BMFin

Ok, I didnt know that. Thanks Any sample footage with OIS in freefall ?

Basically all camera bodies are suitable, but remember that there might not be "ready made" mouth switches for the less popular brands/models. Also remember that Canon has the best range of lenses availeable. Personally I use Canon because of the lenses. Nikon has also nice lenses, but IMO sony is far far behind..

If you are buying new, I would recommend getting CX130 or newer since they shoot progressive (60p)

I had the same problem with another lens http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3904576

Ok. thanks for the info. I think Im going to shoot HD from now on like you suggest. Im suprised you advice exporting to MP4. I thought the easiest way would be to export to the same format as the source was ? (.mpg -> .mpg) This way there is less converting going on etc... Am I wrong ? With the CS4 im actually not "deinterlacing" especially, Im simply just choosing 25 progressive from the customized export settings just before I execute the export task. Is there a special way to deinterlace the footage before exporting ? Thanks.. Johnmatrix: I think the media encoder is slightly different with CS4.

Last weekend I shot tandems with a borrowed Sony CX105E. The editing phase turned out to be more complicated than I thought. I wasnt quite sure which sequence presets I should choose in premiere. I guess I just dont know what Im doing... I was shooting SD HQ and as I undestand it I should be choosing something like AVCHD 720x576 25i (am I right ?) Premiere CS4 wont let me choose this so I just go for the DV-PAL When exporting the video, again I have lots of choises. My goal is to create a videofile aimed for viewing with a computer. At this point I think I need to render a progressive file, since not nearly all media players deinterlace footage as you play it. (am I right?) So I render a MPEG2 720x576 25p The result looks ok, but its not really as smooth as I would have wanted. Im guessing this is because the CX105 footage is interlaced and converting it progressive makes it look a bit weird.. So couple questions: 1)what sequence presets do I choose? 2)what export settings should I choose ? 3)If my goal is to create progressive footage for computer viewing, would I be better of shooting with a camera that captures progressive ? Thanks for any help!

Thanks for the replys everyone. I think Im gonna go for the good old Sony CX105 workhorse. Rendering times and easy usage are important factors when filming tandems.

I need a new video for tandems. Im thinking either Contour HD or Sony CX105 (or CX115) Any experiences with the Contour on tandem videos?

Here is some 7D footage after twixtor http://www.vimeo.com/13557939

I actually think that often DZ.com offers you actually more objective information than you might get at the dropzone. If you post a question here, hundreds of different people are going to read it. At the dropzone you will only hear one persons opinion, and even though he might have thousansa of jumps and lot of experience, he might be wrong or he might say something for a fact, even though there might be several other good and valid responses also. Here on dz.com it is MUCH MUCH more likely that this kind of disinformation will be spotted by others and it will be corrected. On a debateable subject you will learn there might be several good answers when you read these forums. On the dropzone you wont always get to hear all these different opinions. Some people tell how their student learned something wrong on DZ.com. Well I think MUCH more often I hear how someone recieved bad info on real life and no one was there to cerrect him. In this way dz.com might be actually more reliable source of info.

1.May I ask you what else would you expect them to do than file a lawsuit ? They dont seem to have any other choise do they ? 2.What is the question you would like them to answer to you by email?

Minimum focus distance is about 30cm which is about 12 inches.

This lens is manufactured by samyang. It is also marketed as bower and some other labels. They are all identical lenses. Only the name is different. I have made some hand held self portraits with it. I have also dropped my camerahelmet including this lens from about 1000 feet. Lens is still as good as new. Some of the first jumps i had problems with it fogging up. I still havent made enough jumps with it to really tell how often this happens. See some of my pics here http://www.flickr.com/photos/23307727@N08/ Search this forum for samyang to find more info.

Yeah, it seems the FAA has delegated the authority to regulate these gear issues to the manufacturers.

I think the answer is obvious. European manufacturers wont try to ban people using some gear, since they dont have the authority to do it in the first place. Sure they may give recommendations about how to use their gear, and what accessories should be used with their gear, but they cannot ban someone from using a piece of gear what ever that means. In the US, the situation seems a bit different since the manufacturers are given the power to "ban" riggers from packing gear in a manner that deviates from procedures approved by the manufacturer. (14 CFR Part 65.129 for example) In europe manufacturers are not the ones that may decide these things. It is the aviation authority.(IMO this is how it should be) BTW. I think the Dutch "ban" by the authorities, might be against EU-competition law, since it is being sold legally in other EU-countries and therefore be against atricle 28 EC. On the other hand it might be justified by the atricle 30 EC ?? Interesting question.

It is a US question

Obviously yes and thats how it should be. My point is that in the US the manufacturer is given by law the power to actually inhibit people even using this "non approved" gear in the first place. They are not allowed to use this gear even on their own risk.

No, because obviously the student harness is an essential part of the whole harness container system. However you can fit the Dual Hawk system with a HOP-330 for example. I havent given much thought to this, but I find the issue someworth debatable. Imagine if Javelin and UPT issued bulletins that only PD canopies are to be used with their gear. Soon PD would be in monopoly. Im not saying that "banning" argus is wrong. It may very well be justified. All im saying is that I find it interesting that manufacturers are given (by law) the sole power to decide what gear to use with their products. To me it seems a TSO (technical standard order) would be the more appropriate istitution to make such decisions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive_monopoly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law

Out of curiosity, since Im not fully aware of US regulations, I ask this: What kind of effect does this action from manufacturers have? I mean isnt this just an advice from manufacturers that they dont consider argus as reliable ? In other words every jumper should still be able to make their own decisions about this since this is not an FAA regulation or anything binding ? EDIT: With a quick glance on the Sunpath bulletin I found this: "it could now be a violation of 14 CFR Part 65.129(e) if a certificated parachute rigger were to pack a Sun Path Products, Inc. harness and container system with an Argus AAD installed." This brings me to another question: Does the MFG have free hands on deciding what products are suitable with theirs and what not ? If so, I see potential legal issues in terms of competition law..

Ok, I will Medium: Crossfire2 Medium/Long: VX JVX Longer: Katana NEOS Extreme: Velo Comp Velo Now Im happy. The reason why I thought this bible is valuable to the OP is that IMO it is good to know that the icarus family canopies generally forces one to use a bit different technique than the PD family. (with the exemption of the NEOS, which I felt was trimmed rather steep for an icarus canopy and perhaps flies more similar to the PD wings) Im not trying to undermine your experience. Rather trying to discuss this based on my limited experience.

Lots of good advice there Im sure. But Im suprised you categorise XF2 together with katana and Velos together with VX´s The way I have understood it is that the mentioned PD canopies in general have longer recovery arcs than the icarus comparables. Dont you think a Katana dives more than a VX and therefore the katana should at least be in the same class with VX´s if not higher ? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2359351#2359351

Wider range is safer. Try out that XF2 your buddy has and see what you think. You will find out that KA has much wider range than XF2.

The smallest sabre2 I have flown was 120, so I can't really compare. I would guess they are about the same. Many someone else knows better?

I agree completely. XF has a smaller marginal for a good recovery and it is harder to swoop. I tested the NEOS last summer briefly and IMO it felt much more like velocity than what I was expecting from an Icarus canopy. Much steeper trim and longer recovery arc. If I could choose my progression again, I think I would want to learn the fundamentals on Sabre2 and then move on to NEOS. I dont think I would go for the XF2 at all..