ZodiacPhoto

ZodiacPhoto

Lives in United States Upstate, NY, United States
Works as a Electronic Engineer
Has a website at http://www.zodiacphoto.com
Joined on Jun 26, 2006

Comments

Total: 38, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

(unknown member): Interesting that they didn't choose to go with an integrated vertical grip.

Because they can sell it to you for another $2,000?

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2021 at 15:36 UTC
In reply to:

Donald B: win win situation he will get paid $500k for a tv interview prime time magazine articles :-) and his name up in lights.

Aren't any profits acquired by illegal activity forfeited?

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2020 at 21:53 UTC
In reply to:

Lightright: Canon got shot glass.
Nikon got the jellies.
Sony.... a mini me alpha.

I think i prefer the Canon glass. :D

Yes, if used appropriately, it adds about 2 stops of Image Stabilization for me...
;)

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2020 at 00:28 UTC

Will look good on Sony A7C...

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2020 at 16:30 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

Mlumiere: The Canon R5 appears to be of a robust and waterproof construction. Can Sony cameras and lenses Made in China withstand the rain in the rain forest and the shocks of the mountaineer?

Are Canon cameras and lenses made in Japan - just curious?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2020 at 23:41 UTC

Why no Voigtlander primes in Sony info-graphics? I am not even talking about Laova, etc.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2020 at 13:32 UTC as 120th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

lightnchade: What does it mean: "Canon Australia announces..." ?

Does it mean that a division of Canon that is based in Australia has invented some completely new printer that is only available to Australians?

If so, why? Is it such that only Australians need such a printer? Is it related to climate there?

Or does it mean that Canon HQ previously announced this product for some other parts of the world but didn't include Australia but now they decided to include Australia?

If so, why? Why wasn't it previously available in Australia? What has changed to make it now suitable for the Australian market?

If the printer was previously available only outside Australia, what would have happened if an Australian tried to buy this printer from Hong Kong, would the printer have been seized on import as not allowed for that market?

Does the printer have a GPS chip that detects where in the world it is and refuse to function if its not in some acceptable place? And what defines acceptable?

It prints all images rotated 180 upside down.
;)

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2020 at 11:21 UTC
In reply to:

24Peter: I'm confused: 10TB seems like nothing for a huge, multinational company like Canon. I have 10TB storage in my Acer desktop computer. Perhaps it was highly sensitive data which obviously is not good. But the article goes out of it's way to highlight an amount which is like 35 mins of RAW 8K video from the new R5?!?
OK, sorry Canon for your loss :-(

Maybe they will come up with an alternative ending...
After seeing count Rostov in Hulu's "The Great", I have a different image of Natasha Rostova now...
;)

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 22:52 UTC

He reminded me of Q from old James Bond movies (played by late Desmond Llewelyn).

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2020 at 00:25 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

ZodiacPhoto: I wish... I wish.. 20-55mm f/4

Yes, I would trade 5mm at the long end for a constant aperture.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2020 at 21:23 UTC

I wish... I wish.. 20-55mm f/4

Link | Posted on May 28, 2020 at 20:17 UTC as 61st comment | 2 replies

“There are only two things I can't stand in this world: People who are intolerant of other people's cultures, and the Dutch.”

Link | Posted on May 22, 2020 at 01:51 UTC as 10th comment

And where is Nikon? Sad...

Link | Posted on May 19, 2020 at 00:21 UTC as 41st comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Daniel Haussmann: What a joke. What is next? A patent for a "removeable tyre on a moving vehicle"?

Agree, things happen - let the courts straightening this out.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2020 at 20:05 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel Haussmann: What a joke. What is next? A patent for a "removeable tyre on a moving vehicle"?

Since the patent was accepted and approved, I would assume that patent lawyers, engineers, and USPTO looked at existing design before issuing the patent. It goes through a lot of scrutiny.
So, unless everybody in this chain is blind, it means that the patented mechanism is substantially different from existing art.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2020 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel Haussmann: What a joke. What is next? A patent for a "removeable tyre on a moving vehicle"?

