In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

Hmm ... note that the thing which seems to slow down the
power-up cycle of most digital cameras is involved with the autofocus
and the "live view" display.

I don't need autofocus, I know the distance to a good enough approx.,
and I would not use the live view display. How do I look look a camera
that LACKS these common features?

But the longest that it can be set to stay powered up is 30
minutes, IIRC. Note that just a touch on the shutter release button (to
half-depressed) will wake it up as quickly.

A nuisance to be sure for remote opeation

The Digital SLRs happen to be the most expensive digital cameras
in general, so are probably not what you want.

True, the camera will be at risk from weather and vandals.

However -- what I would suggest is that you look at some of the
digital video cameras. You'll need a video capture card on your
computer to grab what it sends, of course, but it will stay on full
time. These cameras can be obtained for very little (IIRC, I got one --
uncased but with lens -- for about $25.00 at a hamfest last summer.
These are *made* to be security cameras.

Finding a video camera is easy, getting the signal 1000' and recording
it is tougher. I cannot simply capture the entire feed, often 24 hrs
goes by without a significant 'event'.

If you can involve a computer, and you simply watch and then hit
a button to tell it to save a picture -- this should do.

I want it principally when I CANNOT watch, when I'm sleeping or gone.

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:45:58 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

Hmm ... note that the thing which seems to slow down the
power-up cycle of most digital cameras is involved with the autofocus
and the "live view" display.

I don't need autofocus, I know the distance to a good enough approx.,
and I would not use the live view display. How do I look look a camera
that LACKS these common features?

But the longest that it can be set to stay powered up is 30
minutes, IIRC. Note that just a touch on the shutter release button (to
half-depressed) will wake it up as quickly.

A nuisance to be sure for remote opeation

The Digital SLRs happen to be the most expensive digital cameras
in general, so are probably not what you want.

True, the camera will be at risk from weather and vandals.

However -- what I would suggest is that you look at some of the
digital video cameras. You'll need a video capture card on your
computer to grab what it sends, of course, but it will stay on full
time. These cameras can be obtained for very little (IIRC, I got one --
uncased but with lens -- for about $25.00 at a hamfest last summer.
These are *made* to be security cameras.

Finding a video camera is easy, getting the signal 1000' and recording
it is tougher. I cannot simply capture the entire feed, often 24 hrs
goes by without a significant 'event'.

If you can involve a computer, and you simply watch and then hit
a button to tell it to save a picture -- this should do.

I want it principally when I CANNOT watch, when I'm sleeping or gone.

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

This camera
http://tinyurl.com/287m7f
is a digital SLR, and it does have a setting where it stays on. The
LCD display is not active except possibly after a shot -- and that can
also be turned off.

It can be triggered by IR remote. There is no direct connection to
the camera, but an electrically-triggered (and silent) IR remote
would be simple enough to make -- or modify the one that comes with
the camera or an available replacement. (They're available for about
$29)

I have one of these cameras. It's dated, but still an excellent
camera. I don't lust for a newer one.

There is no provision for external power supply, but one could easily
contrive something to go in the battery compartment. It uses 5 to 5.2
volts DC, normally supplied by four NiMH AA cells.

Another possibility might be a cheap laptop 'puter and a webcam. House
the laptop in a suitably secure container. A cheap laptop would cost
considerably less than a current-model digital SLR. Thousands of .jpg
images can be stored on the harddrive of even an old laptop.

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 12:02:29 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:45:58 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

Hmm ... note that the thing which seems to slow down the
power-up cycle of most digital cameras is involved with the autofocus
and the "live view" display.

I don't need autofocus, I know the distance to a good enough approx.,
and I would not use the live view display. How do I look look a camera
that LACKS these common features?

But the longest that it can be set to stay powered up is 30
minutes, IIRC. Note that just a touch on the shutter release button (to
half-depressed) will wake it up as quickly.

A nuisance to be sure for remote opeation

The Digital SLRs happen to be the most expensive digital cameras
in general, so are probably not what you want.

True, the camera will be at risk from weather and vandals.

However -- what I would suggest is that you look at some of the
digital video cameras. You'll need a video capture card on your
computer to grab what it sends, of course, but it will stay on full
time. These cameras can be obtained for very little (IIRC, I got one --
uncased but with lens -- for about $25.00 at a hamfest last summer.
These are *made* to be security cameras.

