*** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

[OlyFlyer]

[250swb]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

I have never heard of the case you state of the proper Olympus RM-CB1 damaging the E3's remote socket. Can you link that for us?

I have heard of JJC RM-CB1 clone remote plugs damaging the E3's remote socket because it has happened to me.

The problem with the JJC unit is not universal, but you take a punt on the quality control when you buy them. I have had two, and the first one worked perfectly with the E3, but due to the tripod falling over in heavy wind the 'RM-CB1' (clone) plug broke. However the next one ordered pushed my E3's socket into the camera body because the internal/buried brass tubes of the plug, that accept the pins of the socket, where out of alignment. Cutting the plug open shows that the tolerances are very fine for it to work, or not work, and they look like they could rattle out of position in use.

It is easy enough to pull the E3's socket back into position with a pair of fine nosed pliers because it is simply mounted in a tight fitting rubber grommet, although if you don't have the skill do this send it back to Oly to repair. But on the other hand the Olympus RM-CB1 remote is far better made than the JJC unit, in every respect, and I find it hard to understand how this unit pushed the E3 socket into the body unless it was a totally cack handed person doing it.

If anybody is interested I have invented a modification to help attach the RM-CB1 if you have big fingers, or cold fingers. It is a rubber tap washer with the centre hole drilled out to be a fraction under the diameter of the knurled ring on the plug. This pushes over the knurled ring and gives a much bigger hold on the tiny ring.

Steve

[OlyFlyer]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

I can't link to the problem caused by the Oly original because it was told to me personally, by someone. A known forumer on another forums, but since he has not posted anything about it, I won't tell you his name or alias.

I think if the camera contacts are just held by a rubber ring it is very bad quality, or they missed out a nut to hold the whole thing in place. I tried to push mine with a tooth pick, but it feels as it is not moving regardless how hard I push. Of course, there must be a limit, but it really feels as if I'd need to use more force than I would use with any electronic contact or button, before it gets damaged. Mine really feels like it is firmly glued or held by a nut.

[250swb]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

I think if the camera contacts are just held by a rubber ring it is very bad quality,

Mine really feels like it is firmly glued or held by a nut.

Your reasoning may be a case of thinking your cup is half empty instead of half full.

Look at it this way, if somebody does accidentally mis align the plug or use a faulty plug and screws it into the body socket, instead of simply forcing the pins inwards the pins with nowhere to go would be bent, causing permanent damage. As it is the innards of the socket can simply be pulled back out again. So I don't see it as a design flaw.

As regards the force needed to push the pins into the body the mechanical advantage offered by the threaded ring on the plug should not be ignored, and is probably greater than your tooth pick. However if you are still in doubt I would be happy to demonstrate that the insides of the socket on your camera will move if enough force is applied.

Steve

[OlyFlyer]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

Your reasoning may be a case of thinking your cup is half empty instead of half full.

Look at it this way, if somebody does accidentally mis align the plug or use a faulty plug and screws it into the body socket, instead of simply forcing the pins inwards the pins with nowhere to go would be bent, causing permanent damage. As it is the innards of the socket can simply be pulled back out again. So I don't see it as a design flaw.

As regards the force needed to push the pins into the body the mechanical advantage offered by the threaded ring on the plug should not be ignored, and is probably greater than your tooth pick. However if you are still in doubt I would be happy to demonstrate that the insides of the socket on your camera will move if enough force is applied.

Steve

Why do I feel hosility here in your post?

Firstly, I must say it is not about bending pins, at least not in the two cameras I know of.

Secondly, why do you assume people are stupid, not able to figure out how to insert that simple thing?

Thirdly, the bad version of JJC remote had, due to the flat surface had no alignement key feeling.

Fourthly, IMO if you can push the contact block into the camera using a tooth pick, tha camera is badly made. I promise you, you can't do that with my camera unless you use a great deal of force. You'd probably need a hammer as well.

In the end, my opinion is that a camera of this caliber and price should be protected against this kind of accidents (or stupidity if you like). It is extremely easy engineering to provide that protection, so there is no excuse for Olympus on this one. It is also possible that this was just another quality issue from the first series.

