SX260 HS Porting Thread - page 42 - DryOS Development - CHDK Forum

SX260 HS Porting Thread

  • 642 Replies
  • 168860 Views
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 13621
Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #410 on: 15 / September / 2012, 21:33:18 »
Advertisements
Using the patch posted by nafraf, I've added the sx260 to the stable http://mighty-hoernsche.de and development http://mighty-hoernsche.de/trunk/ autobuilds. Please report whether they work as expected.
Don't forget what the H stands for.

Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #411 on: 16 / September / 2012, 04:48:18 »
Hi,
I've tested stable build on SX260 C and loading with firmware update method is not norking. With boot card I have success.
I tried bracketing in continuous mode it is not working. I tried Tv and Av modes but I have only partial success with Av mode. Could some one try this if it is working?
Thanks

David
I am sorry for my poor English.

Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #412 on: 16 / September / 2012, 05:49:56 »
Do you recommend me the use of 1.1.0 alpha or 1.2.0 alpha with sx260hs? And what are the difference about them? :P
« Last Edit: 16 / September / 2012, 05:53:22 by giacomo.tricarico »

Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #413 on: 16 / September / 2012, 08:56:35 »
Do you recommend me the use of 1.1.0 alpha or 1.2.0 alpha with sx260hs? And what are the difference about them? :P
The code base for 1.1.0 is more stable - new features are not being added.  It also most closely matches the existing documentation.

The code base for 1.2.0 is in flux as new features are added and tested.  Its still relatively stable but it has major changes in the user interface that have not yet been captured on any documentation.

So if you are new to CHDK I would recommend 1.1.0.

Ported :   A1200    SD940   G10    Powershot N    G16


Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #414 on: 16 / September / 2012, 09:46:23 »
Do you recommend me the use of 1.1.0 alpha or 1.2.0 alpha with sx260hs? And what are the difference about them? :P
The code base for 1.1.0 is more stable - new features are not being added.  It also most closely matches the existing documentation.

The code base for 1.2.0 is in flux as new features are added and tested.  Its still relatively stable but it has major changes in the user interface that have not yet been captured on any documentation.

So if you are new to CHDK I would recommend 1.1.0.


Thank you very much for the answer! Anyway, the 1.2.0 chdk posted here:
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=7889.msg90757#msg90757
is the same than this one here?:
http://mighty-hoernsche.de/trunk/
Because i've seen that the chdk in the second link has more MB than the chdk in the first link and it says "alpha" version, too (sx260hs-100b-1.2.0-2153-full_ALPHA), unlike the first chdk which doesn't say alpha(sx260hs-100b-1.2.0-full).

Thank you
« Last Edit: 16 / September / 2012, 09:51:11 by giacomo.tricarico »

Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #415 on: 16 / September / 2012, 10:01:22 »
Ported :   A1200    SD940   G10    Powershot N    G16

*

Offline lapser

  • *****
  • 1093
Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #416 on: 16 / September / 2012, 13:39:56 »
sx260hs-100b-1.1.0-2154-full_ALPHA

This version works with firmware update and auto-boot. Thanks for adding it.

Anything that tries to override the focus distance in MANUAL mode crashes the camera. This includes focus distance override, focus bracketing, and the set_focus(d) function, which seems to set the focus and crash on the next shoot. Using the down key in alt/manual focus mode (to set hyperfocal distance) crashes the camera also. The ROMLOG starts with:

ASSERT!! FocusLensController.c Line 829

In auto focus mode, it appears that the focus override settings are ignored. aflock(1) works in auto, but re-focuses first. I think it also crashes the camera in manual.

The dof display does work in manual focus mode, so I can use it to get close to setting focus at hyperfocal distance.
===
These functions work on G1X without crashing, by the way.
EOS-M3_120f / SX50_100b / SX260_101a / G1X_100g / D20_100b
https://www.youtube.com/user/DrLapser/videos

*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 13621
Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #417 on: 16 / September / 2012, 15:42:02 »
Hi,
I've tested stable build on SX260 C and loading with firmware update method is not norking. With boot card I have success.
What happens when you try to use firmware update ? Do you get a "bad file" error, or does the camera shutdown or hang ?

edit:
I found that the SX240 100c had the wrong platform ID, which would prevent firmware update from working. That will be corrected in the next builds (>= 2157). Sounds like you are on sx260 though, so I'm not sure that explains it...

Note that for "firm update" loading, you must use the right build for your camera, e.g. the sx260 build will give you a "wrong camera" type error if you try to use the sx240 build (assuming the platform IDs aren't wrong in the code, like they were for sx240 100c.)
« Last Edit: 16 / September / 2012, 16:56:17 by reyalp »
Don't forget what the H stands for.


Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #418 on: 17 / September / 2012, 23:46:07 »
just joined, first off thanks for the helpful advice. i've been trying to read before i posted to avoid foot in mouth syndrome.

in reference to dave.a's problem with the stable build on sx260 100c, i also could not get it to work with the firmware update. i was getting an error to the effect of "firmware update failed!". I had to use EOSCard to get my sd card to work, but now it works fine (or at least, any problems i have seem to be PEBKAC  :D ).

the build i used was "sx260hs-100c-1.1.0-2160-full_ALPHA". I confirmed my 260 was the 100c with the ver.req test.

*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 13621
Re: SX260 HS Porting Thread
« Reply #419 on: 18 / September / 2012, 00:09:04 »
in reference to dave.a's problem with the stable build on sx260 100c, i also could not get it to work with the firmware update. i was getting an error to the effect of "firmware update failed!".
Thanks for the report, it looks like all the builds except sx260 100b didn't have PLATFORMOSVER set in the makefiles, which is required to make dryos r50 compatible firmware update files.

This should be fixed in autobuild 2162 (or 2161 for the trunk)
Don't forget what the H stands for.

 

Related Topics