SX280 - battery life shooting video

[factoryguy]

UPDATED May 5:

I apologize to the forum for mixing two different problems.  They are unrelated.

Problem #1:  User error.  I thought I was using a class 6 SD card but I was wrong. The yellow "!" indicates a pathologically slow card.  Upgrading to a class 10 resolved this problem.

Problem #2: UNRESOLVED.  Red battery indicator comes on prematurely.  On a fresh charge, it'll turn red after recording for a couple of minutes.  On a partially drained battery, it turns red immediately upon entering movie mode or pressing the record button.  Turn the camera off and then right back on in "still" mode and it shows full charge and works fine ... until trying to shoot video.  I have not precisely measured recording times but it'll record for at least 20 (maybe 30?) minutes while flashing red.

[myasg]

When will they be shipping cameras with the new firmware updates. I already returned mine and would definitely love to buy a new one that is upgraded.

[pawl]

Upon admitting a problem with their cameras and then requiring that their customers pay shipping, Canon would be inviting a class action suit...I don't think so. But it does sound scary!

[scupking]

We shouldn't have to return the camera for a software update.....

[videophan]

---

@scupking wrote:
We shouldn't have to return the camera for a software update.....

---

I think for the 280SX it may be necessary to return the camera for a firmware update. I looked through a couple of manuals for Canon's higher end cameras and for those models there is a tab on the main menu that you use to check for the firmware version and to update the firmware once downoladed to a memory card. Such instructions are missing from the SX280 manual. I also got this response from Gordon Laing, the SX280 reviewer from CameraLabs:

"it's true that most firmware updates are applied via a download onto an SD card, but maybe the SX280 HS does things differently. It does sound odd to me, but Canon specifically asked me to return it to them, and my model was one I purchased rather than borrowed for review. I'll report back after some more tests, but anyone experiencing the issue now may wish to contact Canon about it. It's certainly very frustrating!"

[videophan]

---

@pawl wrote:

Upon admitting a problem with their cameras and then requiring that their customers pay shipping, Canon would be inviting a class action suit...I don't think so. But it does sound scary!

---

Quite a few years ago, I had a Canon Powershot A70 whose image sensor went bad prematurely. It was determined that this occurred due to a manufacturing defect in the image sensor that involved several Canon cameras as well as cameras from other manufacturers. Canon recalled these cameras and replaced the sensor at no charge regardless of camera age, at least for some time period. As I recall, I paid shipping to Canon for repair, but they paid return shipping. This was a somewhat different situation in that my camera was about 3 years of age when it was returned for repair.

It would be appreciated if a canon representative (are you listening Jessica?) would provide an update on this forum, as promised, to address this issue and what progress is being made..

[pawl]

I didn't think firmware updates were downloaded to memory cards—at least not removable memory cards. It's typically stored on chips embedded in the hardware, the idea being that firmware seldom needs updating (right?). So it would be a major design flaw for Canon to have placed the firmware in such a manner that an update would require opening-up and "operating on" the camera (i.e. replace a piece of hardware). I suppose these things happen—just seems really stupid (and thus, hard to believe).

Any Canon engineers who'd like to add 2 cents?

[videophan]

---

@pawl wrote:

I didn't think firmware updates were downloaded to memory cards—at least not removable memory cards. It's typically stored on chips embedded in the hardware, the idea being that firmware seldom needs updating (right?). So it would be a major design flaw for Canon to have placed the firmware in such a manner that an update would require opening-up and "operating on" the camera (i.e. replace a piece of hardware). I suppose these things happen—just seems really stupid (and thus, hard to believe).

Any Canon engineers who'd like to add 2 cents?

---

Not a Canon engineer, but I don't think returning the camera to Canon for a firmware update necessarily means that accessing hardware is required for a firmware update. Firmware update functionality may just be something that is not offered to the consumer for this model.

[pawl]

Well I'm neither engineer nor computer wiz, but I believe firmware, being what it is, must either be accessed (updated, since it is essentially software) internally, with the camera operated upon, or externally, via its usb/interface cable. I would think that, like typical firmware updates, the process is noninvasive, thus can be done remotely, thus by the consumer [with some level of intelligence].

But maybe it's a hardware issue, in which case...well, obviously it would need to be returned to Canon.

[videophan]

---

@pawl wrote:

Well I'm neither engineer nor computer wiz, but I believe firmware, being what it is, must either be accessed (updated, since it is essentially software) internally, with the camera operated upon, or externally, via its usb/interface cable. I would think that, like typical firmware updates, the process is noninvasive, thus can be done remotely, thus by the consumer [with some level of intelligence].

But maybe it's a hardware issue, in which case...well, obviously it would need to be returned to Canon.

---

It may be a hardware issue, but it could still be an issue that can be resolved by a firmware update and updating the firmware requires a utility that is not onboard the SX280 but is available to technical/repair staff. I guess if the utility can be accessed by standard computer operating systems, that could be furnished to the consumer for remote updating. A thought that has occurred to me is that since this is a battery/battery level indicator issue, it may be risky to do a firmware update without external AC power. Since that is an optional item with the SX280, maybe that is the issue. I know with computer BIOS flashes for laptops, it is recommended that the computer be connected to AC power during the flash, full battery or not, and there is a good reason for that.

What is desparately needed is an update from Canon concerning the issue concerning what to expect...and when.

[pawl]

My delorme inreach (gps beacon) has required two firmware updates in the past two weeks. The update was downloaded to my computer, the inreach was then connected (without the batteries) via usb which supplies some power.

---

@videophan wrote:

---

@pawl wrote:

Well I'm neither engineer nor computer wiz, but I believe firmware, being what it is, must either be accessed (updated, since it is essentially software) internally, with the camera operated upon, or externally, via its usb/interface cable. I would think that, like typical firmware updates, the process is noninvasive, thus can be done remotely, thus by the consumer [with some level of intelligence].

But maybe it's a hardware issue, in which case...well, obviously it would need to be returned to Canon.

---

It may be a hardware issue, but it could still be an issue that can be resolved by a firmware update and updating the firmware requires a utility that is not onboard the SX280 but is available to technical/repair staff. I guess if the utility can be accessed by standard computer operating systems, that could be furnished to the consumer for remote updating. A thought that has occurred to me is that since this is a battery/battery level indicator issue, it may be risky to do a firmware update without external AC power. Since that is an optional item with the SX280, maybe that is the issue. I know with computer BIOS flashes for laptops, it is recommended that the computer be connected to AC power during the flash, full battery or not, and there is a good reason for that.

What is desparately needed is an update from Canon concerning the issue concerning what to expect...and when.

---