My favorite: Fill the frame!
There are many mini 12VDC powered coolers on the market (see: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B072V6NTQD/ref=sspa_dk_detail_0?psc=1&pd_rd_i=B072V6NTQD&pd_rd_wg=yd4Rv&pd_rd_r=1GFX3GYRFG8YR446P0D0&pd_rd_w=EgvuK)
I've considered getting one of these and putting it behind the passenger seat for easy access to a second camera (not my "good" one, since it could be attractive to thieves) . It would only require the addition of 12V outlet that would stay on with the ignition off, but that is not too difficult. My commute is long enough so that the constant battery drain would not be an issue. My main issue has been that none of the ones I've seen have thermostatic control. The temperature inside is just some amount below ambient (usually around 35 degrees). This is probably enough cooling to protect a camera, but overnight (or on a cool day), I'd have to remember to turn it off. If I found one the right size, and with a thermostat, I might try it. I'd be interested in knowing if anyone else has experimented with one of these.
Trig Formula: Altitude = (Width/2) / (Tan(FOV/2))
So for a 94º FOV and 100' desired width: (100/2) x (Tan 47º) = 50/1.07) = 46.6' altitude
...and for 84º and 100': 50/0.9 = 55.5'
Cheers...
Yes, the progressive lenses are a big improvement over the old bifocals. The key is to be sure the lab gets the "transition" in the right spot. My experience has been that they routinely get it too low. This makes using a computer a pain in the neck (having to tilt your head back to get focus). Years ago, I had resorted to a pair of "computer" glasses, which worked ok, but I hated dealing with that second pair. It was the same curse a having to deal with readers. Then, on getting an updated prescription and a new pair of progressives, the lab somehow got it right, and I could finally toss the computer glasses. Fantastic! On my last update, the transition was again too low. Took them 2 re-makes to get it right. But they were good about it, and finally got it right. Knowing it is possible was critical.
I have noticed that others who only need "readers" never seem to have them handy, and when they do find them, they are often badly in need of cleaning. Maybe only because I have been wearing glasses "forever", but I would much prefer to just have them on all the time. With a regular morning cleaning, I am usually good all day. Over the years, there have been a few "incidents" where having them on saved me from serious eye injury. Just another 2 cents on the topic...
Yes, as I mentioned, it can be a lens defect. In that case, an implant will solve the issue. The special implants would only be needed if the defect were in the cornea (as in my case). Cheers!
An astigmatism is different than the blur caused by near-sighted or far-sighted problems (those are simply focus issues). An astigmatism is usually caused by a wave in the cornea. No relationship to the lens cataract.
Sorry, but that is only true if it were due a defect in the lens...or if the defect is in the cornea, and you get the astigmatism correcting implants.
An astigmatism is a distortion in the "optics" (typically, the cornea), so most likely your astigmatism would be unaffected...unless you sprung the extra cash (as I did) for the upgrade to the astigmatism correcting implants. My experience has been mixed. Yes, some improvement in the astigmatism, but there is some risk of complications (as I mentioned earlier). Although, my issue (implant rubbing against the iris) did not surface until after my later surgery to repair a retina detachment. So perhaps that surgery affected the location of the implant. In any case, my advice is to keep it simple with single focal implants.
When considering cataract surgery, the type of implants should be given serious consideration. This is because changing them later is a much bigger deal than getting them, with much higher risks of problems. As Incognito noted, the specialized implants that allow for both close and distance vision have some side effects that may be less tolerable for some. I went for a version that would correct for my astigmatism, being told there was no potential downside. But it turns out that the anchor “feet” are larger on those, and are now causing issues.
If you have been a long-time wearer of glasses, my advice is to go with basic implants and accept the continued need for glasses. They may be a nuisance, but they are good protection for the eyes. If you have been nearsighted, my advice is to have the implant correction set for intermediate distances. This will make for modest eyeglass corrections for both distance and close-up. Plus, it is not an exact science. They cannot guarantee 20-20 at any distance. Also, since nearsighted eyes are at higher risk of a detached retina, get to a doctor immediately at any sign of vision issues after the surgery. Should a retina repair be eventually needed, it may have the side effect of that eye being pushed a bit more toward nearsightedness. Both of my eyes have required this repair, and one had the power shift 2 diopters. Get it done, and good luck.
Such connector pins are typically a copper alloy, which "work-harden" when bent. This makes the bend area slightly stronger (and more brittle) than the "virgin" pin. So if the pin is bent at the base, pushing on the pin tip may result in a bend above the first bend (resulting in a slight "S" shape). Not what you want. So it is important to use a tube over the pin that can apply the straightening force at the bend, and not above it. And yes, it may break...but my experience has been that any pin can be straightened, at least once. Just use the right tool for best results.
I've had an occasional need to straighten pins on other electronic equipment, and found it very tricky with just a simple stick-like tool. My best results (if the pin is not bent over too much) have been with a metal tube that can slip over the pin. For this, I have had good luck using a dispensing needle of an appropriate gauge. These are essentially the same as a hypodermic needle, but have blunt tips. They are used to dispense a variety of materials in various industries. I've never worked on a CF socket, so this may or may not work well. I measured a pin on an old CF reader, and found that the inside diameter of a needle needs to be a bit over 0.020". I would think a 20 gauge needle would be ideal (ID 0.024"). Techni-Tool sells 1 inch long versions of these in packs of 50 for $10 (http://www.techni-tool.com/272PR251). Good luck if you decide to take a crack at it! Maybe a new business venture? :)
I can totally relate. It is easy for most anyone to appreciate a great image, but it is much more difficult to develop the "eye" to critique an average image for potential improvements (and to understand the available solution options). Shooting a lot is fine, but a little training goes a long way. When I started shooting some decades ago (hobbyist only) I concentrated more the technical aspects, but later came to understand that composition is equally (perhaps more) important. My advice is to seek training in either, whenever you think it's time to take it up a notch. I tend toward books for such training, but courses, and tapping more experienced individuals, are great too. As an analogy, my wife and I wanted a nicely landscaped yard when we bought our house. In spite of being avid do-it-yourselfers, we did not have much of a clue about what to do, or what would look good. So we took a landscaping course together, and between that, and a little reading, came to understand some valuable concepts. And now our yard rocks, if I say so myself! So learn what you can from people who have already plowed that ground (so to speak), and have fun shooting along the way. And remember, a craftsman never blames his tools!
I've been carrying a 10X "Hastings Triplet" for years. Compact and great optics. Never felt the need for more power.
Go Cannon. I too learned on a manual film camera many years ago (Canon). And stayed with Cannon on my first digital (also some years back). But it was a fixed lens camera (G3), so as the technology marched on, I eventually decided to get back to an SLR. Having heard that zooms had improved somewhat since my film days, and concerned about getting dust on a sensor with frequent lens changes, I looked for a do-everything zoom lens to go with it. At the time, Nikon seemed to have a better option in that regard, so I jumped ship to Nikon. I'm on my third Nikon now (currently a D600), and while I have liked them all, I will not buy another. The reason is that the last 2 have had oil-on-sensor issues from the shutter mechanism. Nikon did "fix" my D600 at no charge, but a few thousand clicks later, I have yet another spot. So at some point, I'll part with all my Nikon stuff and maybe go back to Cannon. Or maybe jump to a mirrorless Sony. Not sure yet. But no more Nikon for me. Good luck with whatever you decide.