Always use a UV or Skylight filter over a lens. It doesn't really effect the image but protects the lens from dust scratches and splashes. It's easier to clean and can be replaced easier and cheaper. I leave the lens cap off when I am out shooting using the filter as a "cap" until I go home and then put the cap over it. The other day I bumped the lens and bent the threaded portion of the UV filter on one of my lenses. It bent the threaded lip but the lens was ok. If no filter was attached it would have been the lens threads that would have bent!

Back in the early seventies and even into the eighties lots of cameras from many makers were great, good and crap. There was a lot of innovation and pure greed going on. Some worked well and some just did not. In today's market for the prosumer, with Internet reviews almost instantaneous with the relaes dates all cameras are at least very good and of course some are great and will be classics ( for about 3 years until replaced by the next version!). For a camera to be considered "crap" it would have to be so bad that it would be doubtful that it would even capture an image! I don't beleive that in an imaging judged contest done correctly and honestly of course that you could tell what camera took what photo. The only major difference in cameras today that I would think really matters other than features would be expected durability and shutter count, and that is really a concern for pro or semi pro users. A Nikon D-40 or Canon Rebel will still outlast most serious amateurs as far as normal use. I am not saying we should use them but just as an example of what some might say are the bottom of the lines of both makers. They are still great cameras capable of taking far better photos than the average person can make.

I think you are right on the button. I have a P&S that I carry 100% of the time and a Fuji X100 for Travel. I just bought a Nikon DF to replace my old F2a for more technical fun stuff It's all about Photography and the image not the tools. I even use my cell phone in jazz clubs etc. Carry what's comfortable for you at the time and place, all of the images will be better than what was possible in the 1950's!

Camera on tripod, set shutter on bulb, multiple flash untilt desired exposure. Experiment!

Pretty much when permits are applied its for revenue generation under the excuse of safety or the public good. If I go to the local park with a point a shoot I can take all of the photos I want but if I use my D7100 which "looks" pro to the park folks out come the permit police wanting a cut of my income, even though I am not a pro and do not earn income from photos. No amount of explaining works until I show my Federal Law Enforcement Credentials and then it's "oh take all of the photos you want sir", even though I am shooting a model! This is our inconsistent government at work. It's not a right or left issue it's an incompetent lower and upper management issue!

From the age of 13 when I first got my hands on a camera I have always been a "Photographer". I don't know why but I have always been driven to try to reinterpret the moments that move me photographically, I sometimes succeed. Now 52 years later I have a much better understanding of why but either my success rate is only marginally better or my standards are significantly higher.

Well there are "experts everywhere". The truth is that many versions of where Cop comes from are most likely true. Dirty copper may come from darnished buttons and copper badges. Cop may come from Constables on patrol or citizens on patrol. Until a time machine is invented it's all food for though and argument on the forums! Oh well back to photography where no one has any opinions!

Most likely it derives from early police badges being made of copper or tin that was copper plated. A derogatory term was "dirty copper" referring to a tarnished badge ie a bad cop.