Hi,
I am using a SX50 HS and really appreciate the possibility to avoid two problems/restrictions of the SX50 in HiSpeedBURST-mode:
1) The SX50 usually takes too high ISO values in HiSpeedBurst mode even under best light conditions. With CHDK I successfully can make use of 100 ISO in HiSpeedBURST mode.
2) Normally the SX50 "only" makes less quality jpegs in HiSpeedBURST mode. With CHDK one can replace the quality with SUPERFINE JPEG.
Unfortunately the different versions of CHDK for the different camera models do NOT consider at least the official shutter speeds of a model.
Why aren´t those values adapted to the values supported natively from a certain cam?
For example the SX50 officially supports 1/2000.
So I wonder why the CHDK branch for SX50 does not reflect this in the custom auto iso menue?
Wouldn´t it be a good idea to consider such official shutter speed values of the different models?
In my case 1/1000 is the min. shutted speed I can choose (instead of the official 1/2000).
In core/autoiso.c the shutter speed array simply does not include 1/2000.
What can I do now in order to get the 1/2000 value in the array?
I am totally new to CHDK. I do not have any development environment for it on my pc.
If i had: Where do I find the SX50 specific code branch for adapting autoiso.c and compiling CHDK for my SX50?
I need the 1/2000 because 1/1000 is not fast enough for making shots of a flying European dipper.
Is there a chance that the bug WATERWINGZ is confirming will be fixed?
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=11259.msg110460#msg110460Thanks for your help and best regards
canontestit
Best regards
canontestit
If you are talking about CHDK "custom auto ISO" being limited to 1/8th, that could certainly be changed to allow lower values. Seems like a reasonable request to me.
From core/autoiso.c
static const int shutter1_values[] = { 0, 8, 15, 30, 60, 125, 250, 500, 1000 };
But then if we are going to look at AutoISO. perhaps making it aware of the camera's Av setting and ND filter setting (if use by the Canon f/w) might also be a good idea?