Reading mode: Light Dark

G-2 new firmware 1.0.1.0 improvements ONLY

Go to last post
daryl liquin said:
I've noticed that my visits to dpreview.com take longer and that
even though I'm spending more time here I seem to be learning
less...
Click to expand...
Well daryl, thats due to dpreview bull-os upgrade 1.0.0.-1, which forces you to sit through the rantings of overly optimistic & slightly paranoid Canon G2 users who think that their BIOS upgrade just reversed global warming and brought about world peace...

(p.s. sorry to lengthen this thread!)------------------ A happy Pro90 owner! ----------------
 
While I perceive the 'after' shots to be a slight bit brighter, in both of these before and after comparisons, the lettering on the Norton box is softer on the after shots. Take a close look at the round blue 2000 sticker on the box. That sticker is definitely softer on the after picture. I hope this really isn't the case and is a result of reducing the size of the original. I just updated to the new firmware and would hate to think that it made a poor decision. -Norm
Martin Eager said:
binkybarnes said:
i was skeptical
though so, before updating, i took a series of set shots noting the
focus speed. afterwards, i took the same shots. here are four of
the before/after shots:

http://www.pbase.com/prouddadof2/g2_firmware_beforeafter
Click to expand...
Well, I can't see any obvious differences between these before and
after shots.

Cheers
Martin
Click to expand...
 
Forces? I don't read Pro90 posts...
Overly optimistic - maybe.

Slightly paranoid? Huh? Clearly declared the best 4MP, and rivaling the 5s, before any update... What's to be paranoid about?

Maybe a little jealousy that the Pro90 doesn't get as much press around here?
PeterHill said:
daryl liquin said:
I've noticed that my visits to dpreview.com take longer and that
even though I'm spending more time here I seem to be learning
less...
Click to expand...
Well daryl, thats due to dpreview bull-os upgrade 1.0.0.-1, which
forces you to sit through the rantings of overly optimistic &
slightly paranoid Canon G2 users who think that their BIOS upgrade
just reversed global warming and brought about world peace...

(p.s. sorry to lengthen this thread!)
--
---------------- A happy Pro90 owner! ----------------
Click to expand...
 
I've upgraded my G1 but have yet to do any real tests.

I got to thinking about all the other stuff on this thread.

Either Canon are so ashamed of the bugs/errors/problems before the upgrades, that they didn't want to have to admit they needed to make all these wonderful changes.....

Or, they've done the absolute minimum to avoid having to turn around expensive returns for batteries conking out.

I wonder what you would do in their position?
 
Film the focus using another digital camera or G2. Then time it in a video editor. Can someone do this before and after? You need to average 3 focus events and make sure you alternate between far and near high contrast objects for both situations. Also use middle zoom.

-Jack
gkl said:
To Warren, Martin and Nick - skepticism is a healthy thing.

Warren's suggestion is excellent - Phil could put this issue to
rest once and for all. And we all know he's done review updates
before. These G1/G2 upgrade threads seem to be piling up, so maybe
he has some motivation to settle the issue (:-).

Now for my $.02. I have G2 Firmware 1.0.1.0 so take what I say
accordingly. I couldn't resist checking out the autofocus. I think
0.5 sec is a good guess for autofocus in either decent and dungeon
light. But it is almost impossible to manually measure intervals
this short with a reliability better than about 0.3 sec. Human
reflexes just aren't good enough.

Earlier posts cited Phil's G2 review with the early firmware as
giving 0.9 sec autofocus time. Now the difference between 1/2 sec
and 1 sec should be noticeable for most people. So this may not be
a placebo effect, and if it is real, then thanks Canon!

Having said that, the people reporting a 5X optical zoom firmware
upgrade, bless their hearts, may have been using something a little
stronger than a placebo. (:-) cheers GKL
Click to expand...
---Jack==================Galleries: 1) http://www.pbase.com/blulegend/ 2) http://www.photoaccess.com/share/guest.jsp?ID=AB8C5232351&cb=PACurr: Canon PowerShot G2Prev: CP995, CP880, S10, S20, Oly D-340R
 
Well, the truth is probably a little in-between. Perhaps there are some slight changes and routine optimizations in addition to the battery charge fix, but reading some of the revelations posted here, you'd think the upgrade turns the camera into a G3 :
Kenn
Andy Goldney said:
I've upgraded my G1 but have yet to do any real tests.

