Canon 300d won't talk to PC (XP)

Discussion in 'Canon' started by ben via, Apr 29, 2005.

  1. I have just got myself a Canon 300d (digital rebel). In the process of
    loading the bundled software, the installation of the cd software seemed to
    go fine - but when i restarted the computer and plugged in the camera
    itself to the usb port, the Found New Hardware message came up with 'Canon
    Digital Camera' but an error box keeps coming up saying "Windows could not
    load the installer for Image". I tried deleting the drivers and
    reinstalling, but same problem. Is there any way I can get my camera to
    talk to the PC without a card reader? I am using windows XP.
    ben via, Apr 29, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. ben via

    Crownfield Guest

    does canon have a help number or email address? :)
    Crownfield, Apr 29, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. not a local one that came with the camera, but i'm trying to hunt one up...
    ben via, Apr 29, 2005
  4. ben via

    PC Guest

    On user manual page W-14, have you try to set your camera Communication to
    "Normal" instead of "PTP"?
    I had problem with photos transfer when I set to PTP, I'm using Windows XP
    as well.
    Good Luck

    PC, Apr 29, 2005
  5. yep - tried to connect while set in both modes, but got the same message
    ben via, Apr 29, 2005
  6. Have you got any other Imaging devices (e.g. a flatbed scanner)
    plugged in via USB ?

    I couldn't get my 300d to be recognised by Windows XP until I
    unplugged my Mustek USB scanner. I didn't need to uninstall anything -
    I just physically disconnected the scanner from the PC and everything
    was OK.

    Both work fine now, but I can't have them plugged in at the same time.

    It seems the Mustek scanner driver takes over and doesn't allow the OS
    to see the camera.
    peter.downing, Apr 29, 2005

  7. Buy a Pentax *istD. XP sees it as an USB disk drive. No need for drivers :)
    Markku Laamanen, Apr 29, 2005
  8. ben via

    Crownfield Guest

    i think canon has a website?
    it might have a help number.

    it did when I needed it.
    Crownfield, Apr 29, 2005
  9. ben via

    Colin D Guest

    Don't bother with connecting the camera to the PC, get a card reader
    instead. The 300D (i have one) uses usb 1.1, and is deadly slow
    downloading images. A usb 2.0 card reader is not expensive and
    downloads a lot faster.

    Colin D, Apr 30, 2005
  10. ben via

    PC Guest

    It took me 2 hours to download 373 jpeg large photos from 300D to PC.
    Anyone know how much time can be save if I use USB 2.0 card reader to do
    those download?
    PC, Apr 30, 2005
  11. ben via

    Frederick Guest

    373 images is probably going to take a couple of minutes or so. The
    limiting factor when changing from USB 1.1 to USB 2.0 is the speed at
    which data can be read from the card, and written to the HD on your
    computer. IIRC, about 6 - 10 mb/s from a compact flash card is typical.
    Frederick, May 1, 2005
  12. aOn Sun, 01 May 2005 20:45:43 +1200, Frederick

    a firewire cf card reader would be a lot faster
    Gary MacKenzie, May 1, 2005
  13. ben via

    Alan Browne Guest

    I think your problem may be somewhere else. I have a USB 1.1 interface
    on my PC and it takes less than 15 minutes to unload a 1 GB card (in
    camera) when it is nearly full.

    Alan Browne, May 1, 2005
  14. ben via

    Alan Browne Guest

    Correction. I just uploaded 1 GB from my camera via USB 1.1.
    8 minutes. (81 JPG / 81 RAW / 81 THM).

    Alan Browne, May 1, 2005
  15. ben via

    Frederick Guest

    Would it?
    I haven't tried - but USB 2.0 speed is 480 mb/s - about 50 times faster
    than the data can be read from the card. The bottleneck isn't the the
    theoretical transfer speed of the bus.
    Frederick, May 1, 2005
  16. Alan Browne wrote:
    That exceeds the raw data rate of USB 1.1 (16Mb/s versus 12Mb/s).

    David J Taylor, May 2, 2005
  17. Frederick wrote:
    SanDisk SD Ultra II card - read speed 10MB/s (bytes/second) or 80Mb/s

    That make the USB 2.0 hi-speed interface (480MB/s) just 6 times faster,
    not 50 times.

    David J Taylor, May 2, 2005
  18. ben via

    Frederick Guest

    Good lord. (I confused my bits and bytes)
    That means that if Moore's law keeps up (for flash card read/write
    speeds), in a few years a firewire card reader will be faster than USB
    2.0 , and the OP will be correct.
    Frederick, May 2, 2005

  19. USB2 does not have a guaranteed sustined rate.

    IEEE1394 ( firewire/ilink ) does. It has to due to it's requirement to
    handle dv footage which must be constant and fixed rate.

    1GB over firewire would take approx 1hr/13 = less than 5 minutes.
    Gary MacKenzie, May 2, 2005
  20. ben via

    Alan Browne Guest

    I realize that and I was surprised myself. But

    1) the card was full (a couple hundred K short of 1 GB) and,
    2) it took a little less than 8 minutes to upload and,
    3) the USB on my computer is most definitely 1.1.

    I don't know if compression is possible in this case? (Using XP, seeing
    the camera CF memory as a mounted drive).

    Alan Browne, May 2, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.