Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?
Feature-wise, I mean, in cheaper cameras?
Time Lapse, remote, motion detection, manual, long video,
etc?

My impression is, once CHDK is properly tweaked, it can
load at power-up every time, and remain transparent,
buried in the features menus until needed. Is that true?

I saw a video demo of motion detection (object falling into
bathtub water). It didn't seem very sensitive, a moving hand
didn't trigger. Is sensitivity adjustable? If so how much?

All the reviews I've seen so far don't seem objective. They
either say my hero, or crapola. Nor do I see practical
questions like these (here) addressed. Look and feel, etc.
Any pointers?

Thanks!

=========
in rec.photo.digital, CHDK does 1/1,000,000 second, now we
are talking.....;
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, calvin-torgen wrote:


This is why I know that so many of you ...have never even ran CHDK.
... and take advantage of the hundreds of new features and immeasurable
new creative possibilities that CHDK gives back to the world of
photography.

On Mon, 06 Sep 2010 21:22:09 -0700, Crash! wrote:


Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?
Feature-wise, I mean, in cheaper cameras?
Time Lapse, remote, motion detection, manual, long video,
etc?

In short, no. You will get one or two features that CHDK offers, but that's
all. A few people have been trying to hack into some other manufacturers
camera, but so far there's been no word in if they've had any luck to be
able to create something as beneficial as CHDK.


My impression is, once CHDK is properly tweaked, it can
load at power-up every time, and remain transparent,
buried in the features menus until needed. Is that true?


Correct. It doesn't do anything until you select an option from one of its
many menus. If you have a script loaded, then you just put it in CHDK's
ALT mode (the mode where you access the menus with your menu button), and
press the shutter. Instead of taking a photo it will run the script.
Interrupt the script by pressing the shutter again. If you want to use the
camera normally, just exit ALT mode.

I saw a video demo of motion detection (object falling into
bathtub water). It didn't seem very sensitive, a moving hand
didn't trigger. Is sensitivity adjustable? If so how much?


The motion-detection script's parameters weren't adjusted properly then.
Motion detection has been verified to trigger as fast as 32 milliseconds
(1/30th of a second) on one camera model, other models it runs from 45ms
(1/22nd of a second) to about 100ms (1/10th of a second) as the fastest
motion-detection speeds.

It can be adjusted so sensitive that it will even trigger on the sensor
noise. In fact this is a problem many newbies have. Setting the sensitivity
so high that it keeps taking images when nothing's moving. It's detecting
on the sensor-noise threshold in the unlit portions of their scene.


All the reviews I've seen so far don't seem objective. They
either say my hero, or crapola.

The "crapola" proponents are just insecure and envious DSLR users. Due to a
DSLRs slow moving shutter and mirror most all of CHDK's features can't be
implemented on any model of them. There is a project called Magic Lantern
that has done some hacking to increase ISO settings and enabling a
spot-meter on those DSLRs where it's been disabled, but that's about it.

Nor do I see practical
questions like these (here) addressed. Look and feel, etc.
Any pointers?

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_User_Manual
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures

[Note: the motion detection speeds listed in that camera-features chart are
often stated as XXms sometimes / XXms typical. This is no longer true. They
found a way for motion detection to always parse on the active EVF display
buffer (a sequence of 3 always available) so the cameras will now always
trigger on the fastest time listed in the camera-features chart. That chart
was compiled before this motion-detection improvement was implemented..]


Thanks!

=========
in rec.photo.digital, CHDK does 1/1,000,000 second, now we
are talking.....;
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, calvin-torgen wrote:


This is why I know that so many of you ...have never even ran CHDK.
... and take advantage of the hundreds of new features and immeasurable
new creative possibilities that CHDK gives back to the world of
photography.

"Crash!" wrote in message
om...

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?

Perhaps they don't need "something like CHDK"?

On Mon, 06 Sep 2010 21:22:09 -0700, Crash! wrote:


Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?
Feature-wise, I mean, in cheaper cameras?
Time Lapse, remote, motion detection, manual, long video,
etc?

My impression is, once CHDK is properly tweaked, it can
load at power-up every time, and remain transparent,
buried in the features menus until needed. Is that true?

I saw a video demo of motion detection (object falling into
bathtub water). It didn't seem very sensitive, a moving hand
didn't trigger. Is sensitivity adjustable? If so how much?

All the reviews I've seen so far don't seem objective. They
either say my hero, or crapola. Nor do I see practical
questions like these (here) addressed. Look and feel, etc.
Any pointers?

Thanks!