I got to thinking about all the other stuff on this thread.

Either Canon are so ashamed of the bugs/errors/problems before the
upgrades, that they didn't want to have to admit they needed to
make all these wonderful changes.....

Or, they've done the absolute minimum to avoid having to turn
around expensive returns for batteries conking out.

I wonder what you would do in their position?
Click to expand...
 
Norman said:
While I perceive the 'after' shots to be a slight bit brighter, in
both of these before and after comparisons, the lettering on the
Norton box is softer on the after shots. Take a close look at the
round blue 2000 sticker on the box. That sticker is definitely
softer on the after picture. I hope this really isn't the case and
is a result of reducing the size of the original. I just updated
to the new firmware and would hate to think that it made a poor
decision. -Norm
Click to expand...
I don't see the same thing you do in those shots, the stickers look identical at 100% and one certainly isn't "definitely" softer than the other. I fear we're all at risk of over-analysing things here.

Martin
 
Anyone that has ever programed anything will tell you there
are bugs and cludges in the software. If they figured an way
to improve a cludge or to fix a bug that slowed things down,
more power to them. Something simple optimised to make
one issue better can impact the entire system if it frees
clock cycles for the other processes to use. There does not
have to be any change in those other parts for this to happen.
Didn't I read a while back here about 65k being the most often
listed missed focus distance, indicating a possible software bug?
Something as simple as correcting this so that the focus needs
less clock cycles to make a determination could cause everything
mentioned so far except the fantasy stuff like the 5x zoom.
more processing power could easily cause a cleaner manual focus
screen, because of more free resources. It could easily cause
faster focus, by cutting down on the processing needed to reach
focus. The suggestion to film the actual before and after tests
is a good one.
Kenn Hwang said:
Andy Goldney said:
I've upgraded my G1 but have yet to do any real tests.

I got to thinking about all the other stuff on this thread.

Either Canon are so ashamed of the bugs/errors/problems before the
upgrades, that they didn't want to have to admit they needed to
make all these wonderful changes.....

Or, they've done the absolute minimum to avoid having to turn
around expensive returns for batteries conking out.

I wonder what you would do in their position?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Russ C said:
Slightly paranoid? Huh?.....What's to be paranoid about?
Click to expand...
As you can see if you read the thread, the sad old cynics around here (like me!) suggest that everytime there is a BIOS upgrade, there is the usual paranoia that our suppliers are hiding things from us, therefore for every 1 change that has been made and admitted to, there have been 15 or so that Canon for some reason has 'snuck in' on the quiet.

One of the key reasons for the possibility for a customer to perform BIOS upgrades is to inspire consumer confidence that manufacturers can, and will, fix problems that are found after shipping, thereby extending the life of the product. - This is no different to any normal software company.

I personally believe most companies would rather declare ALL changes than take the support calls that are generated each release, asking "is my xxxx problem fixed now?" - customer support is costly and eats their profits.

In my opinion the only "bugs" that a supplier might choose NOT to admit to fixing in a BIOS release are those that could be deemed to show obvious neglect or carelessnes, or problems that could have caused data loss or corruption.

If a Canon engineer went to the marketing department and said "Hey, we just rewrote the autofocus algorithm for the G2, and guess what, now its 10% faster" wouldnt they want to shout about it?!

If you wanted to look for a conspiracy theory on this story, try this one... Canon found that overcharging of BP511 batteries actually caused fire or explosion in some cases, but found out before a customer got injured, and now are trying to get us all to upgrade before we kill ourselves... now THERES a better conspiracy theory for this upgrade!

By the way... for my new Pro90 Bios, a binary comparison Of the about 35 binary files that made up the upgrade, showed that only the following 8 files were changed, with a total of only 3452 bytes of changes - that to my mind doesnt sound like the whole host of improvements some people are hoping for. (As a comparison, this entire message is about 2500 bytes)

a.img,b.img,b21.img,b24.img,b25.img,b5.img,p.dat,romupd.exe

So anyway, call me a miserable, negative, cynical old bas*&ard, but i believe there WAS only one change, the one admitted to by Canon...------------------ A happy Pro90 owner! ----------------
 
What the hell is everyone talking about. The camera worked pretty darn well without the update. I think it is great that the manufacturer came out with any update. Check the other forums and see what the other guys are doing. Take the firmware and run.

