DSE

There frequently are problems with the memory system on third-party batteries. Due to flame-ups in Australia and England, Sony will only warrant their professional cameras if you're using their brand-name batteries. I don't know what the consumer division does. I have a third-party battery one of our vidiots gave me, it reports 75% full no matter whether it's totally empty or completely charged. It gives no warning, just shuts off. One of these days I'll actually drop it off at the recycling station.

IMO, your first words tend to describe fatalism correctly, your second words seems to describe destiny. Fate and destiny are different concepts in my mind. If you believe in fate/kismet/pre-ordination, that's fine; you're resigned to whatever happens to you regardless of your actions (irresponsible view, IMO). Destiny, on the other hand...we can change. If you don't throw your hackey, walk towards the light. If you do toss your hackey, walk towards the packing area.

You're saying the 580 is only 230 USD in HongKong? Please tell me that's so, I want to buy a second 580, and I'm going to be in HongKong in a couple weeks. B&H has the 580 for $360.00 after Canon rebate. To save $130.00, I'll wait til I'm in HongKong.

I have. Just did it again to test it, based on your post. Previewing out HDMI from the HC3, monitoring on a Luma broadcast monitor, manual and/or auto focus cannot display the centerpoint in a backfocus chart. It's soft. I can see how someone might believe it's in focus, particularly using the camera display panel, but it's not actually focused. I suppose it could be said that focus is a relative concept?

On fun jumps, I occasionally jump with in-ear etymotics. I waited til my 100th jump to try it. I recommend against it unless you're the last one out, pulling high and the last one out. It's more of a sunset load treat. I also have a breakaway cable that disconnects my headphones from the MP3 player. You won't hear the wind at all, and likely can't hear your audible. Not good. The music adds a different timing to the jump, and it's very easy to become distracted. Not good. You can't play it in the plane unless it's very low, because you can't hear the PIC. Not good. With low jump #s you don't want to be fiddling with anything as you're going out the door, either. No different than a camera jump or other "special" jump, a jump with music needs to be well-thought out, you should have plenty of experience and solid awareness before planning one. I celebrated my 100th with a minibottle of wine, plastic glass, music, and a high pull. I also was flying a big boat of a 210. IMO, noise canceling won't do squat in freefall.

Well...there *is* always Photoshop.

This will vary greatly with different cameras. With an HC1/3/5/7, or the Sony CX7, you won't get more than 10%.

They're not even up to SD quality, IMO. Lines of resolution mean nothing if it's poor quality going into those lines of resolution. Far from broadcast quality. For double that much, you'll soon be able to buy an HD bullet that records to solid state. April is the expected launch date.

Like anything else from Japan packed it a box. I'd let someone else reassemble it too, unless you've got some micro clamps. Not something I've ever done with expectations of using the shell again.

Cookie's lens has a much lower profile, it's a single element lens which means no zoom through but also offers greater linearity of resolution (better image clarity at the edges). I don't fly an HC40, but you're likely going to experience some vignetting with the multi-element lens, but that can be dealt with by zooming with the lens. I'm sure someone here is flying that combination; they'd be able to give a "real-world" assessment vs my opinion of cheap multi-element lenses.

ok, because I'm curious... why is a circular polarizer not a good idea for skydiving? I understand some of the reasons that someone would want to use a polarizer (in general)... I'm just curious why there would be reasons not to use it skydiving. With a circular polarizer, you're cutting frequencies in variable amounts. In skydiving, you're not at the same horizontal position like you are on the ground. if you were to use a C/P (never linear P because most still cams are split beam and are used w/autofocus), skydiving is where a cheap filter would be better (IMO) than a good quality circular, because it won't be as accurate, and will still allow contrasts to be better. I use one occasionally, particularly when haze is nasty down below. The attached image has a circ on it, set to roughly 90 degrees. No color correction, it's just compressed. You can get away with a circ, you just need to plan on flying at somewhat proscribed angles due to the way the PL shutters/phase are placed. Additionally, it's often challenging using filters on very wide angle lenses. Reflections are a problem.

Mostly, your friend is correct. He should be able to get approx 10% of the focal length, it'll vary from cam to cam by a small amount. I don't get a zoom halfway through my Waycool, either.

We have an 88 year old man who did his first tandem two weeks ago, second tandem this week, FJC today, who wants to have AFF completed by end of year. Gene is a huge inspiration to me. Politics aside, congrats to George Sr, too.

