consider.

Tom (the Flinching)

[Longwatcher]

karusel wrote:
Not very likely. Then the number of malfunctioning boardy would have to be bigger than those that function normally, since I logically assume there will be more 300Ds produced than 10Ds.

Not necessarily,
All they would do is send all the substandard (from a 10D perspective) to the DRebel batch and then if they ran short of bad ones, fill in the gaps with good ones.

They do this with some CCD technologies. You get X number that have no defects, they go to the high-end bin. You get Y number with some defects, but still useable with some pixel mapping, which go to the mid-price bin. Then you get Z number which go to the we can use a part of the sensor in really cheaper, but bulky products. And then you get the trash. You may only get 1 X from a plate (or whatever they call them), but 3 make the Y category and 12 make the Z category, with the other 48 going into the trash.

You set your production for the high-end sets or the mid-range, which ever gets you the highest profit margin and then you use the Z set in cheap products that give you some cash for something you would have had to otherwise throw away.

As to the topic, as long as they realise they void the warranty, they can hack to their heart's content as far as I am concerned. It is their property at that point and if it works great. Me I would wait until after it is well past the warranty to do any hacking or modification.

For example I have considered having (or doing myself) my D60 turned into an IR only camera as a couple of other people have done, but am holding off until I get my next camera as I need a backup, which the D60 is right now.

[PacAce]

belmondo wrote:
RichardtheSane wrote:
and an even smaller percentage have the balls to try it.

Richard (the Sane):

We in the Southwest U.S. prefer the term huevos. Balls are for kicking, throwing, and knocking into holes on golf courses. In your context, that is a most distressing prospect to consider.

Tom (the Flinching)

Do you want that hard-boiled, scrambled or sunny-side up? :D

[karusel]

I fail to see the necessity for cajunas while flashing a camera with a provenly working hacked OS. Should it, for the reasons described in longwatchers post not work, one would simply upload the original OS. Also, if the latter operation runs flawlessly the service staff would not be able to tell whether or not the software aboard has been screwed around with or not, in fact, the would even not get suspicious and even if they did they could not prove the flashing had taken place. IMHO.

longwatcher: Agree with that, it could definetely be the case, the reason that 300D was made may in the first place have been the circuit boards that have shown to have some specific malfunction. So I guess you'd have to be lucky to have one that has been assembled of 100% functioning parts... Or, this hack may prove, that all of the 300D's circuits are completely sane.

[iwatkins]

karusel wrote:
I fail to see the necessity for cajunas while flashing a camera with a provenly working hacked OS. Should it, for the reasons described in longwatchers post not work, one would simply upload the original OS. Also, if the latter operation runs flawlessly the service staff would not be able to tell whether or not the software aboard has been screwed around with or not, in fact, the would even not get suspicious and even if they did they could not prove the flashing had taken place. IMHO.


The only problem with this is that, on the 10D at least, the software on the camera itself includes a section to recognise the fact that a flash card (with new firmware) has been inserted and to give you the option to load the new firmware.

If this is messed up by loading a hack, you will not be able to return your camera to stock and it'll have to go back to Canon to be flashed and I'm sure they'll notice it's been messed with.

Of course, that shouldn't stop anybody trying....

Cheers

Ian

[CyberDyneSystems]

Some firmware #2 flashes went wrong.. we had two instances listed on this very foum. In both cases it was IMPOSSIBLE to flash back to the previous version,. nor was it possible to try again.

Also in both cases Canon made it clear to the customer of the 10D that Canon DOES NOT SUPPORT IT'S OWN FIRMWARE FLASH!!!! Canon DID provide an RMA to repare the BIOS of the 10D's in question,. but they did it at there leasure... (yes it does sound odd that Canon would release firmware and then claim that they won't support its installation?)

BUT If such a freeze were to occur while flashing with a "hacked" bios,. I doubt Canon would be so benevolent. One would have to "fib" and hope that Canon did not catch on.

Like all such hacks,. it is a risk. On a motherboard a toasted bios chip can be replaced for $30.00 or so... in a 300D??? I think it would become a very pricey paper weight.


But here's "The thing"

With photography moving faster and faster into the realm of the "Digital" it is also moving faster and faster into the realm of the "Digital age" which includes the likes of us on te edge hackers, geeks and nerds.

(Call us "Computer Power Users" if the term Geek is unapealing :D )

It then becomes a matter of inevitability that these cameras will be hacked to run "TinFoilHat Linux" in the very near future....

So stand back! The GEEKS are coming!


//the geekness,.. the horror

[Mashuri]

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
Some firmware #2 flashes went wrong.. we had two instances listed on this very foum. In both cases it was IMPOSSIBLE to flash back to the previous version,. nor was it possible to try again.

Also in both cases Canon made it clear to the customer of the 10D that Canon DOES NOT SUPPORT IT'S OWN FIRMWARE FLASH!!!! Canon DID provide an RMA to repare the BIOS of the 10D's in question,. but they did it at there leasure... (yes it does sound odd that Canon would release firmware and then claim that they won't support its installation?)

BUT If such a freeze were to occur while flashing with a "hacked" bios,. I doubt Canon would be so benevolent. One would have to "fib" and hope that Canon did not catch on.

Like all such hacks,. it is a risk. On a motherboard a toasted bios chip can be replaced for $30.00 or so... in a 300D??? I think it would become a very pricey paper weight.


But here's "The thing"

With photography moving faster and faster into the realm of the "Digital" it is also moving faster and faster into the realm of the "Digital age" which includes the likes of us on te edge hackers, geeks and nerds.

(Call us "Computer Power Users" if the term Geek is unapealing :D )

It then becomes a matter of inevitability that these cameras will be hacked to run "TinFoilHat Linux" in the very near future....

So stand back! The GEEKS are coming!


//the geekness,.. the horror

Is that you Neo? :D

There may be a way to use a custom application to access the camera's BIOS through its USB port. What I mean is one may be able to salvage a trashed BIOS this way. Then again, maybe not. Either way, I love doing this stuff. On a side note, I just finished programming my motorcycle's Fuel Injection (2003 VFR) with my laptop over the weekend. What a difference!

[agit-prop]

Longwatcher wrote:

They do this with some CCD technologies. You get X number that have no defects, they go to the high-end bin. You get Y number with some defects, but still useable with some pixel mapping, which go to the mid-price bin. Then you get Z number which go to the we can use a part of the sensor in really cheaper, but bulky products. And then you get the trash. You may only get 1 X from a plate (or whatever they call them), but 3 make the Y category and 12 make the Z category, with the other 48 going into the trash.

I suspect this is one of the differences between the 10D and the 300D; the grade of the sensor

[Mashuri]

Agit-Prop wrote:
Longwatcher wrote:

They do this with some CCD technologies. You get X number that have no defects, they go to the high-end bin. You get Y number with some defects, but still useable with some pixel mapping, which go to the mid-price bin. Then you get Z number which go to the we can use a part of the sensor in really cheaper, but bulky products. And then you get the trash. You may only get 1 X from a plate (or whatever they call them), but 3 make the Y category and 12 make the Z category, with the other 48 going into the trash.

I suspect this is one of the differences between the 10D and the 300D; the grade of the sensor

I agree. They also integrated all the chips onto one circuit board. 10D on the left and 300D on the right:

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/0820/canon04.jpg