Shouldn't this be under general chit-chat?
Almost all personal lines Homeowners polices allow you to add a Camera Floater to your policy where you schedule your equipment and value it. This is a special form designed to cover cameras and is world wide in most cases which is what you want. it has a separate deductible and rating. You do not want it covered under your homeowners policy if you can avoid it. Typically the coverage is "All Risks" which means if there isn't a specific exclusion then it is covered. This puts the responsibility onto the insurance company to prove it is not covered rather than you proving that it is. Big difference. Rates vary somewhat form state to state.
I did the same thing hiking through the woods. Lens hood protected the lens but I got a dent in the barrel. I sent it back to Canon and it was fixed in a week. Cost me over $400 bucks though. Almost half what I paid for the lens. But I am glad I did it. I think I now have a new lens.
Does the church have a big panoramic window in the back which allows a large view of the mountains? If so, did you take any pictures through that window which showed the inisides of the church?
cthahn wrote:
Nothing to do with photography. Just to get your name in print.
He posted it properly in Chit-Chat (non- photography). You owe him an apology.
A suggestion. When you post, especially if a question, make your comment as specific as possible. When you leave a subject wide open is when you seem to get the most sarcastic responses as it allows the respondents way too much leeway. P.S. I try not to be sarcastic on this forum, and there is a lot of opportunity but in real life I just can't help myself. Here is an infamous sarcastic quote I think you'll like. "If only closed minds came with closed mouths!"
I hope this article ends the tat controversy. Why someone would even ask such a question is beyond me. One only has to go out in public, especially on a hot day to see all of the tattoos they could ever want to see. Tattoos make no sense to me but then again I am 67 and on the conservative side. Small ones in discreet places are ok I guess. I have always felt people that got tattoos are the same people that stand out in a crowd, the same people that have trouble containing themselves but again, that is just my opinion. I suspect if you tracked down the people that put flowers on the side of the road where a friend or relative was killed... you would see a lot of tattoos.
But research backs me up. I do hope to some day see a tattoo that looks good to me. But then again I am only 67...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/reef-karim-do/psychology-of-tattoos_b_2017530.html Oh, and please don't shoot the messenger.
This is just like Nikon vs Canon. every one trying to justify why they paid so much for their cameras... I say spend as much as you can afford and be happy with it.
What do you mean, "when they have been processed?"
I have to say I am not a big fan of the Nikon vs Canon debates that occur on occasion but I also have to say if you filter-read there is some valuable information in there. Stuff you find out and I don't know how else you would. It is unfortunate that people get offended but there is also some humor to be had as well.
It just seems to me, when you know it is going to be a controversial subject, the first person to respond would ask the writer to be more specific and everyone else would wait until they were. Then maybe we could just deal with the subject and not what you want to say as a responder thinking you know what the question is when often it isn't that clear. Just my thoughts....
Welcome. Some newbie advice. BEFORE you ask a question, go to the Search function first. Believe it or not, most of the dumb questions have already been asked.
Secondly, if you do ask a question please be specific. If it involves your camera or lens state that. If you take mostly landscape photos, state that. Don't ask, "What is the best camera?" type questions and hopefully you won't get the sarcastic answers some of us are famous for.