 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / May 2008Why no anti theft feature?
Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft feature. Why is that? I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new SD870? > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft > feature. Why is that? What (potential) feature were you thinking of? BugBear >> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >> anti-theft feature. Why is that? > > What (potential) feature were you thinking of? > > BugBear How about a RFID bracelet or keyfob that must be within 6 feet of the camera to operate it? Actually there are a number of proposals for firearms, where the needs are fairly similar. Protecting SLR lenses seems harder though. >>> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >>> anti-theft feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > How about a RFID bracelet or keyfob that must be within 6 feet of the > camera to operate it? So you steal a camera. So it doesn't work. So you pitch it and go steal another one. Not a lot of deterrent there, IMO.  SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net >>>> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >>>> anti-theft feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >So you steal a camera. So it doesn't work. So you pitch it and go steal >another one. Not a lot of deterrent there, IMO. And after they do that 3 or 4 times and realize there's no value to a stolen camera anymore, they won't take the chance to steal another one for nothing. So that thief, who otherwise might be supplementing their lifestyle with lots of stolen cameras, is out of business. Steve >>>>> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >>>>> anti-theft feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > for nothing. So that thief, who otherwise might be supplementing their > lifestyle with lots of stolen cameras, is out of business. I think that's only possible - if possible at all on a large scale - when most cameras are so equipped. Seems like bad guys still steal cars despite measures to prevent same; I don't know if car theft has gone down significantly. But carjackings seem to have gone up; I, for one, am not convinced that I wish to be camjacked. :) SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net >>>>>> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >>>>>> anti-theft feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >I think that's only possible - if possible at all on a large scale - when >most cameras are so equipped. Exactly >Seems like bad guys still steal cars despite measures to prevent same; I >don't know if car theft has gone down significantly. But carjackings seem >to have gone up; I, for one, am not convinced that I wish to be camjacked. >:) That's because cars are now a little harder to steal without the owner so they carjack you. But the car is still valuable no matter how they get it. For it to work with a camera, it would have to be something that makes the camera worthless even if they camerajack you. Like a code you have to enter once a day or something like that. Steve > How about a RFID bracelet or keyfob that must be within 6 feet of the > camera to operate it? That's another good idea. Then if the theft is detected, the camera stops working and displays "to unlock camera, visit this web site and enter serial number using your home computer" > Protecting SLR lenses seems harder though. The lense can require a password (entered via the camera body). If wrong password, the lense would randomly focus back and forth, even if you put it in manual mode :) >> How about a RFID bracelet or keyfob that must be within 6 feet of the >> camera to operate it? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > password, the lense would randomly focus back and forth, even if you put > it in manual mode :) By the time I had operated the key fob for the camera and then entered the password for the lens, turned the key to remove the lens cap, unlock the viewfinder and remove the padlock from the shutter release the object I was going to take would have moved out of shot. John. >>> How about a RFID bracelet or keyfob that must be within 6 feet of the >>> camera to operate it? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > viewfinder and remove the padlock from the shutter release the object I > was going to take would have moved out of shot. Fine for doing tabletop shooting, though... :) SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net On 4/26/08 10:25 AM, in article JPHQj.100$uS1.24@trndny05, "peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >> How about a RFID bracelet or keyfob that must be within 6 feet of the >> camera to operate it? > > That's another good idea. Then if the theft is detected, the camera stops > working and displays "to unlock camera, visit this web site and enter serial > number using your home computer" In Spanish, as well. > On 4/26/08 10:25 AM, in article JPHQj.100$uS1.24@trndny05, "peter" > <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> > In Spanish, as well. For Spanish, press dos. SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net On 4/26/08 2:05 PM, in article pan.2008.04.26.19.05.17.835865@thurston.blinkynet.net, "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote: >> On 4/26/08 10:25 AM, in article JPHQj.100$uS1.24@trndny05, "peter" >> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > For Spanish, press dos. Si! > On 4/26/08 10:25 AM, in article JPHQj.100$uS1.24@trndny05, "peter" > <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > In Spanish, as well. Hello, George: Want to scare away thieves? Just stick a "Sigma" label on your camera! ;-) Cordially, John Turco <jtur@concentric.net> On 5/4/08 4:26 AM, in article 481D8129.3B80CBF1@concentric.net, "John Turco" <jtur@concentric.net> wrote: >> On 4/26/08 10:25 AM, in article JPHQj.100$uS1.24@trndny05, "peter" >> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Cordially, > John Turco <jtur@concentric.net> <G!