Jeff
 
Startup can be limited to the compactflash speed and initialization tasks of the card itself.

No doubt that not all our cameras are made the same. Just like any mass production, they are made in batches. The manufacturers then change parameters, parts, sources of materials, vendors, etc in the middle of production on a regular basis, usually in between batches.

So, in theory, cameras that have come off the production line at different times may react differently to updates. Just like when a small population of owners has a glitch in thier product due to a part used in their product when the batch it belonged to was made.

Like someone said, they are refining the firmware on a continuous basis and likely as they develop new cameras to put the same basic foundation code into. Canon would not revert back to the original release version and update that build just to release an upgrade. If, in the meantime, Canon has streamlined core software functions of the camera, then those changes would likely be seen in a firmware update.

As for listing publicly all the updates, Canon may opt to only admit to a fault already public and not others. People who purchased the camera first, would feel they owned a more inferior product for the time. Not all owners would even know about this update, and if enhancements were made public it would be a huge responsibility to ensure everyone gets their camera updated to be the "same product".

This is just my speculation.

---Jack==================Galleries: 1) http://www.pbase.com/blulegend/ 2) http://www.photoaccess.com/share/guest.jsp?ID=AB8C5232351&cb=PACurr: Canon PowerShot G2Prev: CP995, CP880, S10, S20, Oly D-340R
 
Yay, a voice of reason!!
PeterHill said:
Russ C said:
Slightly paranoid? Huh?.....What's to be paranoid about?
Click to expand...
As you can see if you read the thread, the sad old cynics around
here (like me!) suggest that everytime there is a BIOS upgrade,
there is the usual paranoia that our suppliers are hiding things
from us, therefore for every 1 change that has been made and
admitted to, there have been 15 or so that Canon for some reason
has 'snuck in' on the quiet.

One of the key reasons for the possibility for a customer to
perform BIOS upgrades is to inspire consumer confidence that
manufacturers can, and will, fix problems that are found after
shipping, thereby extending the life of the product. - This is no
different to any normal software company.

I personally believe most companies would rather declare ALL
changes than take the support calls that are generated each
release, asking "is my xxxx problem fixed now?" - customer support
is costly and eats their profits.

In my opinion the only "bugs" that a supplier might choose NOT to
admit to fixing in a BIOS release are those that could be deemed to
show obvious neglect or carelessnes, or problems that could have
caused data loss or corruption.

If a Canon engineer went to the marketing department and said "Hey,
we just rewrote the autofocus algorithm for the G2, and guess what,
now its 10% faster" wouldnt they want to shout about it?!

If you wanted to look for a conspiracy theory on this story, try
this one... Canon found that overcharging of BP511 batteries
actually caused fire or explosion in some cases, but found out
before a customer got injured, and now are trying to get us all
to upgrade before we kill ourselves... now THERES a better
conspiracy theory for this upgrade!

By the way... for my new Pro90 Bios, a binary comparison Of the
about 35 binary files that made up the upgrade, showed that only
the following 8 files were changed, with a total of only 3452 bytes
of changes - that to my mind doesnt sound like the whole host of
improvements some people are hoping for. (As a comparison, this
entire message is about 2500 bytes)

a.img,b.img,b21.img,b24.img,b25.img,b5.img,p.dat,romupd.exe

So anyway, call me a miserable, negative, cynical old bas*&ard, but
i believe there WAS only one change, the one admitted to by Canon...
--
---------------- A happy Pro90 owner! ----------------
Click to expand...
 
Ted B. said:
One Thousand One is about the most inaccurate way to time something
ever tried. Totally subjective and different for every person who
tries it. Try using a stopwatch. That's why most digital watches
today have that feature. Mine does and I used it and powerup time
is 6 seconds flat.
Click to expand...
Yes that technique is relative between different individuals.

BUT

As long as they do it the "same" each time and can't get through the whole phrase, that definitely tells something.---Jack==================Galleries: 1) http://www.pbase.com/blulegend/ 2) http://www.photoaccess.com/share/guest.jsp?ID=AB8C5232351&cb=PACurr: Canon PowerShot G2Prev: CP995, CP880, S10, S20, Oly D-340R
 
PeterHill said:
Russ C said:
Slightly paranoid? Huh?.....What's to be paranoid about?
Click to expand...
As you can see if you read the thread, the sad old cynics around
here (like me!) suggest that everytime there is a BIOS upgrade,
there is the usual paranoia that our suppliers are hiding things
from us, therefore for every 1 change that has been made and
admitted to, there have been 15 or so that Canon for some reason
has 'snuck in' on the quiet.

