shewhorn

There's a reason for it... digital has kind of been the end for the filter for two reasons... 1) It can usually be accomplished with a filter in Photoshop. There are of course exceptions such as a polarizing filter... a filter in Photoshop can't prevent light from certain angles getting to the sensor before the shot is taken (how cool would that be though, a filter that could not only manipulate photons, but go back in time to do so as well... I'm patenting it!!!) but... if you want that saturated blue sky, that's easy to do. 2) When you have two parallel, extremely flat reflective surfaces (the sensor and the filter) aligned with one another it tends to create problems with glare which manifests itself as haziness and reduced contrast in the final image. Come to think of it I can't think of a single one of my colleagues that uses filters anymore. Even a super expensive (I have a few that are over $125 bucks a pop) coated B+W UV filter will cause problems. When we switched to digital the filters pretty much got tossed in the bin. The Canon G10 does have provisions for a filter mount. It is pocketable if you have big pockets and there is a relatively cheap waterproof housing for it BUT... you can't use the filters with the WP housing. Cheers, Joe

Nothing that I'd say has good image quality but I need to bias that by saying I'm a professional photographer so I have different standards and criteria (for example... what a lens will do when you're in a high contrast backlit situation). My own little collection of point and shoots includes the Fuji F10, Pentax Optio W60, and Canon G9 (which I have a waterproof case for). The Canon has the better optical quality by far. The Fuji (even though it's maybe 3 years old) still has a really respectable sensor. I'm not sure how their current lineup does. I'm tempted to go for an Olympus Pen EP-1 with a 17mm pancake lens (which would be roughly equivalent to a 35mm prime on a full frame sensor) though... one might be taking a bit of a liberty calling it pocketable. Anyhow, the EP-1 has a 2.0 FOV crop which means the sensor is significantly larger than your typical point and shoot and the noise performance due to the larger pixels means better signal to noise at high ISOs (your images won't be as grainy (or blurry if the manufacturer applies a lot of in camera noise reduction)). All things considered from the sample images I've seen so far, given this camera's size the ISO 6400 samples are quite respectable. Other than that I don't really follow the consumer stuff so I'm afraid I can't be of much help but the website I've been posting links to is primarily dedicated to reviewing consumer gear and they do a fairly thorough job of providing you with enough info to make a good purchasing decision. I took a quick look through and it looks like the Canon SD-880 IS got a pretty decent review when put up against several other premium point and shoot cameras. Canon has since released a few higher resolution versions of that camera but higher resolution typically doesn't equate to better image quality (it's mostly driven by the marketing folks). Cheers, Joe

Image quality would be the same or worse than the W60 most likely. To make a real difference in image quality you'd have to go from 10 megapixels to 40 megapixels (a doubling of resolution) but of course that would mean that without using a larger chip, the pixel density would be higher which would mean increased heat which would mean increased noise which would mean the camera would be completely useless on an overcast day. I wish they'd go the OTHER direction. Make me a point and shoot with LESS pixels.... 6 is PLENTY for a point and shoot. Focus on high ISO quality and not a marketing number. THAT would make a REAL difference in image quality. Anyhow, the limiting factor right now on the Pentax is the piece of crap lens they have in it (I own a W60 myself... it's fun in the kayak, but it takes crap photos (something of course is better than nothing... I like using it for video myself). Cheers, Joe

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q209waterproofgroup/ This review covers several waterproof cameras. For those of you who like to read the last chapter first the conclusion is that the Canon D10 gets first place and the runner up is the Pentax Optio W60. Cheers, Joe

Wow.... this thread is a blast from the past! Actually, I did have an occasion where I became tangled in line and had to cut myself free and I'm glad I had a hook and not a regular knife as it would have seriously risked cutting my dry suit. Long story short I had a really tough launch on a steep beach with dumping surf, a window to launch came and I had to take it. Unfortunately the 80 lb test fishing line I was dragging behind me had not been stowed. Well... when I finally got past the surf zone I realized there was line all over the place and I couldn't secure my spray skirt but, of more concern was that I'd somehow tied my legs together and the line was wrapped around my legs tightly which required cutting right up against my dry suit. With 3mm gloves on I didn't have the dexterity needed to lift the line high enough to safely cut it with a traditional knife but the hook knife with a slip and a twist made quick and safe work of cutting me free of the line. Cheers, Joe