Take the class. Brian is an amazing teacher, and regardless of your relatively low experience, what you will learn will change/improve your mental and physical approach to canopy control, IMO.

Bear in mind that once the coating on the 10-22 has been compromised, it's lost a huge amount of its value. Same goes for any lens; once the coating has been compromised....it's not repairable for any reasonable sum. 80.00 for a UV over a 700.00 lens is like an insurance policy. re; circular polarizers, not a good idea for most skydiving activities.

Maybe if you were really good at it, you could start a training camp...y'know...teach those less creative?

I'll buy a coupla squares, Strat. Why? Because we're skydivers, we look out for each other, and hopefully try to prevent this from happening. If it can't be prevented, then at least we own the right to shake our heads and say "That didn't need to happen....".

No, you missed the point. There was a huge uproar when I tried a spectre 170. Lots of people said I was a dead man etc. Just like Chris in this thread. I was spending some time reading about canopies and trying to understand some of the more critical technical points and lots of people told me that I should quit it because I would never understand rigging with only 40 jumps. The point is I think Chris flies his canopy in a reasonable fashion and lands it well. So long as he's having fun doing it big whoop. People can make a lot of online assumptions but at the end of the day they are just ASSumptions as you've never met the individuals involved nor seen them fly. -Michael 1-No one called you a "dead man." In fact after reading the thread, the only person saying "dead man" is you. 2-No one told you you should "quit it" with regard to rigging, at least not in a public post. 3-You're a beginning a skydiver with 40 jumps saying it's acceptable for someone at Chris' level to be jumping a high performance canopy in contrast to professional, full-time skydivers with combined totals of at least 50,000 jumps saying otherwise. You say "big whoop" because folks on DZ.com "haven't seen so-and-so fly (whether it's you, Chris, or whomever)? ...statistics disagree with you. At 40 jumps, you're still somewhat clueless. Like Skybytch says, "You don't know what you don't know." At 650 jumps, I'm still very much clueless. Michael, how many broken people have you seen up close and personal in this sport? Do you truly feel you have the experience, knowledge, or the right to dismiss those that have tens of thousands more times experience than you do because "they haven't seen you jump?"

You can use the math rules, or you can do it the easy way....get a protrack, altitrack, neptune, or other logging altimeter. You can buy a real logbook at just about any DZ, from dealers such as ParaGear, BadDog, etc. They range from 10.00 to 30.00 or so. Don't buy one based on price, IMO, get one that allows you space to actually write in it. Your logbook isn't just a collection of numbers, dates, and names; it's a diary that your instructor and yourself, can write about the jump. It's a lot of fun to go back and read old jump notes, IMO.

Wow. If they won't accept a printout of my JumpTrack...remind me not to jump there. It has far more information than a paper logbook... I also type copious notes in my electronic logbook. With a D license, and a printout to demonstrate my currency, I've yet to have a DZ refuse to let me jump (assuming data card is in order, etc.

Welcome to the sport! Tandems count. AFF counts. Any time you jump out of an aircraft of some sort, it counts. As far as a jump log; you need the jump legibly recorded in chronological order in an appropriate log that contains the following information: (1) jump number (2) date (3) location (4) exit altitude (5) freefall length (time) (6) type of jump (formation skydiving, freeflying, canopy formation, style, etc.) (7) landing distance from the target (8) equipment used (9) verifying signature (by licensed skydiver). I use JumpTrack from L&B as an electronic logbook, as it interfaces directly with my Altitrack and ProTrack. For at least the first 500, you'll want a paper logbook. [edited to add: You might want to start reading the Skydiver Information Manual/SIM.

If you're going to the Ranch, then look specifically for Laszlo. You'll find him to be very personable and approachable, not to mention very talented.

I predominantly use a 15mm Canon, you'll find it's common around here. Remote switches can be purchased from Conceptus or the Ranch Pro Shop, and no...it's a standard TRS plug on the camera.

I put about 400 jumps on one before moving up to a 40D. I still keep it as a backup. Great camera, not too heavy. If you buy new, consider armoring it.

Nor does skydiving. ....rather than keep bitching about the love you're missing, why not expend some of the same energy that you're putting into these threads. Contact the editors at Parachutist via email or phone call. You might be surprised at what they have to say.