D100 - no user upgrade for a reason!

[Gabriele Sartori]

Well I don't believe your statements are accurate I will say that I
was more upset before I'd seen the JPG comparisons and realized
that Nikon really hasn't changed them at all. Now to me, the color
profile is annoying at most but not worth losing my camera for 2
weeks to stop from coming up again. To me, the update isn't worth
it and anyone really thinks this is a fix then you'll have to show
me proof of such because I haven't seen any evidence of it.

Phil Askey is a great guy providing this web site. He may black me out since he is a pretty picky guy. Try to post something where in the title you write "Phil you are wrong". It will never pass.

Phil great editor than but he is not a scientist. He should let people that know the matter to talk about and avoid this pathetic defense of Nikon. No camera retuning is necessary for SW upgrades. All the programmers keep these tables in a separate memory area and they don't overlap them during the upgrades. Flash memory have separate blocks that you rewrite one at the time or you can even skip. SW engineers keep precious tuning info in one of these blocks. Even when the total rewriting is necessary they save for a few seconds the tuning data on the RAM usually used as a buffer than they copy it back to the flash.

This is programming one on one. Phil is not a programmer, it should talk of what he knows not what he doesn't know.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

 

[seidmadur]

I like to take pictures. I sometimes take my car and drive to some parts of the country I dont know or up some streets I never been before and if I find an interesting subject, I take pictures of it or remember to come back at some other time when I get the proper light.. it's a very interesting hobby!

Tomorrow, I'll take my car again and drive to some place I know, give my camera to a guy at a counter and then maybe go for a walk or maybe for lunch. They have a couple of nice places where you can eat down there...

My point? Why do own a camera again? Maybe you guys spend too much time whining on the computer and not enough out there enjoying taking pictures.

Just my toughs..

Guys,

CHILL OUT!

There are many digital cameras (consumer and D-SLR) which can't be
flashed by the user simply because of the type of EEPROM chip they
use to hold the firmware. Sony digital cameras for example can't
be flashed by the user and have to be taken to a service center.

Nikon are offering the upgrade for free, all you have to do is get
the camera to the service center.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

--
EH

 

[Gabriele Sartori]

No but it is also unrealistic to think that a firmware upgrade will
never fail... From what I can see if it does fail and all of these
D100's are under warranty, then it gets a lot more expensive.

ANd who told you? Santa Claus? Sorry for the tone, but this is really too much. There are almost 150 million new computers in the world every year. Millions and millions get upgraded locally. A few may fail , OK UPS those to the service center!
--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

 

[Gabriele Sartori]

Phil,

Thanks for the input. Obviously you have contacts at Nikon -- I
wonder if you can find out the real story. It's very much in Nikons
interest to give people an explanation for the return to service
centre policy. So far it's been all speculation, and a lot of this
Nikon bashing could be finished with one detailed statement from
Nikon.

Personally I don't buy the can't be user upgraded argument. I've
seen enough evidence to suggest that Nikon could allow us to make
the upgrade but are choosing not to for reasons unknown.

You are 110% right. Don't buy the bullcrap. This camera is either user upgradable or is a very bad design. In my opinion Phil has made the post without knowing the facts. Since we all recognize his authority in the field, he should be more careful than us and write only the facts that he can verify 100% otherwise is a pathetic defender of his sponsors and companies that are giving cameras to test.. I hope he is not.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

 

[Michael Hung]

I can respond but I have long refused to reply to ignorant people especially ignorant people in my own profession. You are not the only engineer in this forum and no one in this forum knows what exactly is changed in the firmware other than those 4 things they posted. I would not question the ability of Nikon engineers and their decision unless I know all the facts.

ebay your gear and move on.. you can get a Fuji or a Kodak with your lens.. Or move to Canon and have more fun there.. better yet.. quit your job and find an engineering position at Nikon and tell them they are all insane and noone can do decent design there.

