Perfect!!!

Like Chris Elliott said years ago in a TV commercial, "No. NOT Reallyyyyy!"
Umh bill, politely, you failed to appreciate my alluding to a post made at 15:01:09 yesterday on this same topic page. 😉

Really? I wondered about that, but wasn’t certain enough to reach that conclusion. Thank you for enlightening me with your opin@^€, or should I call it a fact*?

* Oops, I almost used the "O" word.

Yes, and with respect to iDevices, it has been around a few years now. It’s the SanDisk iXpand flash drive available in 32, 64, 128, and 256 GB sizes. It has both a male USB-A plug and a male Lightning plug and can hold photo, audio, and video files as well as pdfs.

Good comparable views, though the UV counterpart looks like an underexposed silhouette. Compare to my examples of an IR vs. a B&W version of a VL photograph.

Well, I’m glad you focused long enough THIS TIME. 😜

Not quite, but I am making a point you will understand IF you take the time to read my initial post, which is not vague, in response to your first post. (Hint: It won’t appear so lengthy if you read it on an e-tablet, laptop, or desktop.) 😜

Oh, well WHY didn’t you write that in the first place? I’m sure you’ve got a valid reason; I’m just curious to know what it was, particularly since you indicated that you employed an ISE to find out its definition.

Well, this extensive cut-and-paste IS a legitimate answer to the posted Topic title! But given Itatko's first post, it’s unclear, at least to me, whether your response is what he was looking for. But no, you didn’t fail to communicate, as now I know something more than the definition of one more acronym. 👍🏼

Literally, pretty well, thank you.

I assume you are referring to me, CHG_CANON.
Yes, you may be on to something there, but I am, physically, living alone, I have the time, and at worst my lengthy post was a form of blogging. Go figure 😎.

Precisely what I thought, bleirer! But after posting my lengthy response to Itatko's first post, I realized it’s possible that he is merely employing the rhetorical question as a means of introducing the organization referred to TIPA.

I suppose that’s a legitimate form of introduction, but I dislike it for its obvious ambiguity.

I'm sorry, Itatko, I don’t understand why you bothered to create this topic. Is it that you’re trying to send a message to those members who post comments/questions and don’t think to use an Internet Search Engine FIRST under ANY circumstances?!!

If I’m correct, please understand that I’m not mocking you; rather, I would ascribe you’re action as being, at best, one of wishful thinking. Just examine the demographics of the membership, especially for age and education. Secondly, ARE YOU AWARE that some acronyms and unpronounceable capitalized initials have more than one definition?

Yup, and sometimes the context provided by the author of the "alphabet soup," as I label it, is unclear. OMG, and then there’s a third category which relates to the naïve simplistic faith that any ISE (or did you mean Google.com EXCLUSIVELY?) will always be able to "decode" any alphabet soup?

Before I give an example denying such a belief, DO YOU know what ISE in the preceding paragraph stands for? Well, Google will give you the answer, right? Hmm, let’s see! Was I referring to "Identity Services Engine"?

No, and that wouldn’t make any sense in this context, would it? Oh, I know!! I was referring to an Internet Search Engine ... of course!! Wasn’t that incredibly obvious to you? No?

How about other members? Well actually, it’s not obvious at all for at least two reasons: A. I just made this acronym up (wasn’t that idiosyncratic of me and do you believe no other member of this photography forum would ever do this?); and B. I FAILED (NOT "I didn’t") to introduce this group of capitalized letters ALONGSIDE its definition explicitly spelled out!

How could I have easily prevented this? Let’s go back to the second sentence of the first paragraph of my response. ALL I had to do was ADD the following after the three words "Internet Search Engine": (ISE). Oh my, isn’t that simple?

Now back to negating the belief that Google is omniscient. But first, please clear the recent searches using that app on your device. Now let’s employ an acronym I’ve seen bandied about in this forum for a few years: IBIS.

Go ahead, type it in to Google. Here’s what I got that you should also have obtained: https://www.google.com/search?q=ibis . For those who don’t want to take the time to check this URL, you’ll find all sorts of results on the bird, Ibis, followed by this word as the name for a Hotel chain, a Medical specialty clinic, a Consulting firm, etc. (And yes, I pressed the "More Results" twice and didn’t find much else.)

WAIT A MOMENT! Google's ISE utterly FAILED to find any mention of "Image Stabilization" in that Search? Incroyable!

But when I entered "In-Body Image Stabilization," it was magic! Yessir, I saw the acronym IBIS in the 5th result. Uh-oh, wait a minute! Wasn’t the purpose of my search to find out what IBIS stands for?

Well, Itatko, I do thank you for posting this, since it gave me an opportunity to expand on my one of my pet peeves, writers who employ alphabet soups without even a passing thought of defining them.*

lev29

* - Yes, I am aware that we photographers do share a number of acronyms here and I’m not suggesting that one should define them all when posting a comment, but as a consequence, there will exist some readers who are left out of the discussion. Perhaps those members, before inquiring explicitly, could TRY to employ an ISE first, and then should it fail to enlighten them, post an inquiry prefaced by a statement that the tried before asking?
😎

Don't forget Kolarivision.com also does IR conversions, such as my mirrorless Sony a6000 camera.

Thank you.