Hello Jan & HPPS850 gang,

Just wanted to share the news with everyone that I was successful in
fixing the "rainbow issue" that has plagued my 850 for the past 2
years and caused me to shelve the camera. Many thanks Jan for posting
the detailed repair instructions in the HP945 forum...

http://www.hp945.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1293

Example photos showing the problme can be found in this group's
Photos sestion under "A Toasted 850".

As promised I did shoot a couple of photos of the disassembly and
will be sending them to you (Jan) for inclusion in your repair
thread. Unfortunately I only had my 35mm camera to shoot with. I will
email some scans when I get them back from processing.

The only thing I wasn't certain about was how long to leave the
soldering pencil on each leads in order to reflow the solder without
applying undue heat to the board. I used a 15w pencil and applied it
to each pin seperately (I think 48 in all) for about 6-7 seconds with
3 minutes cool down time between each application.

Best regards,

Jay (with newly resurrected HP PS850!)

--- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "jgenemans" <jgenemans@...>
wrote:
>
> The HP850's is starting to malfunction a lot, as you will see in the
> next batch of photos that I hope to upload very shortly
> (http://www.hp945.com/galleries/index.php?cat=8). It occasionally
> showed the red screen or black screen before the colored blotches
and
> out-of-focus happened. Since HP refuses to be reasonable, I am
buying
> a new NON-HP camera. In hind-site HP could have had a lot of good
> press with my most current album, but the HP failed in the hour of
my
> greatest need for it to behave properly.
>
> However, the good news is that since I cannot leave NOLA, my wife is
> flying down to the vessel on Thursday, hopefully with a brand new
> Panasonic FZ30 to replace the ailing 850, so I will still be here.
> The HP850 was my 2nd digi-cam and completed my transistion from film
> to digital. Now it is time to move on to a better camera since HP
> doesn't have anything comparable in their line-up in the ultra-zoom
range.
>
> Professional Reviews:
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz30-
review/index.shtml
> http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_3792.html
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
>
> User Review
> http://www.shopping.com/xPR-Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_FZ30~RD-
195479506564
>
> From what I can tell it fixes my three biggest complaints that the
> HP850/945 series had:
>
> My only two concerns:
>
> 1. Digital Noise, which is similar to the HP camera that we own.
> Other alternative would be a more expensive DSLR setup costing 2x or
> more and be a lot more complicated.
>
> 2. Proprietary Battery, does not use cheap double "AA" batteries.
> Will not be addressed by any better prosumer camera other than the
> Canon SR12 which has severe Chromatic Aberration in reviews and will
> also have the dust issue too since it's lens protrudes.
>
> Pluses:
> 700%+ increase in speed of startup & operation (#1 complaint on HP)
> 1 second start-up time
> 0.1-0.3 seconds to focus and shoot a photograph
> 3 FPS unlimited continious shooting
> Dust issue resolved! (#2 complaint)
> Sealed lens that doesn't extend and retract :)
> Reduced Chromatic Aberration (#3 issue w/ HP)
> Uses same type of memory as current HP camera's
> With a 55-52 adapter can use the same accessories/lens, including my
> underwater case.
> 100% increase in resolution
> 8MP vs 4MP
> 100% increase in light sensitivity
> ISO 400 vs ISO 200
> 50% increase in optical zoom
> 12x vs 8x
> Better zoom control on ring
> Infinite steps instead of 13
> Manual Focus on ring
> RAW/TIFF file format (better post processing)
> Image stabilization
> External Flash Mount
> Broadcast quality video (no DSLR has this)
> Similar but improved controls layout to current camera.
>
> Acceptable Minuses:
> Bigger & Heavier
> More Expensive
>
> --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "Jay Mc Kee" <NWTSPM@m...>
wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > Sorry to hear your 850 has joined The Dark Side as mine did, and
at
> an especially bad time too. I don't think your harder-than-usual
> handling of the unit has anything to do with the problem. I've
always
> babied mine, never banged, dropped or otherwise sunjected it to any
> shock and I have never got it damp let alone wet. One unusual thing
> did happen once. I got caught in the rotor wash of a landing
> helicopter once in Apr 2004. Some dust did enter the optics but I
was
> able to blow most of it out (probably some back into) the camera
using
> compressed air. Other than some splotches caused by dust in the
> optics, the 850 worked fine unil the processing problem erupted in
May
> 2005.
> >
> > The problem - at least in my unit - manifests itself in yellow and
> fuchia pixles as well as red. The error does follow contours and
falls
> in shadows where severe changes in brightness occurs. (on the "dark
> side" where light/bright borders into shadow) Do you have any
examples
> to share? I'd be interested to see a sample and let you know if it
> looks similar or identical to an "effect" that I have seen with
mine.
> >
> > Unfortunately I have little faith in HP or their products. Based
on
> what I have heard of their service of these cameras, I have chalked
up
> my experience with the 850 as a costly lesson learned. I turned my
> trusty 35mm Canon A-1 SLR over to my local Canon authorized repair
> facility for a complete teardown and overhaul, which is far cheaper
> than replacing the 850 and will produce beautiful photographs.
> Although bigger and more clumbsy than the 850, my SLR has multiple
