"gothika" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:00:08 -0700, "Ed Price"
wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
wrote in message
...
The real reason I'm sure is the $150 flat rate to repair a 2 year
old camera. Typically they have test jigs set up for this stuff and
take
less that 5 minutes in most cases.
Apparently you have never worked on a camcorder with an intermittant
problem.
8^)
Actually I have and you are right - they can be tough. In this case,
I'm
talking about a digital still camera where the moving parts are all OK.
That's really impressive analysis skills, considering that you forgot
about
the shock hazard of the flash circuitry and the energy content of the
batteries.
The shock hazard is trivial, it won't kill you. Won't even burn you,
just make you yell abit.
I did camera repair years ago and we used to use flash capacitors and
charging coils on any hard nose that got transferred in. Just wire it
into an open loop between his metal stool and the steel work tables we
fixed camera on.(And we used really big caps from the older graflex
flashes and old strobonars.)
Also I doubt his camera uses anything bigger than "AA"s, not enough
energy in those to do much more give you a mild spark even on a small
charged capacitor.
And you're still posting to those two imaginary groups.
Ed
wb6wsn
You need to stretch your imagination a bit. True, a charged strobe capacitor
likely won't kill you. But what happens immediately after getting a zap?
Maybe you involuntarily shove that Xacto blade into your thumb, or maybe
knock the camera on the floor.
As for battery energy content. I can recall doing a stoopid trick with a
Polaroid flat-pack battery; I decided to cut the sheet open to see what was
inside. I was amazed to find that, as I was cutting the pack open with a
stainless steel scissors, there was enough heat liberated to boil the
chemical filling and cause smoke to rise from the pack. OK, not exactly
nuclear fission, but not a suggested practice either.
Besides, the OP was a considerably lower than 50th percentile induhvidual,
and ignorant persistence seemed to be his leading trait.
Ed
wb6wsn