DSE

"HDV" lens is indeed marketing BS. The term "HDV" can *only* relate to a tape format, nothing else. "HD" lens however, is not BS. Lens resolution, MTF, chroma timing are documented going back more than a century. Everyone in the production world is well aware of the different resolve of various grades and forms of glass. The glass must be matched to sensor size and distance from the glass. You (or anyone else) should do this, if you are skeptical; Grab any HD camcorder. Doesn't matter whose you use. Tack up a piece of newspaper. Put the camera in wide, walk the camera up to the newspaper so that the newsprint fills the entire frame. Shoot 10 seconds. Now put on any low line count lens (such as the crap wides that most skydivers seem to use). If you have a Royal, Century, and/or Raynox, do the same with these, too. Shoot again. Capture, put both in your NLE. Put the shots side by side in a split frame. This is better done with a resolution chart, we use the industry standard EIA 1956 chart. Then come back and tell us that resolution at the lens is BS.

"I'm a moron, this is my wife, She's frosting a cake with a paper knife, All that we've got here so nicely displayed, it's a little bit cheesy, but American made.... DZ's got the Flakes!"

Both the HC5/7 beat hell on the HC3 in low light. The 5/7 are similar in low light. However, low light is the after sundown jumps, or very near sundown jumps. It's when the cam starts kicking in gain. Outside of the ClearVid chips and better DSP, the only additional benefit of the HC5/7 over the 3 is the XV color, which is indeed a difference, especially if you start editing with Vegas 8Pro and use 32bit float modes. The color quality will scare you

http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF5.html will help. Century and Raynox are bigger, but do have greater resolution. I'm really hoping to soon see a small profile lens that has great resolution capability...

I'll bet he sure as hell wouldn't have 5+ wraps around his hands when he does.

Maybe some graphite on the hinge? I've only got around 400 jumps on mine, but it cuts away very easily. I've been checking the cable about once a month or so, when I also check the screws, etc on the helmet. I've twice lubed the cable with silicone, same thing used on my cutaway cables, but it was easy to cut when I first got it, too.

Excellent! Congrats to all three.

Aahhhsoo my young camera dude...not only possible, but wonderful There is zero difference in resolution when dealing with HD modes for PAL and NTSC. In fact, there no longer is a PAL nor NTSC when dealing with HD; it's all ATSC, or "Advanced Television Standards Committee stuff. All you're doing is converting 50i to 60i or 25p to 30p. Fortunately, it's very, very easy. Just import the 50i AIC footage to a 60i sequence or project. Output. Done. Zero quality loss. You *might* see some slight motion blurring due to the added frames, depending on the content.

I discovered electricity...I just didn't invent it. One day I decided to wire a lunchbox (power grid for studio lighting) without killing the breaker. A-it's only 110. B-I wasn't gonna manage to touch neutral or earth to hot, so no big deal. Pliers had another idea. Between the now-welded together pliers, and the permanent scar on my palm...I feel I genuinely discovered electricity that day. I don't see anything wrong with any Tom, Dick, or Harry running out to buy an off the shelf camera, helmet, ringsite, recording indicator, etc if they've got the requisite number of jumps and recommended skills. Whether they'll be able to shoot good video/photos remains to be seen, as that's talent, not technical. We've all seen crappy photos from photogs with thousands upon thousands of jumps, and we've all seen great pix from guys with a few hundred jumps. Either you have an eye, or you don't. Either you develop one, or you don't. Jump numbers help, but at some point it's no longer flying skills but rather the quality of your eye, IMO. but damn....we're now into a much deeper subject than "Where did LANC go?"

So permanent, life-long soldering burns indicate that I'm a true vidiot? All that said....I don't think that anyone can dispute that there is nothing wrong with taking advantage of technology as it rolls forward. Having LANC made a lot of things easier in the professional production world, and has some side bennies for skydiving. Fortunately they're keeping it available on the professional grade gear.

My reasoning behind it is multifold; ~instructor can see what they're doing, and respond accordingly. ~Sometimes, a student may disagree with an instructor based on reasons of what may appear to be intuitive, but may still be wrong. As a result, they come here looking for an argument that they can present or at least consider with regard to their instructor. ~Perhaps the specific DZ has unique landing situations, common winds, obstacles, or other exclusionary situations that can only be addressed by someone who is aware of the possibilities surrounding the "true" reason for the questioning. ~And sometimes I'm lazy and don't want to type the answer to a question that has been probably asked a hundred times. Remember, I used to ask really dumb questions, now I just ask the not-quite-as-dumb questions.

The post referred to doesn't make any sense, because it refers to "flying wing" without horizontal speed, and a "collapsed wing" which refers to having more horizontal speed. Both are incorrect or at the least, very odd descriptions. A "flying wing" (if I understand the intention) actually has greater horizontal speed, while a "collapsed wing" (again,if I understand the intention) probably refers to a flared/braked wing, which then has less horizontal speed but potentially greater vertical speed. "Collapsing" to me, anyway, describes the stall point of a canopy. The only time you want the stall point near the ground, is just prior to your feet touching. Additionally, the post refers to how the winds may be. Flaring is very similar in no wind and high wind, the differences are how fast you flare. However, this isn't really easily explained to a low-number jumper, IMO. Otherwise, they might not flare at all in a high wind. High winds don't mean that you adjust how much you flare. IMO (I'm sure someone will correct me) one should always flare the same, regardless of upwind, no wind, or downwind. You may finish at a different point due to speed being bled off, but the flare itself remains the same. With jump numbers of 30 or so...I'd imagine/hope that you're still in the mode of a two (or some DZ's three) stage flare.