> programmable modes incuding fully automatic, instant response and
> predictable results. All attributes I had to give up in the trade-
off
> with the convenience of digital. I'm actually looking forward to
> shooting film again.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jay
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: jgenemans<mailto:jgenemans@y...>
> > To:
>
Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2005 5:36 AM
> > Subject: [Photosmart_850] Re: Did I cook my 850?
> >
> >
> > Jay,
> >
> > My camera started doing something similar, it is creating a
ghost
> > image of red dots similar to yousr, only mine is following the
> > contours of objects that are light/dark in color but are
offset. I'm
> > taking hurricane Katrina aftermath photos with mine and have
been
> > subjecting it to unusually harder condition that IT SHOULD BE
ABLE TO
> > HANDLE.
> >
> > Needless to say, HP has let me down again, and again, and
again
> > especially when I needed their product to work the most.
> >
> > Did you finally resolve your red dot issue?
> >
> > Jan
> >
> > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "Jay" <NWTSPM@m...>
wrote:
> > > Hi jgenemans,
> > >
> > > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "jgenemans"
<jgenemans@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > > 400x400 image pixels is the limit of the Yahoo group limit
as
> far as I
> > > > can tell.
> > > >
> > > > It is best to crop a photo down to that size to illustrate
the
> problem
> > > > rather than resize it to 400x300.
> > >
> > > Okay. I did that. There are two more samples, progressively
tighter
> > > crops of "Sample2", in the Photos section.
> > >
> > > > From what I am seeing, it appears that the edges appear to
be
> > > > distorted or over-sharpened, a processing error.
> > > >
> > > > Try opening the battery door on your camera (or removing the
> > > > batteries) for 24 hours, this resets the camera.
> > >
> > > I will try that. the longest I've had the batteries out is
about 30
> > > minutes. I'll leave the batteries out for a week if there is
any
> > > chance that it might solve the problem.
> > >
> > > > If this doesn't work
> > > > then check the firmware that is on the camera.
> > > >
> > > > What version of the firmware are you using? Depress
the 'flash'
> > > > button while turning on the camera to put it into its
> diagnotic mode.
> > > > Look for "FW", it should read 1.01.05 (or .06), if it
doesn't
> read
> > > > these numbers, you may want to flash the firmware. .06 is
the
> highest
> > > > officially released firmware revision, .04 and below were
> plagued with
> > > > freezes and other issues.
> > >
> > > I updated the firmware in June in reaction to this problem. It
> had no
> > > effect.
> > >
> > > > There is some risk to this, as I have read on a few
instances
> where
> > > > the camera totally became unusuable, especially if the
camera
> is out
> > > > of warranty.
> > >
> > > Thankfully that has not happened.
> > >
> > > > Make sure you use the original 16MB SD chip, and are
> > > > using a set of fully charged batteries prior to flashing
your
> camera's
> > > > firmware as it will take a little while (last time I did
this
> was two
> > > > years ago).
> > >
> > > I used fresh alkaline batteries when I flashed the firmware,
but
> don't
> > > remember if I used the original 16MB SD card. It's likely
that I
> used
> > > my SanDisk 256MB card for the operation. It it that important
that I
> > > should reflash it using the 16MB card?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your help.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Jay
> > >
> > > > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "Jay" <NWTSPM@m...>
wrote:
> > > > > Hi jgenemans,
> > > > >
> > > > > 400 image pixels or monitor pixels?
> > > > >
> > > > > I can resize to 400 pixels wide, but that just "shrinks"
the
> whole
> > > > > frame. Are you looking for a crop that nets 400 image
> pixels? I just
> > > > > uploaded three samples that are resized. Not sure if that
is
> helpful
> > > > > of not.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know how to view the "Full Size" photos after
they are
> > > > > uploaded. I (as the owner/uploader) have never had a
problem
> viewing
> > > > > the full size photo I upload to any Yahoo Groups' photo
section.
> > Maybe
> > > > > that's available only for the images a particular person
> uploads?
> > > > > (i.e. "your own")
> > > > >
> > > > > My camera is out of warantee. I understand how bad their
service
> > > > > policy is. Why would anybody want to pay for nearly the
full
> > purchase
> > > > > price just to receive someone elses used/refurbished
camera?
> That's
> > > > > insane. It's almost as if they discourage repair work
> intentionally.
> > > > > HP is a joke, not just the cameras, but the company as a
whole.
> > (these
> > > > > days) If Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard could see what's
> happening at
> > > > > the company that bears their name, they would roll in
their
> > graves. At
> > > > > least the heart of their company - Test and Measurement -
what
> > HP was
> > > > > founded on - lives on at Agilent.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry for the rant.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do appreciate your suggestions. I may or may not launch
my
> problem
> > > > > over to the 945 group. This camera is looking like a lost
> cause. I
> > > > > can't afford to be in the market for another digital
camera
> > right now
> > > > > and I don't want to buy used, so I'm back to my 35mm SLR.
At
> > least the
> > > > > control, flexibility, predictablity and quailty is there,
> even if I
> > > > > have to wait for processing. Sigh.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Jay
> > > > > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "jgenemans"
> <jgenemans@y...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Unfortunately I cannot look at your photos in full
size, if
> > you can
> > > > > > crop them down to 400 x 400 pixels.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (Does anyone know how to view uploaded files in their
full
> size?
> > > > > > Yahoo!'s help doesn't even come close to answering this
> > question. I
> > > > > > have nothing to click in FireFox or IE 6.0)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It appears that "image problem sample 2" has red
blotches
> > (flowers)
> > > > > > that shouldn't be there as I could only view it in
400x301
> > > pixels. If
> > > > > > this is the case, I haven't seen this kind of defect
> before on the
> > > > > > 850/945. You may want to ask your question at
> www.hp945.com and
> > > post
> > > > > > your photos there (250kb limit).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the camera is in warranty, you are in luck. If not,
then
> > you are
> > > > > > screwed as HP doesn't fix camera's. You return your
> camera, they
> > > > > > charge you the price for a new one while sending you a
> > refurbhished
> > > > > > camera (above market value, I might add), they in turn
> repair your
> > > > > > camera and repeat the process for some other person
with a
> > > camera that
> > > > > > is not functioning correctly since they 'claim' that
they
> > don't fix
> > > > > > camera's, but somehow manage to get 'refurbished'
cameras
> -- those
> > > > > > camera's have to come from somewhere. HP has lost my
business
> > for a
> > > > > > simple cleaning that they wanted $300 USD for.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "Jay"
<NWTSPM@m...>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like to invite everyone to take a look at my
sample
> > > > > > pictures
> > > > > > > under "Photos>A Toasted 850".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Has anybody experienced *that* before with their
850/945?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If so, what might the problem be? (Other than the fact
> that I
> > > > > > bought
> > > > > > > a camera from a computer company - Mistake!)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Would something like that be repairable?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Would HP be competent enough (or even care enough) to
> try it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Jay
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "jgenemans"
> > > <jgenemans@y...>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Yahoo strips the photographs, so they were not
visible.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Based on what you have said, I have not heard of
this
> in HP
> > > > > > > 850/945's.
> > > > > > > > It sounds like a sensor/processor defect of some
kind.
> > > "Noise"
> > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > appear similar to grain in 35mm film and can be
> corrected with
> > > > > > Neat
> > > > > > > Image.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dead/Hot pixels would appear white, blue, red,
green,
> or black
> > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > an individual pixel has malfunctioned. From your
> > > description, it
> > > > > > > > sounds like an entire register (produces lines,
zones, or
> > entire
> > > > > > > > colors are messed up) has malfucntioned on your
sensor
> or your
> > > > > > > > processor since it can be seen on both the
viewfinder,
> > > screen, and
> > > > > > > > resulting JPG file (can't be more specific without
> seeing a
> > > photo
> > > > > > > > first).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since it is out of warranty not much can be done.
If
> you are
> > > > > > > > adventerious, open the camera in a clean room
> environment and
> > > > > > check
> > > > > > > > all of the connections (NOT RECOMMENDED) and
> reassemeble. I
> > > > > > haven't
> > > > > > > > heard of a 100% success story when someone has done
this.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I know that this isn't what you wanted to hear, but
based
> > solely
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > your description it sounds like your camera is only
useful
> > for
> > > > > > > modern
> > > > > > > > artsy type photographs.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "Jay"
<NWTSPM@m...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Sorry if I upset anyone by sending sample photos
with my
> > > > > > initial
> > > > > > > post.
> > > > > > > > > I should have thought about sending unsolicited
> > > attachments. My
> > > > > > > bad.
> > > > > > > > =8^(
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I dropped the batteries out and put them back in,
> tried a
> > > > > > > different SD
> > > > > > > > > card and even upgraded the firmware to 1.01.06,
but
> no luck.
> > > > > > Still
> > > > > > > > > getting the pixel "trails". I believe the correct
term
> > > > > > > is "noise", and
> > > > > > > > > it is visible in the LCD viewfinder and screen.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks for letting me bend your ears. =8^)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jay
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In Photosmart_850@yahoogroups.com, "Jay Mc
Kee"
> > > > > > <NWTSPM@m...>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Something unusual and apparently irreversible
happened
> > to my
> > > > > > 850
> > > > > > > > > this last weekend. I'm attaching a couple of
photos
> (if this
> > > > > > Yahoo
> > > > > > > > > Group accepts attached photos) to show the problem
> and the
