BMFin

quote from the newsarticle: Thats BAD ASS !

so far so good.. ` so what ?

Nice ! The time-lapse sequences in the beginning resembled Koyaanisqatsi in my eyes somehow.. A good example of what you do with DSLR video in the hands of talented people.. Great work !

Yeah, like I said, I was talking about just the slider. So far no incidents anywhere? (knock on wood) But I guess we will be having this discussion after the 1st fatality on a removable slider on terminal opening ? Personally I would opt for the removable slider just as easy as I opt for the collapsible PC. Definetly a big help even for almost everyone. The only thing that keeps me from doing this is the risk factor in terminal. Maby Im just a pussy...

How big of a risk do you see the removable slider in terminal deployments ? What I mean is that one malfunction there could be fatal...

I have a few new ones in my flickr

You need to re-read my post. Im not saying justice is being served. Im saying that if justice is, or is not being served, it is the justice systems fault not the plaintiffs fault nor the lawyers fault etc...

I think GaryP is right. Waiver doesnt give much protection for negligence and IMO this is the way it should be. In western world you cannot give someone permission to kill you. Anyways, Im stunned how everyone here is blaming the plaintiff or the lawyers etc.. If you think justice wont be served, blaim the justice system. The justice system should take care of justice being served. Not the plaintiff nor the lawyers..

I already had my eye on that canopy too, but then I read some mixed opinions on that canopy. I decided to stick with my XF2 for a while longer.. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3622742

Someone correct me if Im wrong but I hear the distance record is by Nick Batch 181.70m

I'm sure that's not *quite* what you meant, right? Getting the photo is the most important "phase." Otherwise, it's just "fixing it in post" and that's never a good idea. Post is generally for enhancing what is already great, not for fixing what isn't so great, or so it is in our house, anyway. I may have exaggerated a little. Ofcourse the importance of PP varies within different diciplines of photography. On journalistic photos the importance is very small. They are not even supposed to be post processed very much. There shooting the photo is the biggest phase.. On the other hand some advertizing photoshoots are very different. Often takes carefull planning and casting and organizing before the photoshoot even takes place. After the photoshoot the Post processing phase can take a long time. In this situation shooting the photo is quite a small phase I would say..

markowgti: I never ment to say anything bad about YOUR photos. Definetly very nice freefall photography. I was merely commenting on the importance of being able to view EXIF data in general. Your photos are exellent potential. Really sorry if in a way this implied your photos to be bad in anyway.. (they definetly are not) My point merely was that photography doesnt end where you press the shutter. It ends when you feel you have achieved the result you wanted. Thats it. IMO shooting the photo is only one small phase on the workflow towards a good photo. If you dont believe me, try to find one GOOD photo on any magazine shot by a pro that was not post processed. No one leaves their work half way. And thats why those photos that are so to say finished dont have EXIF data in them... Personally im just beginning to grasp the potential of dark room phase and post prosessing phase of digital photography. Im just about to realize how little I know about it... Anyways, very important phases in creating a photo IMO. (I go and get another beer)

Its nice, but exif in general is limited to those photos that werent edited at all. Rarely professional photographers leave their photos untouched, and those are the photos I would find interesting in terms of EXIF data anyway..

Yeah.. I heard that too. Thats pretty sick ! Btw. Are weights allowed nowadays in competitions ? I always thought that at one point the trend was to upsize to a bigger canopy and strap a lot of weight. I hear Jay and the guys were strapping even 70 lbs. The reason for this was that the bigger canopy at the same WL would swoop further. Then after some weight restrictions took place, the trend was to downsize back to smaller canopies to get the optimal WL. Was this not the case ? Why were people wearing so much weight back in the day if there was no real benefit ?

IF you have a good USM lens, I definetly think AF is the way to go. Almost never I would use center point only, because it focuses only on the centre. There are a lot of times the exact centre point would not hit the target and this would cause the AF to fail. (see the pics attached) IF you have a cheap lens with a bad AF motor, then might be better to use MF. Though even a slow AF lens could be usable if you use a mono switch that makes the camera focus constantly. Focusing on a given distance is a good idea like Teigen said, but then the photos will be sharp only at this given distance. Sure depending on the DOF on the given setup you might end up with reasonably sharp photos most of the times even if you arent exactly always at the given distance. However reasonably sharp isnt ofcourse as sharp as it could be. One other thing worth mentioning is that when filming tandems for example I like to take a variety of angles within different distances. With MF you wont have SHARP photos at docking distance and sharp photos at 30ft distance on the same jump. Basically you would need to choose which ones you want in beforehand. (just to clarify, I did use all nine AF points on the example photos and therefore they are both focused correctly)

I was also under the impression that it was a generally undisputed fact that the bigger canopy loaded the same will swoop further. (Not faster or more fun, simply further. Also not taking into account the wind factor) I also recall some people buying larger canopies and to wear lead at the same time simply to make the same WL as with their previous canopy but with a larger wing.. What was the distance world record flown with ? Velocity 120sqft ? (EDIT: it seems its not Bruno Brokken anymore but Nick Batch instead) I guess the general view on this isnt as unanimous as I thought..

I would assume he doesnt jump those on a regular basis ? But this is only an assumption.. reply] You would be wrong. He jumped both all the time. He has since up sized a little 70 something? Like I said it was only assumption. Im glad you correct this. Well, everyone can jump what they want. I wish them all good.

I would assume he doesnt jump those on a regular basis ? But this is only an assumption.. The JVX 50 video is just hilarious. With the comments of the videographer I just cant stop laughing...

A joke ! No way man ! Hes cool as hell ! (apparently sarcasm over the internet is a skill that isnt easy to master)

I waited 10 days for a lineset after I ordered one for my XF2.

Quuote frome the news: Not trying to understate the goal in this record, but AFAIK this has already been done even wihtout engines.. Therefore doing it with engines seems kind of pointless ?

Yo but seriously, these vids prove beyond doubt that JVX loaded >4.0 is the bomb ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctvTcMyQsRc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34VOLS4tiQ4 Take no substitute !

No need to use gaffers tape unless you want to.. Like I said canon offers a viewfinder cover that comes with the camera. (normally it is included in the carry on strap)

Casio EX-F1 I mean that there is no way to change optics. Ocfourse you can strap a wide angle converter there but thats not what you want from a good camera. In addition the sensor in this camera is 7.18 X 5.32mm so the cropfactor is about 5x FF. So much for the use of nice FOV and so much for finding a quality optics with such a high resolution that delivers for such a small sensor. (even if changing optics was possible) IMO the revoluionary feature with this camera is the 300-1200 fps, but at those speeds the resolution is poor and no where close to HD. So if you MUST be able to shoot 300fps this camera might be a good comprmise, but if you dont really need that High speed feature, then there isnt much this camera offers in addition. Personally I dont see a reason why I would need to shoot 300fps in freefall on the expense of picture quality..

Friend of mine had one of those for trial and he mostly shot in freefall with it. After the trial he decided not to buy it though. If I remember right the main reason was the optics. You cannot change optics on this camera. Personally I would guess 60fps in skydiving is enough for most use.. Not much use for any faster than that I guess, since most of the times theres nothing interesting happening that fast ?