Back to my home page

BACKGROUND

I decided to get a digital camera. However, I was on a limited budget, so I looked at the cheap end of the range. My goal was to get a few photos for emailing to people rather than to produce a masterpiece! I also wanted something small, easy to carry around, and inexpensive in case it got lost or damaged. Especially since the kids were sure to want a go with it!

One of the cheapest cameras around at the moment is the Mustek Gsmart Mini. I paid about 30 pounds for it, including VAT. A major constraint was that I needed a camera which is supported by gphoto2, because I run Linux exclusively on my PC. Once I established that gphoto2 had support for this camera (albeit experimental) I decided to take the plunge. Very few other cameras at this end of the price range appeared to have any support in gphoto at all.

Despite endless googling for information about this camera (reviews, real-life experiences etc), I found hardly anything. In fact, I think I found a couple of sketchy reviews and 1 sample photo. Also, I found absolutely no information about how well the gphoto2 support worked. This state of affairs motivated me to write this page. Hopefully anybody making the same choice about whether to buy this camera can now make a more informed decision.


SUPPORT

This section discusses how well the camera is supported by the gphoto2 driver.  First of all, I have to thank Till Adam (the driver's author) that support exists at all.  Without his previous work, I wouldn't even have considered buying the camera.

In the current released version of libgphoto2 (currently 2.1.1), the 640x480 modes seem to work sometimes.  I don't think I got the 320x240 mode to work at all, and the movie mode isn't supported at all.  The 640x480 mode fails if a picture contains more than 64kbytes of image data.  In this case, the driver only downloads the remainder modulo 64kbytes from the camera and all subsequent frames are downloaded with the data skewed out of position, leading to wraparounds, colours casts etc.  This makes the enhanced 640x480 mode virtually useless, and even the standard 640x480 mode fails sometimes.

In the CVS version, the 320x240 mode works as well.

Since then, I've been working with Till to fix the remaining problems.  We believe the driver is now fully functional : all 640x480 images now seem to download correctly, and the movie mode is supported.

Since I don't know when these fixes will appear in a released version of libgphoto2, here is the source of my updated gsmart.c file To make use of this, unpack the libgphoto2 version 2.1.1 sources, and replace the camlibs/gsmart/gsmart.c file with this one before compiling. It currently emits a lot of verbose debugging information which I used when I was debugging the driver. Feel free to edit out this stuff before building! - unless you especially want to read it all. I'm afraid that once I got the code working, I never got round to tidying it up.

REVIEW

Here's my review. The plus points for the camera:

Comments that could be a plus or a minus depending on your requirements:

The minus points for the camera itself are:

So in summary:

Also, the "marketing spiel" for the camera appears to be wrong or misleading in at least these respects:


LINKS AND RESOURCES

A page about the gsmart mini2 with some useful information that applies to the mini as well. In particular, there are notes about how to play the movies with mplayer ... if only I could extract the movies from the camera :-(

How to mod the camera to allow the macro mode to focus even closer. Also some useful links.

Till Adam's page (he's the author of  the gphoto2 driver for the camera).

Source code to repair the gsmart mini support with libgphoto2 version 2.1.1

Another review of the camera

Yet another review of the camera


GALLERY

Having said all that, I have now got some useful pictures from the camera.


Here's me sitting in front of the computer. This was taken with a 60W bulb in a desklamp shining in my face. The two pictures show the raw image the camera produced, and the result after rotation + brightness/contrast adjustment using Gimp.

Here's a view of Sand Bay taken from the top of Worlebury hill. This image is unprocessed.

A couple of "still life" arrangements. These were taken at the far end of our kitchen from the window on a sunny day.

Boxes of toys. These were taken indoors, in a room with a large window, on a sunny day. I used jpegtran to rotate the Lego picture, otherwise it's untouched. The other is straight from the camera.

The lakes at the Aztec West business park, north of Bristol. One is untouched. In the other I used Gimp to remove my own shadow from the grass. Can you work out which is which ?!

The Lamb public house, Worle. This is straight from the camera too. You can see this was a dull day.

This is a picture of our spare room (in dire need of tidying up), taken at night, illuminated by just the 100W ceiling light (with lampshade). The raw picture from the camera is shown. So is my best attempt at recovering this with Gimp. It's pretty obvious that the degradation in the original has gone beyond what can be recovered; this shows the limits of the camera with too little indoor lighting. The carpet and wall colours are badly corrupted (they should be light brown and light blue respectively.)

Here's an indoor view. Lighting this corner of the room are 3x60W bulbs on the ceiling, and a 500W uplighter (on about 3/4 power) behind the TV. This lighting level seems sufficient to get an acceptable picture from the camera even without post-processing.

Sand bay on an overcast day.  The first image came direct from the camera and was taken in "enhanced" 640x480 mode.  The second was scaled up to 800x600 from this using djpeg, pnmscale and cjpeg.  Note the filesize is considerably smaller than the original even though the image is bigger!
Sand bay original thumbnail

Sand bay enlarged to 800x600

Back to my home page