> > > > > > point
> > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > > it started happening.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Other that a single dead pixel, my 850 has been
> > > performing as
> > > > > > > > > expected since I purchased it new in September
2003.
> Now it
> > > > > > > appears I
> > > > > > > > > have pixels that fail when they are called upon to
> render
> > > > > > certain
> > > > > > > > > colors. It's so weird it's hard to explain in
words
> > > therefore I
> > > > > > > hope
> > > > > > > > > some examples can speak for me.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The image that appears to have started the
problem was
> > > taken
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > flash on under the dark canopy of a tree. The tree
> actually
> > > > > > > touched
> > > > > > > > > the ground most of the way around and created a
heavily
> > shaded
> > > > > > > > > (somewhat dark) "cave". I shot a picture (first
image #
> > 5434)
> > > > > > > under
> > > > > > > > > this tree while the camera was in the shade and
pointed
> > in the
> > > > > > > > > direction of the Sun. There was a bright spot of
sky
> > peeking
> > > > > > > through
> > > > > > > > > the canopy near the center of the scene at the
> instant the
> > > > > > shutter
> > > > > > > > > snapped. The flash also fired on that shot. The
Sun
> wasn't
> > > > > > shining
> > > > > > > > > into the camera at all, but it would appear that
> particular
> > > > > > > condition
> > > > > > > > > was more than the camera could handle. I took two
> > pictures in
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > lighting condition and the flash fired both
times. I had
> > > no idea
> > > > > > > > > something serious had happned to the camera.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Now every image taken by this particular camera
> from that
> > > > > > point
> > > > > > > > > onward has this weird discoloration peppering
random
> areas.
> > > > > > It's
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > just the images, but the problem can be seen in
the
> > viewfinder
> > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > well! (see images # 5478, 5478-Crop & 5487) The
> problem is
> > > more
> > > > > > > > > noticable in brightly lit scenes, and somewhat
harder to
> > > detect
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > dimmer scenes.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I've pulled the batteries out several times and
> cycled the
> > > > > > power
> > > > > > > > > switch (with batteries out) and nothing seems to
> solve the
> > > > > > > problem. I
> > > > > > > > > have a bad feeling the camera is ruined.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Has anybody encountered or seen this problem
before
> > with an
> > > > > > > 850? (or
> > > > > > > > > any other digital camera for that matter?)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Is my 850 ruined?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > My 850 I'm sure is out of warranty at this
point.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts, ideas, technical insights or
> recommendations
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > most
> > > > > > > > > welcome.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Jay
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS Digital wedding
> photography<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Digital+wedding+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=L
earn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+pho
tography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course
&c=6&s=188&.sig=Umur-3rsLOic7dZMwVL94w>
> Learn digital
> photography<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Learn+digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Lea
rn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photo
graphy&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c
=6&s=188&.sig=emApqtvj0kHQhppIzRrNgw>
> Digital photography
> college<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Digital+photography+college&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=L
earn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+pho
tography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course
&c=6&s=188&.sig=aIiABJLTZsUnmWBs4mZwuA>
>
> > Digital
> photography<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+dig
ital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography
&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=1
88&.sig=pJmwqgVzec3JGBtWYlPbOg>
> Digital photography web
> site<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Digital+photography+web+site&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=
Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+ph
otography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+cours
e&c=6&s=188&.sig=BMII8rtDZlAtVdZsPhaZqw>
> Digital photography
> course<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Digital+photography+course&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Le
arn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+phot
ography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&
c=6&s=188&.sig=OrnrutXVhHZu-7E7ccLtuw>
>
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > a.. Visit your group
> "Photosmart_850<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Photosmart_850>" on
the web.
> >
> > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >
> Photosmart_850-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Photosmart_850-
unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> >
> > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of
> Service<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
>