One of the key reasons for the possibility for a customer to
perform BIOS upgrades is to inspire consumer confidence that
manufacturers can, and will, fix problems that are found after
shipping, thereby extending the life of the product. - This is no
different to any normal software company.

I personally believe most companies would rather declare ALL
changes than take the support calls that are generated each
release, asking "is my xxxx problem fixed now?" - customer support
is costly and eats their profits.

In my opinion the only "bugs" that a supplier might choose NOT to
admit to fixing in a BIOS release are those that could be deemed to
show obvious neglect or carelessnes, or problems that could have
caused data loss or corruption.

If a Canon engineer went to the marketing department and said "Hey,
we just rewrote the autofocus algorithm for the G2, and guess what,
now its 10% faster" wouldnt they want to shout about it?!

If you wanted to look for a conspiracy theory on this story, try
this one... Canon found that overcharging of BP511 batteries
actually caused fire or explosion in some cases, but found out
before a customer got injured, and now are trying to get us all
to upgrade before we kill ourselves... now THERES a better
conspiracy theory for this upgrade!

By the way... for my new Pro90 Bios, a binary comparison Of the
about 35 binary files that made up the upgrade, showed that only
the following 8 files were changed, with a total of only 3452 bytes
of changes - that to my mind doesnt sound like the whole host of
improvements some people are hoping for. (As a comparison, this
entire message is about 2500 bytes)

a.img,b.img,b21.img,b24.img,b25.img,b5.img,p.dat,romupd.exe

So anyway, call me a miserable, negative, cynical old bas*&ard, but
i believe there WAS only one change, the one admitted to by Canon...
Click to expand...
OK, you are free to believe whatever you want...

One question: What is your theory on why the numbering convention changed for the G2 firmware release? From 1.0.0.0 to 1.0.1.0 in one public release. The G1 and Pro90 are only at 1.0.0.3 after a couple of public releases. From my experience, there are usually two reasons for the number jump on the G2: 1) There were 9 Canon internal releases before the first public update; or 2) Incrementing the second position from the right indicates a more MAJOR update than incrementing the first number. Either way, it seems like more happened on the G2 than the Pro90 or the G1...

I'm interested to hear your belief on this one...
PeterHill said:
--
---------------- A happy Pro90 owner! ----------------
Click to expand...
 
Hi Bob,

Sure I'm well aware of that. However, stick around these situations long enough and you begin to see a familiar trend in how people react to these changes. Everyone WANTS to see an improvement, and it's really not that hard to convince yourself that there is one, especially if you use statements like "It focused much faster on a scene where before it would have had a lot of trouble." No actual test, no verification of identical testing situations. Just conjecture.

I'm not saying that all of these changes and claims of changes are bogus, just that people should take a deep breath before believing everything they read.

Also, keep in mind that focus speed was not the only thing discussed. We had reports of startup times speeding up, startup sounds being replaced, AF assist lamps shining brighter, and so forth. Realistically, while your post makes a lot of sense, there's even more being talked about that really shouldn't be affected with a firmware update.

Kenn
Bob Williams said:
Kenn Hwang said:
Andy Goldney said:
I've upgraded my G1 but have yet to do any real tests.

I got to thinking about all the other stuff on this thread.

Either Canon are so ashamed of the bugs/errors/problems before the
upgrades, that they didn't want to have to admit they needed to
make all these wonderful changes.....

Or, they've done the absolute minimum to avoid having to turn
around expensive returns for batteries conking out.

I wonder what you would do in their position?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I ordered a G2 from Harmony Computers on Sunday.. I hope to get it by the end of the week.. It was shipped out today.. I hope I have the current firmware.. I wont be able to see the difference you guys are talking about but Ive never owned a digital camera before.. So I am not going to undertsand anything about it for a while.. I just wanted one for the fun of it.. Ive always wanted a digital camera but then I kept changing my mind and saying oh I don't need one cause I have a good scanner.. But then I saw a couple peoples that just got them and one was the G2. I finally came searched and searched and found the G2 to be one of the best... I can't wait to get it now.. I don't take a lot of pictures now but I wll with this just to play around with.. Should I buy the shortcut book since I will know nothing about this? I can't wait to get it.. Rose
--Rose
 
Dont think you should invest in the shortcut book. Just search here and even Phil's review show the use of the basic features.