Finding a video camera is easy, getting the signal 1000' and recording
it is tougher. I cannot simply capture the entire feed, often 24 hrs
goes by without a significant 'event'.

If you can involve a computer, and you simply watch and then hit
a button to tell it to save a picture -- this should do.

I want it principally when I CANNOT watch, when I'm sleeping or gone.

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

This camera
http://tinyurl.com/287m7f
is a digital SLR, and it does have a setting where it stays on. The
LCD display is not active except possibly after a shot -- and that can
also be turned off.

It can be triggered by IR remote. There is no direct connection to
the camera, but an electrically-triggered (and silent) IR remote
would be simple enough to make -- or modify the one that comes with
the camera or an available replacement. (They're available for about
$29)

I have one of these cameras. It's dated, but still an excellent
camera. I don't lust for a newer one.

There is no provision for external power supply, but one could easily
contrive something to go in the battery compartment. It uses 5 to 5.2
volts DC, normally supplied by four NiMH AA cells.

Another possibility might be a cheap laptop 'puter and a webcam. House
the laptop in a suitably secure container. A cheap laptop would cost
considerably less than a current-model digital SLR. Thousands of .jpg
images can be stored on the harddrive of even an old laptop.

I wonder how much bandwidth an ordinary 56K dialup modem requires to
work. Phone lines are nominally 300 Hz to 3000 Hz but I think most
are better than that.

Inexpensive voice-bandwidth "walkie talkie" VHF and UHF radios are
readily available that easily work over a range of 1000 feet (more
like miles) without direct LOS contact.

A webcam probably needs a PC to work, but old PC's are easily found
for 50 bux or so. Once you get it going, it needn't even have a
monitor. I see a used 600-MHz Dell Portege laptop on Ebay for $159
with 6 minutes to go.

On 2008-01-01, Don Foreman wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:45:58 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

[ ... ]

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

This camera
http://tinyurl.com/287m7f
is a digital SLR, and it does have a setting where it stays on. The
LCD display is not active except possibly after a shot -- and that can
also be turned off.

Actually it is *not* a digital SLR. Note the wording from the
auction:


================================================== ====================
You're viewing an Olympus C-2500L

I used this camera Until I could afford the Expensive Lenses and Body of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
more expensive DSLR.

It is an excellent reliable camera that gives you some of the control of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
an SLR Camera without all the associated costs.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
================================================== ====================

So -- it may do what is needed here -- but it is not (and does
not claim to be) a DSLR. Two physical differences:

1) A SLR (digital or non) has a moving mirror which redirects
the image to the viewfinder. From the location of the
viewfinder eyepiece, I don't think that this is the case here.

I *think* that what it has is an internal display in the
viewfinder, which could slow it down as much as using the
external display.

2) A SLR has interchangeable lenses. This one has only a fixed
zoom lens.

It can be triggered by IR remote. There is no direct connection to
the camera, but an electrically-triggered (and silent) IR remote
would be simple enough to make -- or modify the one that comes with
the camera or an available replacement. (They're available for about
$29)

I have one of these cameras. It's dated, but still an excellent
camera. I don't lust for a newer one.

O.K. Just don't call it a DSLR. :-)

There is no provision for external power supply, but one could easily
contrive something to go in the battery compartment. It uses 5 to 5.2
volts DC, normally supplied by four NiMH AA cells.

Another possibility might be a cheap laptop 'puter and a webcam. House
the laptop in a suitably secure container. A cheap laptop would cost
considerably less than a current-model digital SLR. Thousands of .jpg
images can be stored on the harddrive of even an old laptop.

It is not really clear what he wants this for -- though it
sounds like he needs an anti theft camera.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

On 2008-01-01, Don Foreman wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:45:58 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

[ ... ]

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

This camera
http://tinyurl.com/287m7f
is a digital SLR, and it does have a setting where it stays on. The
LCD display is not active except possibly after a shot -- and that can
also be turned off.

Actually it is *not* a digital SLR. Note the wording from the
auction:


================================================== ====================
You're viewing an Olympus C-2500L

I used this camera Until I could afford the Expensive Lenses and Body of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
more expensive DSLR.