Michael

I know it very well since I'm a EE, I designed electronic devices
for most of my life and still today I work in one of the biggest
semiconductors company in the world.

To retune the camera upgrading the FW is totally asinine. The
tuning information stay always in a separate table that has to stay
untouched.
I understand that a lot of people may not know these basic concepts
of SW designs but since you ignore them I'm telling you now sir.

 

[Jason VIllafranca]

If Phil is wrong then why would NIkon even go through the trouble of putting us through the trouble?... they too are spending time and money doing these upgrades themselves... it doesn't make any sense to go through all of this if Nikon could just post the upgrade for user download... I am sure that Nikon has a reason for doing this - and I am sure that it is to benefit them only by benefitting us first... if the down time for any owners is a problem than just wait till you have to send the camera in for cleaning or somthing like that and get the upgrade at the same time...

Well I don't believe your statements are accurate I will say that I
was more upset before I'd seen the JPG comparisons and realized
that Nikon really hasn't changed them at all. Now to me, the color
profile is annoying at most but not worth losing my camera for 2
weeks to stop from coming up again. To me, the update isn't worth
it and anyone really thinks this is a fix then you'll have to show
me proof of such because I haven't seen any evidence of it.

Phil Askey is a great guy providing this web site. He may black me
out since he is a pretty picky guy. Try to post something where in
the title you write "Phil you are wrong". It will never pass.

Phil great editor than but he is not a scientist. He should let
people that know the matter to talk about and avoid this pathetic
defense of Nikon. No camera retuning is necessary for SW upgrades.
All the programmers keep these tables in a separate memory area and
they don't overlap them during the upgrades. Flash memory have
separate blocks that you rewrite one at the time or you can even
skip. SW engineers keep precious tuning info in one of these
blocks. Even when the total rewriting is necessary they save for a
few seconds the tuning data on the RAM usually used as a buffer
than they copy it back to the flash.
This is programming one on one. Phil is not a programmer, it should
talk of what he knows not what he doesn't know.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

 

[Jason VIllafranca]

and in my opinion, we should be even more careful about what we say about the owner of this site!... Phil has a site to run and sponsors to keep... I think everybody is going overboard on the simple fact that we have to send our $2000.00 cameras on a little trip to become better...

If we are not careful then we are in danger of having Nikon pull the plug on us here at DPReview!... Phil gets to review and preview Nikon products regularly because of the sites big audience - But if you were Nikon and you heard that the people at DPReview were plotting to raise a lawsuit against your company after you tried to do them a favor what would you do?.... I would CUT THEM OFF!!!... fortunately most of us here are not falling for the "lawsuit" idea but unfortunately too many of us do not realize that the Nikon Upgrade is a favor to us!...

Phil,

Thanks for the input. Obviously you have contacts at Nikon -- I
wonder if you can find out the real story. It's very much in Nikons
interest to give people an explanation for the return to service
centre policy. So far it's been all speculation, and a lot of this
Nikon bashing could be finished with one detailed statement from
Nikon.

Personally I don't buy the can't be user upgraded argument. I've
seen enough evidence to suggest that Nikon could allow us to make
the upgrade but are choosing not to for reasons unknown.

You are 110% right. Don't buy the bullcrap. This camera is either
user upgradable or is a very bad design. In my opinion Phil has
made the post without knowing the facts. Since we all recognize his
authority in the field, he should be more careful than us and write
only the facts that he can verify 100% otherwise is a pathetic
defender of his sponsors and companies that are giving cameras to
test.. I hope he is not.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

 

[michaeladawson]

We have a right to receive firmware updates. If anything, Nikon

Oh really? I didn't know that. Please send me the agreeement where this is stated. I know a great lawyer and I'm sure we can put the screws to Nikon on this. NOT!

 

[michaeladawson]

You're not the first to say this Jason. But I have yet to hear any of the complainers address this point.