-Jack
Rose said:
I ordered a G2 from Harmony Computers on Sunday.. I hope to get it
by the end of the week.. It was shipped out today.. I hope I have
the current firmware.. I wont be able to see the difference you
guys are talking about but Ive never owned a digital camera
before.. So I am not going to undertsand anything about it for a
while.. I just wanted one for the fun of it.. Ive always wanted a
digital camera but then I kept changing my mind and saying oh I
don't need one cause I have a good scanner.. But then I saw a
couple peoples that just got them and one was the G2. I finally
came searched and searched and found the G2 to be one of the
best... I can't wait to get it now.. I don't take a lot of
pictures now but I wll with this just to play around with.. Should
I buy the shortcut book since I will know nothing about this? I
can't wait to get it.. Rose

--
Rose
Click to expand...
---Jack==================Galleries: 1) http://www.pbase.com/blulegend/ 2) http://www.photoaccess.com/share/guest.jsp?ID=AB8C5232351&cb=PACurr: Canon PowerShot G2Prev: CP995, CP880, S10, S20, Oly D-340R
 
Kenn Hwang said:
Hi Bob,

Sure I'm well aware of that. However, stick around these situations
long enough and you begin to see a familiar trend in how people
react to these changes. Everyone WANTS to see an improvement, and
it's really not that hard to convince yourself that there is one,
especially if you use statements like "It focused much faster on a
scene where before it would have had a lot of trouble." No actual
test, no verification of identical testing situations. Just
conjecture.
Click to expand...
I didn't WANT to see any changes. I just wanted the up to date FW. After all, I never even had my battery die.

The only change I can see on mine is faster focus.

---Jack==================Galleries: 1) http://www.pbase.com/blulegend/ 2) http://www.photoaccess.com/share/guest.jsp?ID=AB8C5232351&cb=PACurr: Canon PowerShot G2Prev: CP995, CP880, S10, S20, Oly D-340R
 
Kenn, I understand the scepticism. I am sitting here with
the G-1 upgrade on my machine waiting for feedback from
people like Nahau and such on the actual impact. One of
the claims, faster startups, I will point you to exactly such
an improvement in a firmware upgrade, and recently. The
D-7 upgrade. The mem access speeds got better, so things
worked faster. In that case tho, the new speed also caused
a lot of memory cards to stop working in the camera that had
previously worked. Many people want the old firmware and
it's problems back, rather than having to buy better memory
cards. They were cutting the bounce flash detect wires in
thier flashes to correct the problems before the update.
Now the flash exposures are correct, but many people have
no memory that will work in the camera. Lets just hope that
the G-2 upgrade has some of the benefits discussed, and
none of the all too easy downsides that can come from
firmware upgrades.
Kenn Hwang said:
Sure I'm well aware of that. However, stick around these situations
long enough and you begin to see a familiar trend in how people
react to these changes. Everyone WANTS to see an improvement, and
it's really not that hard to convince yourself that there is one,
especially if you use statements like "It focused much faster on a
scene where before it would have had a lot of trouble." No actual
test, no verification of identical testing situations. Just
conjecture.

I'm not saying that all of these changes and claims of changes are
bogus, just that people should take a deep breath before believing
everything they read.

Also, keep in mind that focus speed was not the only thing
discussed. We had reports of startup times speeding up, startup
sounds being replaced, AF assist lamps shining brighter, and so
forth. Realistically, while your post makes a lot of sense, there's
even more being talked about that really shouldn't be affected with
a firmware update.

Kenn
Bob Williams said:
Kenn Hwang said:
Andy Goldney said:
I've upgraded my G1 but have yet to do any real tests.

I got to thinking about all the other stuff on this thread.

Either Canon are so ashamed of the bugs/errors/problems before the
upgrades, that they didn't want to have to admit they needed to
make all these wonderful changes.....

Or, they've done the absolute minimum to avoid having to turn
around expensive returns for batteries conking out.

I wonder what you would do in their position?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top