Thought some of you might be interested in this. It looks a bit more robust than the Pentax Optio W60 that I have. It also has a better waterproof rating (10 meters vs. about 3 on the Pentax if memory serves me correctly). http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/25/canon-p...hot-d10-review/ The integrated tether is kind of gimmicky for most users but for kayakers I think it's a nice touch. Cheers, Joe

It actually doesn't do very well at all in a sealed hatch. The problem with the Spot system is that the sat phone is single duplex which means that it can only send a signal, it can't receive. As a result it has no idea as to whether or not a message was sent, or if the carrier was even picked up. Basically it's sending blind messages. I've not had difficulty sending messages with the unit in the front dash (way up front) on my car provided that there are no buildings or trees around but inside the hatch... not much love there. It really does need to have a full, unobstructed view of the sky. Cheers, Joe

Hmmm... "I've heard that divers use sticks of dynamite to keep warm and avoid hypothermia. I was talking to a diver friend and they said C4 was far more effective for keeping warm... it's also a good way to go fishing... apparently"

Ha! I posted a suggestion to the Myth Busters and I also fired off a question to the USCG SAR. I doubt the Myth Busters will do a piece on it and I'm not sure the USCG will respond but there you have it.

That's the one I'd heard (and was familiar with) as well but when I went searching for the source I couldn't find it. I did find the USCG's version. I have a feeling that the USCG's version is the original and the other version got morphed some how through the years. Think about it... 50 yards is less than the length of an Olympic size swimming pool. The survival data does not in any way support that version of the "rule". That's saying 50% of the population would die swimming in 50 degree water for 2 minutes and I just can't find any data that supports that. Surely a small percentage will die, most likely those with cardiac problems but 50% seems highly unlikely given that exhaustion for 40 to 50 degree water sets in at 30 minutes to 60 minutes. I think I'm going to send this one in to the Myth Busters! Cheers, Joe

I figured I'd start a new thread on this as there seems to be several versions of the 50/50/50 rule. Someone also mentioned that someone could not survive being in 50 degree water unprotected for 50 minutes. This is not true. The chances of survival depend upon your physiology, metabolism, and the conditions that you're in but people can and do routinely survive submersion in 50 degree water without any thermal protection. In fact, expected survival time for someone in 40 to 50 degree water is 1 to 3 hours (exhaustion or unconsciousness occurs in 30 to 60 minutes), in 50 to 60 degree water it is 1 to 6 hours (with exhaustion or unconsciousness occurring in 1 to 2 hours). Obviously there are many variables and the conditions in which you're experiencing submersion will vary a great deal. If you're in rough seas and you have nothing to hang on to, chances of survival will probably be governed more by the "exhaustion" part of the equation more than anything else. The official cause of death in that case would be drowning and not hypothermia although there is of course a bit of semantics there. Because of exhaustion you can no longer swim, and thus you drown... were it not for the hypothermia... yadda yadda yadda. In calm conditions where you don't have expend as much energy swimming your survival time will go up (because the body's defense mechanism is to stem bloodflow to the extremities and protect the vital organs, the more you move, the more you draw blood flow away from those vital areas and in addition, circulating more blood to the extremities will in effect cool your body even faster). I don't know what the origin of the 50/50/50 rule is but the USCG version goes something like: If you're in 50 degree water for 50 minutes you have a 50% better chance of survival if you're wearing a PFD. Anyhow... I just wanted to put that out there as there seemed to be a bit of confusion. I'm not going to claim to be right but I did do a bit of research before posting just to double check so I think I'm right but if I'm not feel free to correct me. If I'm going to eat my words they ought to be nutritious. Cheers, Joe

10:30 is, believe it or not, quite early for me but I'm interested so I might be there, and I might not (how's that for vague). I'm assuming someone will be monitoring 72? Cheers, Joe

Just another followup thanks... I finally got around to ordering a Chase Cam mount. Got the triangular mount with the 3" extension. About $55 total, shipped. About half of what the Sticky Pod is going for. I'm excited to try it out. Cheers, Joe

Thanks Jon, I'll check them out. Little Florida (that's what I call the North Shore due to all the extremely slow and bad drivers that seem to infest the area, LOL) could work out if I schedule a session around a paddling adventure! Cheers, Joe

Found this thread: http://www.nspn.org/forum/index.php?showto...;hl=acupuncture Anyone have any folks to add to that? Location wise closer to southern NH along the 93 corridor is preferable but I can go into Boston if need be (just not as convenient). Cheers, Joe