1. Nikon has proved that they will release firmware updates to digital cameras.

2. Sending in D series cameras to Nikon for upgrades is going to be massively expensive for Nikon.

Please, anyone, tell me why it is reasonable to assume that this upgrade can be done at home. I'm not saying this is NOT possible. What I am saying is everyone is jumping to that assumption.

Can someone post eyewitness testimony that they brought their camera in for the upgrade and they watched the tech insert a CF card and push a couple buttons?

Well I don't believe your statements are accurate I will say that I
was more upset before I'd seen the JPG comparisons and realized
that Nikon really hasn't changed them at all. Now to me, the color
profile is annoying at most but not worth losing my camera for 2
weeks to stop from coming up again. To me, the update isn't worth
it and anyone really thinks this is a fix then you'll have to show
me proof of such because I haven't seen any evidence of it.

Phil Askey is a great guy providing this web site. He may black me
out since he is a pretty picky guy. Try to post something where in
the title you write "Phil you are wrong". It will never pass.

Phil great editor than but he is not a scientist. He should let
people that know the matter to talk about and avoid this pathetic
defense of Nikon. No camera retuning is necessary for SW upgrades.
All the programmers keep these tables in a separate memory area and
they don't overlap them during the upgrades. Flash memory have
separate blocks that you rewrite one at the time or you can even
skip. SW engineers keep precious tuning info in one of these
blocks. Even when the total rewriting is necessary they save for a
few seconds the tuning data on the RAM usually used as a buffer
than they copy it back to the flash.
This is programming one on one. Phil is not a programmer, it should
talk of what he knows not what he doesn't know.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

 

[Andrew Snow]

Too bad I'm locked in with all these lenses otherwise it would be
bye, bye, Nikon.

To bad for us too, so we now have to put up with your incessant whining on this topic!

Every part of the DSLR represents a compromise in one way or another - this is just another one. For what will probably be the only upgrade in the life of the camera, does it really matter? And you can't say you didn't know it wouldn't be user-upgradeable when you bought it, at any rate.

• Andrew

 

[Phil Askey]

I'm not sure that it "needs" the upgrade, one is available. Firmware upgrades have been a way of life for digital camera owners for years now. There will always be an owner who has 'just received' his camera and it is now a firmware revision old.

Guys,

CHILL OUT!

There are many digital cameras (consumer and D-SLR) which can't be
flashed by the user simply because of the type of EEPROM chip they
use to hold the firmware. Sony digital cameras for example can't
be flashed by the user and have to be taken to a service center.

Nikon are offering the upgrade for free, all you have to do is get
the camera to the service center.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

Phil-
I hope you can understand our gripe. I just purchased my D-100 2
weeks ago and already it needs a firmware upgrade? That is utterly
rediculous. Never have I purchased a product, computer or
otherwise, that required an update one week after I purchased it.
I fell in love with the D-100. I'm shooting events every weekend
since I got it. Now, I have to pack it up and ship it away for two
weeks? Terrible. I don't have a camera of equal quality as a
backup. I'm not a happy camper. Nikon should send me a
replacement while I'm getting mine fixed. Notice I said fixed and
not upgraded. I truly believe that it's a fix. Anyway, I think
our point was made on this forum and I hope Nikon is/was listening
to the unhappy D100 customers. No business, I repeat no business,
can afford to have unhappy customers these days. The economy is
bad enough. I'll get off my soapbox now.

BTW, you have a great website and forum. Your information and
reviews have been brilliant. Keep up the good work. Rob

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[Phil Askey]

Sigh.. Actually I am a programmer, but we'll let that one go.

Well I don't believe your statements are accurate I will say that I
was more upset before I'd seen the JPG comparisons and realized
that Nikon really hasn't changed them at all. Now to me, the color
profile is annoying at most but not worth losing my camera for 2
weeks to stop from coming up again. To me, the update isn't worth
it and anyone really thinks this is a fix then you'll have to show
me proof of such because I haven't seen any evidence of it.