It is an excellent reliable camera that gives you some of the control of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
an SLR Camera without all the associated costs.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
================================================== ====================

So -- it may do what is needed here -- but it is not (and does
not claim to be) a DSLR. Two physical differences:

1) A SLR (digital or non) has a moving mirror which redirects
the image to the viewfinder. From the location of the
viewfinder eyepiece, I don't think that this is the case here.

I *think* that what it has is an internal display in the
viewfinder, which could slow it down as much as using the
external display.

2) A SLR has interchangeable lenses. This one has only a fixed
zoom lens.

It can be triggered by IR remote. There is no direct connection to
the camera, but an electrically-triggered (and silent) IR remote
would be simple enough to make -- or modify the one that comes with
the camera or an available replacement. (They're available for about
$29)

I have one of these cameras. It's dated, but still an excellent
camera. I don't lust for a newer one.

O.K. Just don't call it a DSLR. :-)

There is no provision for external power supply, but one could easily
contrive something to go in the battery compartment. It uses 5 to 5.2
volts DC, normally supplied by four NiMH AA cells.

Another possibility might be a cheap laptop 'puter and a webcam. House
the laptop in a suitably secure container. A cheap laptop would cost
considerably less than a current-model digital SLR. Thousands of .jpg
images can be stored on the harddrive of even an old laptop.

It is not really clear what he wants this for -- though it
sounds like he needs an anti theft camera.

Yes, I need an anti-theft, anti-trespasser driveway gate camera and the
Olympus C-2500L seems to be real close to what I need. I want to fix
the focus, I know what the distance will be (about 30'). I do not need
interchangeable lenses, the camera will be set up outdoors 24/365 and it
looks like I can power it externally and trigger it by IR and set the
aperture manually and let it set the speed to light conditions. I will
not use a flash on the camera (too far) but might want a remote flash
closer to the subject. Floodlights might be available.

Since I will principally aim the tripod mounted camera by trial & error
I don't even have to have a viewfinder

I would appreciate feedback from readers who have this or similar
cameras as to the suitability. My requirements are;

* Can be powered from an external AC source and set to never shut down.
OK if I have to modify the battery compartment for AC connection.

* Can be remotely triggered and sets the speed for correct exposure

* Digital, uses a chip I can remove and read with a card reader on my
computer

* I would LIKE a fast response between triggering and picture taking,
i,e, no 5 second warm-up. If I use a remote flash it will be powered up
either 24 hrs or during darkness. I do not want a viewfinder or moving
lenses to slow the response time, I need to snap the pix within 1 sec of
trigger.

Any help or suggestions greatly appreciated. I would rather do this
with a camera rather than a video link if possible - I don't need real
time but do need a compact easy to review output; I'd normally review
the output every week or 2.

nick

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

nick hull fired this volley in
:
1 sec of trigger.

Any help or suggestions greatly appreciated. I would rather do this
with a camera rather than a video link if possible - I don't need real
time but do need a compact easy to review output; I'd normally review
the output every week or 2.

Nick, I had "neighbor visitors" for a long time, who thought my barn was
an attractive meeting place. Things got messed with, and occasionally
taken. (especially the beer; damn!)

I set up an inexpensive Wally-World video camera, and a junked-out old
desktop PC. I run the freeware "HSSVSS", which monitors up to two
channels of video (up to 8 in the purchased version), and saves still
frames upon motion detection.

It has been _perfect_ for me. It will monitor as long as I want, and
save up all motion frames for future review, with an option to re-cycle
the frames after a certain amount of storage has been used. It will also
e-mail me whenever there's an event, and allow me to review the frames or
watch the real-time video remotely (as from my business, 10 miles away).

The whole rig (discounting the old PC, which cost, essentially, nothing)
came in at $119, including software, cabling, camera, and video-to-USB
interface.

After a quick advertising around the community concerning the fact that I
had 24-hour surveillance, and we've not had another visit, except for the
errant deer who wanders into the shot now and again.

LLoyd

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:24:54 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, nick
hull quickly quoth:

Yes, I need an anti-theft, anti-trespasser driveway gate camera and the
Olympus C-2500L seems to be real close to what I need. I want to fix
the focus, I know what the distance will be (about 30'). I do not need
interchangeable lenses, the camera will be set up outdoors 24/365 and it
looks like I can power it externally and trigger it by IR and set the
aperture manually and let it set the speed to light conditions. I will
not use a flash on the camera (too far) but might want a remote flash
closer to the subject. Floodlights might be available.