I don't know what you mean by:

mechanical advantage offered by the threaded ring on the plug should not be ignored, and is probably greater than your tooth pick

My "tooth pick test" was done this way: pushing each individual pin to a limit I regard they should hold and then pushing the plastic block which holds the three pins. The threaded ring has nothing to do with it, and in fact the threaded ring should not add any force, it is there to hold the contacts in place to prevent accidental removal of the cable.

Lastly, of course, with great enough force we can break anything, we are as I said, not stupid. But great force or mis alignement is not the case here. I am sure if you can push the pins or the plastic block holding the pins into the camera body using a wooden tooth pick without using too much force, than they missed out something in your camera. The rubber gasket around the contact block is not made to hold everything. At least not in my camera. But if you feel safe with that solution, that is your business, since it is your camera. I know I would not be happy if I could push it into my camera body, which I can not.

Last lastly, my cup is as it is, it has nothing to do with the problem, which for me personally is not a problem at all. I was just trying to help others not to end up in a situation two people I know of ended up with. If the thing is held by a rubber ring only, than my cup is not even half empty, it is empty. That is a very weak point in an otherwise fine and high quality camera. It would be a shame if it would be done that way in every camera, which fortunatelly not seem to be the case, as my camera is OK, so my cup is not half empty nor half full, it seems to be full.

[250swb]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

There is no hostility in my post, I am just pointing out that not everything may be as you think. After all, it has happened to me in real life, and you are only basing your post on an unattributable second party for your information.

The threaded ring has nothing to do with it, and in fact the threaded ring should not add any force

I think you are misunderstanding what is meant in engineering terms by 'mechanical advantage'. It is the same as the use of a lever, you get a mechanical advantage by using a lever to lift a heavy weight. Likewise, screwing the ring of the plug onto the socket you get a similar mechanical advantage where the force used can appear light, but is multiplied if the plug is pushing against the pins of the socket, rather than simply engaging and locking the plug in place.

And your theory about why it should happen is simply a theory, with no practical experience of what is causing the problem with the JJC unit. I on the other hand have had it happen and also discovered WHY it had happened, and it isn't anything to do with the plastic part of the plug. Perhaps if the black plastic was badly moulded it could give rise to the problem, but ANOTHER genuine option is that I discovered that it was the internal brass tubular connectors inside the plug that go out of alignment and push against the pins instead of slipping over them. So you can be completely UN-STUPID and sensible in attaching the plug to the socket, and the still end up forcing the pins into the body as you tighten the locking ring. If only you had actually read my first post I wouldn't have had to repeat that for you.

So I have suggested nothing that implies I assume people are stupid in not being able to insert a remote plug into a socket, so you can back off with your mis representation of what I said. I do however understand that accidents happen. Otherwise, going by your outburst, we can all assume Olympus think E3 users are all stupid because they put locks on the battery and card doors.

Your misrepresentation continues by suggesting I have been pushing the pins and mounting block into the camera with a toothpick. Where did that come from, you are the one with the toothpick!

I think if you want a discussion you should use some facts every now and again, on the off chance that information can be imparted. Otherwise if you carry on you'll only have people inspecting the end plastic bit of their JJC plugs when the problem may be inside it, as was mine. So if you want to reject my practical evidence of the faulty plug go ahead, but please don't doom other photographers by insisting your idea is the only one. I'm not responding to you any more, you are unable to hold a reasonable discussion about facts.

[OlyFlyer]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

There is no hostility in my post, I am just pointing out that not everything may be as you think. After all, it has happened to me in real life, and you are only basing your post on an unattributable second party for your information.



I think you are misunderstanding what is meant in engineering terms by 'mechanical advantage'. It is the same as the use of a lever, you get a mechanical advantage by using a lever to lift a heavy weight. Likewise, screwing the ring of the plug onto the socket you get a similar mechanical advantage where the force used can appear light, but is multiplied if the plug is pushing against the pins of the socket, rather than simply engaging and locking the plug in place.

And your theory about why it should happen is simply a theory, with no practical experience of what is causing the problem with the JJC unit. I on the other hand have had it happen and also discovered WHY it had happened, and it isn't anything to do with the plastic part of the plug. Perhaps if the black plastic was badly moulded it could give rise to the problem, but ANOTHER genuine option is that I discovered that it was the internal brass tubular connectors inside the plug that go out of alignment and push against the pins instead of slipping over them. So you can be completely UN-STUPID and sensible in attaching the plug to the socket, and the still end up forcing the pins into the body as you tighten the locking ring. If only you had actually read my first post I wouldn't have had to repeat that for you.