Phil Askey is a great guy providing this web site. He may black me
out since he is a pretty picky guy. Try to post something where in
the title you write "Phil you are wrong". It will never pass.

Phil great editor than but he is not a scientist. He should let
people that know the matter to talk about and avoid this pathetic
defense of Nikon. No camera retuning is necessary for SW upgrades.
All the programmers keep these tables in a separate memory area and
they don't overlap them during the upgrades. Flash memory have
separate blocks that you rewrite one at the time or you can even
skip. SW engineers keep precious tuning info in one of these
blocks. Even when the total rewriting is necessary they save for a
few seconds the tuning data on the RAM usually used as a buffer
than they copy it back to the flash.
This is programming one on one. Phil is not a programmer, it should
talk of what he knows not what he doesn't know.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[zettlers #105592]

Phil, would it be possible for You to make a short test – 1.0 and 2.0 compared. It would make life easier for a lot of people on this forum knowing if there is a difference in exposure and sharpness!

Regards
Zettlers

Guys,

CHILL OUT!

There are many digital cameras (consumer and D-SLR) which can't be
flashed by the user simply because of the type of EEPROM chip they
use to hold the firmware. Sony digital cameras for example can't
be flashed by the user and have to be taken to a service center.

Nikon are offering the upgrade for free, all you have to do is get
the camera to the service center.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[VJ]

There are many digital cameras (consumer and D-SLR) which can't be
flashed by the user simply because of the type of EEPROM chip they
use to hold the firmware. Sony digital cameras for example can't
be flashed by the user and have to be taken to a service center.

Yes, that is true. And I also think the petition is not going to help the current crop of D100 (and D1x/h) users. But it might help to convince Nikon to reconsider this design-feature in their future cameras (so that perhaps the next models will have a user upgradeable firmware)...

About the second remark:

I should also add that Nikon may need to re-calibrated or run some other > special application on the D100 after the firmware is installed. Whichever > way I'm sure you would want the best possible result for your camera.

The Nikon Service center in Belgium told me that it is possible to stop by them to get this upgrade - after making an appointment (this was for instance not possible when I wanted hot pixels fixed, I then had to go to the store and send the camera in). They also confirmed the upgrade was done while one is waiting, so I'm not sure there is much calibration that is done afterwards. (my guess would be that they need special hardware to flash the camera - as you mention because of the type of rom they used)

Nikon are offering the upgrade for free, all you have to do is get
the camera to the service center.

Yes, but this might be difficult for some people. If you can't get to a service center and have to ship the camera, you're probabely without one for 2 weeks.

So while I agree that it has few use for the current users, and while I'm glad that Nikon keeps improving on their product, I think it is something they might consider when designing future products...

But I also would like to add that - if I'm not mistaken - user flashable chips tend to be slower than others, so that might be a reason Nikon opted for them....

Jörg

 

[Thorsten49231]

You have to admit that it's pretty amazing that a 2002 DSLR's firmware is not user upgradeable! They knew they were going to put out upgrades, no crystal ball needed for that. It does look like they completely mis-judged the user reaction, though!

I agree with you that people are going overboard and act as if their life depended on the upgrade, but your siding with Nikon without having more hard data than anyone else (or if you do, you don't show it) is rather disturbing. Isn't your mission to be on the consumer's side and provide the best and most up-to-date info as possible? Telling everyone here "you're just unreasonable, the manufacturer is right" is rather contrary to your mission. Why do you first shoot at the users of your site, instead of picking up the phone, calling someone at Nikon, telling them that things here are getting a tad out of control, and whether they can give you some insight into the situation to post?

The last time I saw you fire at your users to protect a manufacturers interests (Canon D1s leaked announcement) it backfired pretty badly, imho. I'm sad to say that my respect for your editorial impartiality has pretty much eroded away at this point. Not due to a single incident, but rather through a pretty consistent series of incidents.

--

• Thorsten

 

[Phil Askey]

Let me get ONE THING VERY CLEAR.