Since I will principally aim the tripod mounted camera by trial & error
I don't even have to have a viewfinder

I would appreciate feedback from readers who have this or similar
cameras as to the suitability. My requirements are;

Couldn't you use a good video camera with telephoto lens mounted on
the hill between you so you could use wired video for the gate. I was
thinking that it might not work well during rainy or foggy nights, but
a closer camera might not, either. Light the area.

Alternatively, use RF vidcam and set up a repeater on the hill.


* Can be powered from an external AC source and set to never shut down.
OK if I have to modify the battery compartment for AC connection.

* Can be remotely triggered and sets the speed for correct exposure

* Digital, uses a chip I can remove and read with a card reader on my
computer

* I would LIKE a fast response between triggering and picture taking,
i,e, no 5 second warm-up. If I use a remote flash it will be powered up
either 24 hrs or during darkness. I do not want a viewfinder or moving
lenses to slow the response time, I need to snap the pix within 1 sec of
trigger.

Vidcams are always on and software for the recorder can work with
motion sensors.


Any help or suggestions greatly appreciated. I would rather do this
with a camera rather than a video link if possible - I don't need real
time but do need a compact easy to review output; I'd normally review
the output every week or 2.

If it's that far between reviews, perhaps a wildlife cam is in order.
Build a secure metal enclosure for it.

Just remember that if things are happening at your gate, a single
flash picture won't tell you the whole story where a short run video
would. Only you can weigh the advantages. G'luck.

---
Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing.
This is the ultimate.
--Chuang-tzu (369 BC - 286 BC)

In article ,
Larry Jaques wrote:

Couldn't you use a good video camera with telephoto lens mounted on
the hill between you so you could use wired video for the gate. I was
thinking that it might not work well during rainy or foggy nights, but
a closer camera might not, either. Light the area.

Too much woods in the way

Alternatively, use RF vidcam and set up a repeater on the hill.

Sounds possible, I'm studying it

If it's that far between reviews, perhaps a wildlife cam is in order.
Build a secure metal enclosure for it.

I have one, am building a thicker metal enclosure; the first one got
broken into and stolen. I would also like to be able to take pictures
on signals, not just warm bodies.

Just remember that if things are happening at your gate, a single
flash picture won't tell you the whole story where a short run video
would. Only you can weigh the advantages. G'luck.

Video can be nice but still cameras have much better resolution. Maybe
some day I can afford both, for now digital cameras seem easier and
cheaper.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:24:54 -0600, nick hull wrote:



Yes, I need an anti-theft, anti-trespasser driveway gate camera and the
Olympus C-2500L seems to be real close to what I need. I want to fix
the focus, I know what the distance will be (about 30'). I do not need
interchangeable lenses, the camera will be set up outdoors 24/365 and it
looks like I can power it externally and trigger it by IR and set the
aperture manually and let it set the speed to light conditions. I will
not use a flash on the camera (too far) but might want a remote flash
closer to the subject. Floodlights might be available.

Since I will principally aim the tripod mounted camera by trial & error
I don't even have to have a viewfinder

I would appreciate feedback from readers who have this or similar
cameras as to the suitability. My requirements are;

* Can be powered from an external AC source and set to never shut down.
OK if I have to modify the battery compartment for AC connection.

Yes. It can be set to never shut down, and you can supply 5 to 5.2 VDC
to the battery contacts within. There is no external power connector.

* Can be remotely triggered and sets the speed for correct exposure

Yes

* Digital, uses a chip I can remove and read with a card reader on my
computer

Yes. It uses either SmartMemory (now obsolete) or CF (still
available). USB readers are readily available for about $25. SanDisk
is one, available at BestBuy. The camera itself has an RS-232 serial
port that is abysmally slow. This is probably the last digicam that
didn't have USB. I always use the card reader.

* I would LIKE a fast response between triggering and picture taking,
i,e, no 5 second warm-up. If I use a remote flash it will be powered up
either 24 hrs or during darkness. I do not want a viewfinder or moving
lenses to slow the response time, I need to snap the pix within 1 sec of
trigger.