So I have suggested nothing that implies I assume people are stupid in not being able to insert a remote plug into a socket, so you can back off with your mis representation of what I said. I do however understand that accidents happen. Otherwise, going by your outburst, we can all assume Olympus think E3 users are all stupid because they put locks on the battery and card doors.

Your misrepresentation continues by suggesting I have been pushing the pins and mounting block into the camera with a toothpick. Where did that come from, you are the one with the toothpick!

I think if you want a discussion you should use some facts every now and again, on the off chance that information can be imparted. Otherwise if you carry on you'll only have people inspecting the end plastic bit of their JJC plugs when the problem may be inside it, as was mine. So if you want to reject my practical evidence of the faulty plug go ahead, but please don't doom other photographers by insisting your idea is the only one. I'm not responding to you any more, you are unable to hold a reasonable discussion about facts.

Read your post once again, please. You are still very hostile and even more trying to insinuate I am stupid, when in reality you are not reading my posts. I never said YOU pushed the pins with anything, definitely not a tooth pick. I, on the other hand did push MY pins and MY camera contact block to test MY camera with a tooth pick before I used my JJC remote because I already knew about some people having problems. If it can be pushed in with a tooth pick than it is probably something wrong with the camera (yours or mine) because I can not push in my contacts. Everything else is in YOUR imagination and misinterpretation. Got that? If not, I can try again later. I can ask an Aussie or a Brit beside me to help with my poor English, if that is the problem, so we can create a shorter version for easier understanding.

What you did with you camera or how you pushed, bent or whatever you did is YOUR business. The two people I am talking about I know well enough to be able to believe what they say. ONE remote and ONE camera I have seen with my own eyes and concluded THAT remote was not like mine, it had several problems, one was the flatness, two was the fact that there was no key feeling, three was that the holes were possibly too small. I am talking about a POSSIBLE problem with others as well; how yours was I have not the slightest idea. Of course the screw offers greater force than my tooth pick, but only if one is careless and tightening it to the maximum and only if there are other problems as well. Again, you screw tutoring is just an insinuation of me being stupid, when in reality you don't seem to understand what I am saying and interpret in a very hostile way.

Your post made me regret I bothered posting this at all. Nobody else seems to be interested anyway, so why bother? Unfortunately, on this forum one can not delete his own thread, so now it will stay. I don't know what your problem is, but whatever; I think you should cool down a bit.

if you want to reject my practical evidence of the faulty plug go ahead

No, I am not rejecting anything. Of course it is a faulty plug, I saw one with my own eyes, remember? I even write about that as well. But Oly can not disclaim responsibility for a weak design, regardless how much you seem to try to defend them.

don't doom other photographers by insisting your idea is the only one

I doom no one, you on the other hand do that, as it seems. I talk in a general term and just reporting what I have seen with MY own eyes. The problem I have seen may be ONE of the problems, got it?

I bow for the photograpger in a graceful good bye on this subject. Not going to post more about this. My aim was to inform others in what I have seen, and that has been done now. I even spent some time in illustrating my thread with a few macro images. Sorry I wasted my time here.

Good bye
OlyFlyer

[Scapula Memory]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

Olyflyer,
The thread starter ( yourself) can close the thread if you want to. Look under thread tools.That way the whole thing can be cooled off in a respectable manner

[Ian]

Re: *** Warning For Jjc Remote ***

Olyflyer,
The thread starter ( yourself) can close the thread if you want to. Look under thread tools.That way the whole thing can be cooled off in a respectable manner

I have now closed this thread as suggested.

I really don't understand how, from simple beginnings, this thread got so heated

To both sides - this forum will not tolerate arguments like this. I expect people to respect posts made in the interests of others and if there is a difference of opinion, to argue your point respectfully and not 'attack' or rubbish the other person.

At the same time, if you are the subject of what you feel are unreasonable responses, please don't make matters worse by overheating things from your side. Keep things cool.

Otherwise we get in to a situation like this...

Ian