Already being discussed Not directly skydiving-related.

The top box in that image would be huge. Big enough nearly for two CX placed end to end. The smaller TRV box would still be big, but it would definitely fit. You don't want to cram a lot of foam around the sides of these camcorders though...they get hot. Well...not hot. Very warm. The owners manual, pissy weak as it is, recommends not letting the cam get too warm.

No one *yet* makes a box for the CX. I'd expect one fairly soon. If you have an HC3 box, you can set thick foam beneath the CX and it fits "reasonably" well, but I sure wouldn't buy a box just to modify the insides. I happen to have a couple HC3 boxes lying around.

CineForm is supported for Sony Vegas and Adobe Premiere. If you're using Sony Vegas, VASST has a product called GearShift that manages the MTS to M2T conversion very nicely. ::Disclaimer::GearShift is my brainchild, and therefore I personally benefit from any purchase of the software.::

Anyone got a Hawkeye with a cutaway on it? A guy at our DZ is not wanting to jump his Hawkeye without a cutaway, and I couldn't find anything for him. Suggestions?

Nothing seems like nothing to me; I wasn't around back "in the day." What I do know is that at every course I've attended, and in several discussions with various instructors, and reading posts here...no one ever fails to talk about the evaluator that failed someone "simply because he didn't like them." Or "It didn't use to be about whether you passed the course, it's whether you got the examiner to like you." I don't disagree, there certainly are coaches (and AFFI's, TI's) that have the rating that probably shouldn't, and haven't got the skills that the rating should present. There are police officers, teachers, firefighters, etc. that shouldn't be doing what they're doing either. The answer isn't global on either side of the argument. I learned a lot in my coach course, maybe I'm not what you want me to be, and I know I'm not where I want to be. But at the end of the day, I paid my money, I learned the material, I use what I learned as a starting point for where I want to go, and I'm comfortable with my progress, probably no different than anyone else that has obtained the rating. I got it so that I might be able to make a positive difference in someone else' skydiving ability, and feel it's bullsh** for someone to want to take that opportunity away from all parties involved. Look at the recent statistics; it's skygods that are killing other skydivers, not coaches. Most coaches are probably just doing the best they can as they work their plan. But it'll probably never be good enough for the skygod mentality.

Never before had this crossed my mind. Thank you for bringing it up.

Unbeknownst or misunderstood by most...Sony is an umbrella company. The divisions within Sony compete with each other with a ferocity of Microsoft and Linux. Many divisions have competing products. What sucks especially is when you see the OEM division buying non-Sony product even though they make the very product they're buying. A couple cases in point....ever notice a Sony VAIO comes with Adobe Premiere installed but Sony develops Sony Vegas? Or... When the consumer division made the HC1 and Broadcast wasn't expecting it, so the consumer version was phased out in favor of the A1U professional version of the camcorder? It's seriously messed up. So....Sony Electronics has to pay a royalty to their sister company that manages OEM.

There is sort of already a device like this, but yours appears much more simple to operate, so yes...there likely is a place for it. DVInfo.net and CreativeCOW are where you'll want to hang and let folks know about it.

But, but, but, but...Jimmy! Using a mirror is SO uncool. And then there is the safety side. You might biff on landing and then the mirror shatters, driving shards of cheap glass coated with toxic chemicals into your leg or midriff! Seriously, with no LANC, your mirror idea is likely the best one, since if there is no start/stop access via switch....gotta touch the camera anyway.

Sony Electronics OEM owns the LANC protocol. Building it into a camera requires a license. A license costs $$. Canon dropped LANC from their consumer cams, and Sony consumer dropped it. Pro-sumer and professional products will continue to offer it. In fact, the newly announced HDR 1000U has a LANC on it as well. LANC doesn't serve as well in a non-taped based format, simply because there is no start/stop mechanism/protocol like there is for tape. However, they seem to forget that zoom, focus, aperture, start record/stop record are all LANC-accessible features that not everyone can use with an IR remote. that said....be on the lookout for new products that can indicate record without a LANC port.

Well hell...based on this thread and skygod-like responses to it... the USPA and every other governing organization should simply do away with ratings, tests, evaluations or any other measurement of anything. It's apparently all about the money. The time some have spent in classrooms, thousands of $$ on jumps and learning...it's all meaningless if half this thread is credible. Let's just go (back to) a good ole' boy system where if you're my buddy, you can take this kid on his AFF, and if you're not my buddy...go somewhere else. Doesn't matter how good you may be...you're my pal, so you must be OK. It's worked in government, and it apparently was the past history of this sport too. Bring back the good ol' boys days.

We have three different radio freq's, so up to three AFFs can be in the air at once. It's very rare to have all three, but two in the air at once is very common. Oft times, the chief instructor or DZM is on the radio with them from deployment until the instructor lands. Someone on the ground is always there with the radio however, until the instructor lands, simply in the event that the instructor has a mal or other issue with landing immediately where the radio control is located.