Shootin' out the back door, about half a second or a bit less from
full press to click -- no half-press to focus and meter exposure.
Might be quicker if set to manual (preset) exposure and focus, this
was in full auto mode. The camera has contacts in the "hot shoe" for
external flash, and the built-in flash is actually pretty good. 20 or
30 feet, no problem. It can be supressed, just don't deploy it! The
available (on EBay) FL-40 external flash is excellent and quite
powerful.

"Film speed" to ISO400 is an available setting. The images get a bit
noisier but it works well in low-light situations. I've taken photos
with a flashlight and by moonlight with this camera.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:07:23 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:


* Can be powered from an external AC source and set to never shut down.
OK if I have to modify the battery compartment for AC connection.

Yes. It can be set to never shut down, and you can supply 5 to 5.2 VDC
to the battery contacts within. There is no external power connector.

Make that a regulated supply, pls. Probably goes without sayin' but
....

I haven't measured it, but I'd guess it could take at least half an
amp at times. I'd allow for an amp. An LM7805 regulator chip would
provide the regulation for under a buck. Email if you want more info.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:07:23 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:


Yes. It can be set to never shut down, and you can supply 5 to 5.2 VDC
to the battery contacts within. There is no external power connector.

CORRECTION! (I finally found my manual) There is a jack for external
power, and an AC adapter was sold separately. The camera does not
power down automatically when the external supply is used.

Now the bad news: while the camera responds quickly to the shutter
button, there is a 2 second delay when actuated by the IR remote. I
don't see a way around that, other than to operate the shutter button
mechanically with a small solenoid.

On 2 Jan 2008 04:03:27 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:

On 2008-01-01, Don Foreman wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:45:58 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

[ ... ]

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

This camera
http://tinyurl.com/287m7f
is a digital SLR, and it does have a setting where it stays on. The
LCD display is not active except possibly after a shot -- and that can
also be turned off.

Actually it is *not* a digital SLR. Note the wording from the
auction:


================================================== ====================
You're viewing an Olympus C-2500L

I used this camera Until I could afford the Expensive Lenses and Body of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
more expensive DSLR.

It is an excellent reliable camera that gives you some of the control of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
an SLR Camera without all the associated costs.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
================================================== ====================

So -- it may do what is needed here -- but it is not (and does
not claim to be) a DSLR. Two physical differences:

1) A SLR (digital or non) has a moving mirror which redirects
the image to the viewfinder. From the location of the
viewfinder eyepiece, I don't think that this is the case here.

I *think* that what it has is an internal display in the
viewfinder, which could slow it down as much as using the
external display.

2) A SLR has interchangeable lenses. This one has only a fixed
zoom lens.

It can be triggered by IR remote. There is no direct connection to
the camera, but an electrically-triggered (and silent) IR remote
would be simple enough to make -- or modify the one that comes with
the camera or an available replacement. (They're available for about
$29)

I have one of these cameras. It's dated, but still an excellent
camera. I don't lust for a newer one.

O.K. Just don't call it a DSLR. :-)

See
http://www.steves-digicams.com/c2500.html

The viewfinder does indeed view optically thru the lens. When I press
the shutter I can hear the mirror slap within if I put my ear right on
the camera. It's a quiet "tic tic", and the viewfinder goes
momentarily dark when that happens.

There is no electronic viewfinding function on this digital camera
because the image sensor is obscured by the mirror when viewfinding.
This camera gets considerably better battery life than most digital
cameras because it need not ever use the LCD display to take photos.

SLR literally means "single lens reflex". Many SLR's do indeed have
interchangable lenses, but that is not a condition for being an SLR.

On 2008-01-02, Don Foreman wrote:
On 2 Jan 2008 04:03:27 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:

[ ... ]

Actually it is *not* a digital SLR. Note the wording from the
auction:


================================================== ====================
You're viewing an Olympus C-2500L

I used this camera Until I could afford the Expensive Lenses and Body of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
more expensive DSLR.

It is an excellent reliable camera that gives you some of the control of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
an SLR Camera without all the associated costs.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
================================================== ====================

So -- it may do what is needed here -- but it is not (and does
not claim to be) a DSLR. Two physical differences:

1) A SLR (digital or non) has a moving mirror which redirects
the image to the viewfinder. From the location of the
viewfinder eyepiece, I don't think that this is the case here.

I *think* that what it has is an internal display in the
viewfinder, which could slow it down as much as using the
external display.

