I am assuming that the motor drive alone will absolutely, positively
not exhibit this defect when tested separately.
John
CPS
On 10/4/2007 8:56:00 AM, Chuck Norcutt (chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
wrote:
> But
> wouldn't electronic switch chatter be faster than what the motor
> drive and camera could respond to? I have little experience with
> debouncing switches in software but my recollection is that we're
>
> talking times of a few milliseconds at most. Since the motor drive can
> only run about 5 frames/sec it
> can't respond to events of less than
> 200ms duration without having some form of memory to capture the switch
> bounce. What's
> the flaw in my logic? Is it the user's thumb that's
> doing the chattering at a much slower rate than switch contact bounce?
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> John Hermanson wrote:
> > Maybe, possibly could be a dirty (chattering) switch in the T-45. It's
> > making partial contact so the motor thinks the button was pushed two or
> > more times when it is only being held down.
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > John Hermanson
> > Camtech Photo Services, Inc.
> > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|