> >Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >feature. Why is that? Neither does your underwear, yet they rarely get stolen. So treat your camera like you do your underwear -- keep 'em on your peron, and hidden from sight. -- Larry >> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >> feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So treat your camera like you do your underwear -- keep 'em on your peron, and > hidden from sight. And wear them three days in a row, and toss them onto the stage during a concert. >So treat your camera like you do your underwear -- keep 'em on your peron... Sorry for the typo; the above only works in Argentina. -- Larry >>So treat your camera like you do your underwear -- keep 'em on your >>peron... > > Sorry for the typo; the above only works in Argentina. And only juance. SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft > feature. Why is that? Maybe nobody's thought it of. You might be the first, but you'd be better off suggesting it to Canon rather than here. Or maybe nobody's thought of a way to implement it. What would you suggest? Retrofit a car alarm with a key fob to arm/disarm? Leash it to a big dog? You could always use one of those laptop anchoring cables, although it will limit your mobility. Unfortunately there's not much you can do that won't either add bulk and weight, or otherwise restrict its usefulness in some way. > I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a > thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new > SD870? If you're that worried about it, I'd say go with which ever is cheaper to replace. Or take both so if one walks you'll still have the other. > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has > anti-theft feature. Why is that? The most effective anti-theft measure is a brain, and most of us already have one. :-) > I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a > thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand > new SD870? Why are you going on this trip? When I travel I normally worry about maximizing picture-taking opportunities, not which gear I can most afford to lose. Paul Allen >Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >feature. Why is that? > >I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a >thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new >SD870? That really seems like a great idea. One would have to sign on to the camera with a password, at some minimally inconvenient interval, or it wouldn't respond. This could be done at the camera through a (probably cumbersome) key system, or easily through a computer connecting to the camera. If it became generally known that a camera couldn't be operated more than one week after being stolen, its attractiveness would be reduced. Although lenses are detachable, there's enough circuitry in them that the password feature could cover them, too. For those that don't want to be bothered, the password feature could be disabled by default, enabled by selection. SignatureJohn >>Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >>feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >operated more than one week after being stolen, its attractiveness >would be reduced. I think you over-rate the intelligence of a thief. The thief sees a pawnable camera, not a device that won't work without a password. I have a vehicle that doesn't have a trunk, so anything in my car is in view. Last weekend I took a short trip, and put an empty sack that originally contained 17 pounds of dry dog food in the back. When I left the car unattended, I stuck my camera bag in the sack figuring that no one would break into my car to steal a crumpled bag of dry dog food. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>>Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >>>feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >I think you over-rate the intelligence of a thief. The thief sees a >pawnable camera, not a device that won't work without a password. I would think that a pawnshop operator would think twice before lending money on a device that is likely to become valueless, and might require the possessor to demonstrate ownership. But, it's hard to tell. >I have a vehicle that doesn't have a trunk, so anything in my car is >in view. Last weekend I took a short trip, and put an empty sack that >originally contained 17 pounds of dry dog food in the back. When I >left the car unattended, I stuck my camera bag in the sack figuring >that no one would break into my car to steal a crumpled bag of dry dog >food. That sounds like a pretty good idea. SignatureJohn > On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:18:11 -0400, tony cooper > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > That sounds like a pretty good idea. I would not be the least surprised if he went on to say that someone stole the dog food sack anyway. At least, not with the idiots around here. But yeah, barring alternatives, that was a good idea. -- YOP... >> On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:18:11 -0400, tony cooper >> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > >But yeah, barring alternatives, that was a good idea. There was a garbage worker's strikes a few years ago, one person had the novel idea of putting his garbage neatly packaged in a grocery bag, left it in the car with the window down. It went! >>>>Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >>>>feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >might require the possessor to demonstrate ownership. But, it's hard >to tell. You are still over-rating the intelligence of the smash-and-grab thief. He's not thinking "Will the pawnshop owner take this?". The thief sees something that might have value. He steals it. You, on the other hand, think that the item might not have pawnable value. That ability to logically evaluate the risk vs reward factor is one of the reasons you are able to make a living doing something other than stealing cameras. Maybe some other reasons are at play, too. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>>>>Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >>>>>feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >other than stealing cameras. Maybe some other reasons are at play, >too. Once it becomes known that cameras aren't likely to be negotiable, they won't be as attractive. Anyway, since cameras have microcontrollers and already link to computers, it would be an almost trivial addition to the code. Even if something isn't anywhere near 100% effective, it might still be worth doing. SignatureJohn >>> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >>> feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > that no one would break into my car to steal a crumpled bag of dry dog > food. No, but the dog might eat it. Dave Cohen >>>> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >>>> anti-theft feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> > No, but the dog might eat it. Beware roving packs of feral camera hounds. SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net > That really seems like a great idea. One would have to sign on to the > camera with a password, at some minimally inconvenient interval, or it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > operated more than one week after being stolen, its attractiveness > would be reduced. The only way this would work is if it were implemented on wide scale, so everyone knew that cameras had this anti theft feature. The problem then is if it is that wide spread, someone will put in the effort figure out how to bypass it, making it useless. Keep the camera in a hard case with remote control zapper with electrodes in the handle. Soon as some one takes off with it, hit the remote and zap them. Now that would be a good anti theft device and lots of fun too :) SignatureChris W KE5GIX "Protect your digital freedom and privacy, eliminate DRM, learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm" Ham Radio Repeater Database. http://hrrdb.com >> That really seems like a great idea. One would have to sign on to the >> camera with a password, at some minimally inconvenient interval, or it [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >remote and zap them. Now that would be a good anti theft device and >lots of fun too :) Or, hang it by the strap around the neck of your pit bull. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft > feature. Why is that? > > I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a > thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new > SD870? Ever heard of travel insurance? On Apr 25, 4:18 pm, snap...@mailinator.com wrote: > > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft > > feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Ever heard of travel insurance. Is there a travel insurance policy that will immediately pay for lost gear and only ask questions later? Is there a travel insurance policy that will somehow try to compensate you for photo opportunities that are potentially lost forever while you are waiting to replace your equipment? Is there a travel insurance policy that can send you back into time and let you start your triip planning anew? -- YOP... > On Apr 25, 4:18 pm, snap...@mailinator.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > -- > YOP... You need to see someone Nervous. Prudent care is one thing, that kind of worry is something else. SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit Think about it. Unless every camera had the device and most everyone used it, the thief would have your camera and be off with it before they figured out if it had a anti-theft feature. You would still loose the camera. I would bet most people, like me, would never bother. I keep my camera with me so it is not really at much risk. Unless you can come up with a solution that would stop the thief before he takes it, I don't see how it would be of much worth. > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft > feature. Why is that? > > I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a > thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new > SD870? SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit : Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft : feature. Why is that? : : I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a : thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new : SD870? The camera less that's attractive to a thief is the one you don't leave on the table in the food court while you go for another slice of pizza. > : Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has > anti-theft [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the > table in the food court while you go for another slice of pizza. It does not matter what camera it is. The thief probably does not know the difference between any of them. John. >> : Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >> anti-theft [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> the >> table in the food court while you go for another slice of pizza. > It does not matter what camera it is. The thief probably does not know the > difference between any of them. But opportunistic thieves are usually quite good at "looks expensive!", which is all they need to know. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] >>> : Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >>> : feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > But opportunistic thieves are usually quite good at "looks > expensive!", which is all they need to know. All they need to know is, you might be carrying an effective deterrent. http://snipr.com/25x94-dr3wh1 which can do this http://snipr.com/25x9u-jhekd3 > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft > feature. Why is that? > > I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a > thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new > SD870? Surely even thieves have better sense than to steal Canon Rebels. > Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft > feature. Why is that? How would an anti-theft feature on a digital camera work, exactly? > I'm going on a trip and can't decide what camera is less attractive to a > thief. A 5 year old canon rebel 300D (DSLR) with kit lense or a brand new > SD870? Basing your decision on which camera is less appealing to thieves is silly. I doubt your garden variety thief really cares. If you keep a close eye on your camera and take care not to leave it unattended in public, the odds of it being stolen are very slim, so bring the camera you feel will best fit your photographic needs. >> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has >> anti-theft feature. Why is that? > > How would an anti-theft feature on a digital camera work, exactly? The unauthorized user would either get all zeroes or all ones. :) SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Blinky: http://blinkynet.net >> Cameras are one of thieves favorite targets. Yet no camera has anti-theft >> feature. Why is that? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > public, the odds of it being stolen are very slim, so bring the camera > you feel will best fit your photographic needs. The best way to find out which is the most attractive to a thief would be to leave both of them unattended and see which gets stolen. The remaining one should be the one to take on holiday, since it is very obviously less attractive to thieves. There is always the chance that both would get stolen, but then you could post here for our opinions on what new camera you should buy. Roy G ><snip> > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Roy G About ten years ago, two kids broke into my church and found a three-year-old Dell notebook and a brand new Toshiba; they stole the obsolete Dell and left the brand-new Toshiba that was sitting right beside it. The knew Dell, but it turned out they had never heard of Toshiba. The obsolete machine was more attractive to them than the state-of-the-art one. The owner of the older machine was not very upset, as he used the insurance money as part-payment on the new notebook that he had been planning to buy. Allen |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.