2) A SLR has interchangeable lenses. This one has only a fixed
zoom lens.

[ ... ]

O.K. Just don't call it a DSLR. :-)

See
http://www.steves-digicams.com/c2500.html

The viewfinder does indeed view optically thru the lens. When I press
the shutter I can hear the mirror slap within if I put my ear right on
the camera. It's a quiet "tic tic", and the viewfinder goes
momentarily dark when that happens.

O.K. So it has the mirror -- but most would not call this an
SLR. Instead they would call it a "ZLR" (zoom lens reflex).

There is no electronic viewfinding function on this digital camera
because the image sensor is obscured by the mirror when viewfinding.

O.K. ZLR.

This camera gets considerably better battery life than most digital
cameras because it need not ever use the LCD display to take photos.

Agreed that that is one of the major killers of battery life.

SLR literally means "single lens reflex". Many SLR's do indeed have
interchangable lenses, but that is not a condition for being an SLR.

The closest to that which I have ever had was the Zeiss
Contaflex -- which had only the front element of the lens
interchangeable, because it had a between-the-lens leaf shutter. The
Kodak Retina had the leaf shutter, but just behind the interchangeable
lens. The medium format SLRs like the Hasselblad have interchangeable
lenses with shutters included in each lens -- the expensive way to go.

Normally -- the major benefit of the reflex design is to allow
focusing and accurate framing with interchangeable lenses. No parallax
problems, unlike with a rangefinder -- or with a TLR (Twin Lens Reflex)
such as the Rolliflex.

Even the earliest SLR which I have known of -- the Graphflex --
had interchangeable lenses (just as the Speed and Crown Graphics had,
mostly for 4x5 film. The Graphflex was far from the most convenient
camera to use -- but it did get around the parallax problem at least.

If you go into newsgroups such as rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,
you will have to work to find anyone who would be willing to call a ZLR
a SLR.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 3 Jan 2008 04:50:41 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:



So -- it may do what is needed here -- but it is not (and does
not claim to be) a DSLR. Two physical differences:

1) A SLR (digital or non) has a moving mirror which redirects
the image to the viewfinder. From the location of the
viewfinder eyepiece, I don't think that this is the case here.

I *think* that what it has is an internal display in the
viewfinder, which could slow it down as much as using the
external display.

2) A SLR has interchangeable lenses. This one has only a fixed
zoom lens.

[ ... ]

O.K. Just don't call it a DSLR. :-)

See
http://www.steves-digicams.com/c2500.html

The viewfinder does indeed view optically thru the lens. When I press
the shutter I can hear the mirror slap within if I put my ear right on
the camera. It's a quiet "tic tic", and the viewfinder goes
momentarily dark when that happens.

O.K. So it has the mirror -- but most would not call this an
SLR. Instead they would call it a "ZLR" (zoom lens reflex).

Olympus called it an SLR. Steves'digicams called it an SLR. Wikipedia
defines a DSLR as: "A digital single-lens reflex camera (digital SLR
or DSLR) is a digital camera that uses an automatic mirror system and
pentaprism to direct light from the lens through the viewfinder."
Nowhere does it mention interchangable lenses. I still regard the
C2500L as an SLR, albeit a rather early digital model. You may call
it whatever you like!

Heck, if it has only one lens, that really makes it an SLR, right? Not
a MLR -- multiple lens reflex, or ILR -- interchangable lens reflex.
It may be the only true digital single lens reflex! G

(snip)

If you go into newsgroups such as rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,
you will have to work to find anyone who would be willing to call a ZLR
a SLR.

Well there ya go! It's so hard to be correct...

If you put a zoom lens on your SLR, is it not then a ZLR? Maybe an
SLR(Z) or an IZLR?

Perhaps the parlance has evolved among the cognoscenti in the 8 years
since the C2500L was a current model.

On 2008-01-03, Don Foreman wrote:
On 3 Jan 2008 04:50:41 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:

[ ... ]

O.K. Just don't call it a DSLR. :-)

See
http://www.steves-digicams.com/c2500.html

The viewfinder does indeed view optically thru the lens. When I press
the shutter I can hear the mirror slap within if I put my ear right on
the camera. It's a quiet "tic tic", and the viewfinder goes
momentarily dark when that happens.