P.S. If a pretend-photographer troll going by the name of SMS chimes in,
ignore ANYTHING it says about CHDK. It has never used CHDK, it has never
worked on the documentation for CHDK, it has never been involved in the
programming for CHDK. But he will loudly claim otherwise. All that SMS
likes to do is try to claim credit for the brilliant work of others. Until
you ask him a serious question about using CHDK, then he pretends like he
never saw your question in order to evade proving that he knows nothing
about how to use the simplest of features of CHDK.

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 06:00:35 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"Crash!" wrote in message
news:7b6dnbp7IJpoIBjRnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@pghconnect. com...

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?

Perhaps they don't need "something like CHDK"?

Most don't. The features that CHDK brings to the photographer's table are
usually only needed by advanced professionals and highly creative
photographers. Most are quite happy with their automatic and three standard
manual settings (Tv, Av. M). Then too, some who lambaste CHDK are so
flustered by all the features of CHDK and being unable to even understand
how to use them, or even know what they would be useful for, that it's just
a case of the usual simpletons' "sour grapes". They can't understand it so
it must be useless or bad.

Are you displaying a simpletons' "sour grapes"?

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 06:00:35 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"Crash!" wrote in message
news:7b6dnbp7IJpoIBjRnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@pghconnect. com...

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?

Perhaps they don't need "something like CHDK"?

Does anyone? I have yet to see an example of a good photograph that
was taken utilizing the CHDK "features" that was not an image that
could have been taken with an off-the-shelf, unhacked, Canon
point-and-shoot.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 01:26:50 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 06:00:35 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"Crash!" wrote in message
news:7b6dnbp7IJpoIBjRnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@pghconnect .com...

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?

Perhaps they don't need "something like CHDK"?

Does anyone? I have yet to see an example of a good photograph that
was taken utilizing the CHDK "features" that was not an image that
could have been taken with an off-the-shelf, unhacked, Canon
point-and-shoot.

http://fiveprime.org/hivemind/Tags/CHDK/

Insecure DSLR-TROLL fools never find what they don't want to look for.

"Superzooms Still Win" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 01:26:50 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 06:00:35 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"Crash!" wrote in message
news:7b6dnbp7IJpoIBjRnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@pghconnec t.com...

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?

Perhaps they don't need "something like CHDK"?

Does anyone? I have yet to see an example of a good photograph that
was taken utilizing the CHDK "features" that was not an image that
could have been taken with an off-the-shelf, unhacked, Canon
point-and-shoot.

http://fiveprime.org/hivemind/Tags/CHDK/

Insecure DSLR-TROLL fools never find what they don't want to look for.


LOL, can't find what is never posted anywhere. Feel free to post links to
all your great shots Bozo...... go on I dare you!!

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 19:01:51 +1000, "Pete D" wrote:



"Superzooms Still Win" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 01:26:50 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 06:00:35 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"Crash!" wrote in message
news:7b6dnbp7IJpoIBjRnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@pghconne ct.com...

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?

Perhaps they don't need "something like CHDK"?

Does anyone? I have yet to see an example of a good photograph that
was taken utilizing the CHDK "features" that was not an image that
could have been taken with an off-the-shelf, unhacked, Canon
point-and-shoot.

http://fiveprime.org/hivemind/Tags/CHDK/

Insecure DSLR-TROLL fools never find what they don't want to look for.


LOL, can't find what is never posted anywhere. Feel free to post links to
all your great shots Bozo...... go on I dare you!!

Were you an actual photographer that actually owned a camera and could do
likewise in return, I might do that (for one or two). But since you are
nothing but a hopelessly pathetic ****ingly useless pretend-photographer
TROLL (proved many dozens of times over) ... it's not worth anyone's time.
This is the problem with you basement living trolls, you're so desperate
for any high-quality glimpse of reality beyond your mommy's basement walls
that you'll try to be this childishly and pathetically manipulative.

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 19:01:51 +1000, "Pete D" wrote:



"Superzooms Still Win" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 01:26:50 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 06:00:35 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"Crash!" wrote in message
news:7b6dnbp7IJpoIBjRnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@pghconne ct.com...

Do any of Canon's competitors have something like CHDK?

Perhaps they don't need "something like CHDK"?

Does anyone? I have yet to see an example of a good photograph that
was taken utilizing the CHDK "features" that was not an image that
could have been taken with an off-the-shelf, unhacked, Canon
point-and-shoot.

http://fiveprime.org/hivemind/Tags/CHDK/

Insecure DSLR-TROLL fools never find what they don't want to look for.


LOL, can't find what is never posted anywhere.

Oh, by the way, that link is posted on the main page for the CHDK Wiki. I
know, because I put it there. It's available to anyone that has a sincere
interest in CHDK. That counts out numbnuts DSLR-TROLLS like you, don't it.