I am not "SIDING" with anyone here. I am trying to point out that there will be reasons that this isn't a user installable upgrade. The fact that you even consider it "siding" is disturbing, isn't it?

You have to admit that it's pretty amazing that a 2002 DSLR's
firmware is not user upgradeable! They knew they were going to put
out upgrades, no crystal ball needed for that. It does look like
they completely mis-judged the user reaction, though!

I agree with you that people are going overboard and act as if
their life depended on the upgrade, but your siding with Nikon
without having more hard data than anyone else (or if you do, you
don't show it) is rather disturbing. Isn't your mission to be on
the consumer's side and provide the best and most up-to-date info
as possible? Telling everyone here "you're just unreasonable, the
manufacturer is right" is rather contrary to your mission. Why do
you first shoot at the users of your site, instead of picking up
the phone, calling someone at Nikon, telling them that things here
are getting a tad out of control, and whether they can give you
some insight into the situation to post?

The last time I saw you fire at your users to protect a
manufacturers interests (Canon D1s leaked announcement) it
backfired pretty badly, imho. I'm sad to say that my respect for
your editorial impartiality has pretty much eroded away at this
point. Not due to a single incident, but rather through a pretty
consistent series of incidents.

--

• Thorsten

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[Phil Askey]

Well as I don't have a D100 here, no it wouldn't be a "short test". I think there are plenty of intelligent people here who will do that exact test, I'd just be repeating them. If they find a significant difference then I may investigate it.

Regards
Zettlers

Guys,

CHILL OUT!

There are many digital cameras (consumer and D-SLR) which can't be
flashed by the user simply because of the type of EEPROM chip they
use to hold the firmware. Sony digital cameras for example can't
be flashed by the user and have to be taken to a service center.

Nikon are offering the upgrade for free, all you have to do is get
the camera to the service center.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[Phil Askey]

Sorry but this is totally incorrect. While I don't know for sure that any re-calibration is carried out on the D100 I do know that other upgrades which have required return to service center for other camera models have indeed included running special re-calibration applications on the camera.

I know it very well since I'm a EE, I designed electronic devices
for most of my life and still today I work in one of the biggest
semiconductors company in the world.

To retune the camera upgrading the FW is totally asinine. The
tuning information stay always in a separate table that has to stay
untouched.
I understand that a lot of people may not know these basic concepts
of SW designs but since you ignore them I'm telling you now sir.

--
Regards
Gabriele Sartori

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[alfred_schiele]

Hi

There are many digital cameras (consumer and D-SLR) which can't be
flashed by the user simply because of the type of EEPROM chip they
use to hold the firmware.

So why do manufacturers use EEPROM's then and what is the need for this.

In addition this sounds like there is special equipment needed instead of simply connecting the camera to a standard computer via the user accessible interfaces. I am sorry that I doubt a bit that it works this way...

Sony digital cameras for example can't
be flashed by the user and have to be taken to a service center.

This example makes the process not more convenient at all for Nikon users...

Nikon are offering the upgrade for free, all you have to do is get
the camera to the service center.

It would be even more comfortable for Nikon if users could do the upgrade themselves. Less cost for Nikon and users. I can not understand why a method can not be done where both parties would profit.

Most users have to mail in thier cameras and this takes at least a good week and creates shipment cost to nikon and risk of damage.

I understand your message but I can not agree that this solution is ok.

Regards, A. Schiele

 

[alfred_schiele]

Hi

I should also add that Nikon may need to re-calibrated or run some
other special application on the D100 after the firmware is
installed. Whichever way I'm sure you would want the best possible
result for your camera.

When I look at Nikons recommendations how to maintain a camera your sugggestion fits perfectly...

Nikon always wants us to make sending in our cameras for inspection, service and calibration. Possibly this is useful for professional use, but the D100 is not addressed to be a professional camera... and be sure Nikon always finds something to adjust, replace and charge for...

Even if service is free, it remains inconvenient.

Regards, A. Schiele