O.K. So it has the mirror -- but most would not call this an
SLR. Instead they would call it a "ZLR" (zoom lens reflex).

Olympus called it an SLR.

Olympus is guilty of "advertising-speak", just like we know that
those "titanium" drill bits are really (hopefully) HSS coated with
Titanium Nitride.

I know that you know better than to want a drill bit made
of titanium. And I usually consider your optical information to be
good, too. But I do have to disagree with you on this one thing.

Steves'digicams called it an SLR.

Steves' is probably taking the maker's advertising-speak as
gospel. And they may be getting an advertising kickback from the
manufacturer, or may have been doing so at the time that was written.
This is something which some web based camera testers are accused of
these days. In any case, this would make Steve -- or anyone else in a
similar position -- a bit less likely to argue the point.

Wikipedia
defines a DSLR as: "A digital single-lens reflex camera (digital SLR
or DSLR) is a digital camera that uses an automatic mirror system and
pentaprism to direct light from the lens through the viewfinder."

At which precise time did it say that? You know how likely to
change Wikipedia's definitions (especially those which may be
controversial) can be. :-)

Note that the collection of newsgroups aimed at digital cameras
is currently:

rec.photo.digital 0001456307 0001435796 y
rec.photo.digital.point+shoot 0000002230 0000002082 y
rec.photo.digital.rangefinder 0000000356 0000000341 y
rec.photo.digital.slr-systems 0000118052 0000109228 y
rec.photo.digital.zlr 0000003880 0000003516 y

Note that the ZLR cameras have their own separate newsgroup.

Nowhere does it mention interchangable lenses. I still regard the
C2500L as an SLR, albeit a rather early digital model. You may call
it whatever you like!

Heck, if it has only one lens, that really makes it an SLR, right? Not
a MLR -- multiple lens reflex, or ILR -- interchangable lens reflex.
It may be the only true digital single lens reflex! G

The "Single lens" is in contrast to a rangefinder (which had
separate optics for the viewfinder) or a TLR (Twin Lens Reflex) such as
the Rolli which had two lenses of identical focal length one above the
other. Sometimes the two were also the same maximum aperture, other
times the taking lens would be a bit faster than the viewfinding lens
(e.g. f:2.8 for the taking lens and f:3.5 for the viewfinder lens. The
benefit of this is that you had a better idea of what you were getting
in terms of depth of field.

There were even some interchangeable lens TLRs -- such as the
Mamyia -- aimed for professional photographers. There was a manual
cover plate inside to protect the film while the lens pair was being
changed. This, of course, made the ability to change lenses cost more,
since you had to change two at once.

(snip)

If you go into newsgroups such as rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,
you will have to work to find anyone who would be willing to call a ZLR
a SLR.

Well there ya go! It's so hard to be correct...

If you put a zoom lens on your SLR, is it not then a ZLR? Maybe an
SLR(Z) or an IZLR?

No. A ZLR has *no* choice of lenses. It has *only* the single
zoom lens, with no provisions for changing to another lens which might
be faster, or longer focal length, or shorter focal length. You are
stuck with the range of the zoom (3:1 IIRC in this one). Not that this
matters for the planned use which triggered this discussion.

And don't claim more by "digital" or "electronic" zoom. That
gains you nothing which you cannot get by using a computer program to
crop the image and blow it up -- and loses a bit of flexibility in
fixing framing errors.

Perhaps the parlance has evolved among the cognoscenti in the 8 years
since the C2500L was a current model.

Or the cognoscenti were not willing to accept advertiser-speak
from the start. :-)

I would not want something which *claimed* to be an SLR which
did not offer interchangeable lenses. I like to be able to use the
older lenses from the same maker, and to mount the camera on a
Catadioptric telescope for a really serious telephoto lens. (And yes, I
do know that is a mis-use of "telephoto", as it really refers to a long
focal length lens combined with a secondary cluster of lens elements
near the back to allow the lens to be physically shorter than its
nominal focal length. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:45:58 -0600, nick hull
wrote:

I want it principally when I CANNOT watch, when I'm sleeping or gone.

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Hi Nick,

Have you found this do-it-yourself trail camera site yet?

http://www.pixcontroller.com/

They have some boards, mods, a bit of camera info that may
be helpful. I haven't dealt with them, just came across them
while searching for something...

Sometimes the site is a little pokey loading, be patient.

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email