"A clockwise lock mechanism 11A is illustrated with the shaft lock portion 15A attached to a clockwise rotating driveshaft 13. Arrows on the shaft lock portion 15A indicate the rotational direction, and the shaft lock portion defines a recess 21 in the middle between the arrows. The blade lock portion 17A of the lock mechanism 11A on the clockwise rotor blade 9A is dropped into the recess 21 as seen in FIG. 4 and the rotor blade 9A is then rotated in direction R opposite to the direction of the arrows such that the blade 9A slides into slots 23 on each side of the shaft lock portion 15A under the arrows, and lugs 25A on the blade lock portion 17A engage notches 27A defined by the shaft lock portion"

Link | Posted on May 18, 2020 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

Joey Bagodonuts: Quadcopters like the design in the patent were around decades before the patent. The idea has been around for over 100 years.
This is lke someone today patenting a child's or toy bicycle based on the basic design of the bicycle that's been around for a century.

There are pictures of quadcopters (4 rotors, x configuration, legs on bottom) from years before the patent, which tells me this is a modeny grab and a way to stiffle competiton and innovation.

Also, the DJI Phantom came out in 2013 and was designed before that. The patent wasn't applied for until 2013.

In this patent, the drawings are essential because they illustrate a very particular mechanism. The patent covers not any drone, or any drone with rotors locked to driveshafts, but just this exact mechanism.
I am not an expert on drones, but 30+ years of engineering and having my own patents makes me, after reading "most people here" replies, wonder why such a simple matter is not understood by many readers.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2020 at 11:23 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: US Patent No. 9, 260,184. is for 4 rotors in an x configuration with little feet on the bottom

its basically the drone equivalent of patenting the wheel ... and applying an accusation
of intellectual property theft against every car motorcycle bicycle tricycle unicycle
plane or jet with landing apparatus ,wheat grinding mills every mechanical clock or other device that employs a turning circle on an axel as a whole or part of the apparatus ....

im pretty sure any manufacturer of rolling pizza cutters would recieve a cease and desist notine as well

, i can only imagine this debacle going further south if a monkey ends up being the owner of the intellectual property in question ,

Autel "copied" the problem from bicycle pedals, but created the unique solution, the mechanism of attachment, which was copied by others.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2020 at 00:51 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: US Patent No. 9, 260,184. is for 4 rotors in an x configuration with little feet on the bottom

its basically the drone equivalent of patenting the wheel ... and applying an accusation
of intellectual property theft against every car motorcycle bicycle tricycle unicycle
plane or jet with landing apparatus ,wheat grinding mills every mechanical clock or other device that employs a turning circle on an axel as a whole or part of the apparatus ....

im pretty sure any manufacturer of rolling pizza cutters would recieve a cease and desist notine as well

, i can only imagine this debacle going further south if a monkey ends up being the owner of the intellectual property in question ,

don't reed the description of the whole "aircraft" - they had to include it to show where the patent applies - but this is NOT what is unique.
Look at the drawing of the mechanism attaching rotors to the driveshafts - this is what makes it different.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2020 at 23:31 UTC
In reply to:

Joey Bagodonuts: Quadcopters like the design in the patent were around decades before the patent. The idea has been around for over 100 years.
This is lke someone today patenting a child's or toy bicycle based on the basic design of the bicycle that's been around for a century.

There are pictures of quadcopters (4 rotors, x configuration, legs on bottom) from years before the patent, which tells me this is a modeny grab and a way to stiffle competiton and innovation.

Also, the DJI Phantom came out in 2013 and was designed before that. The patent wasn't applied for until 2013.

Just look at the drawings - it does not have to be "special", but rather particular - a very specific design.
Engineers could come up with different designs to achieve the same function, but they've chosen to use the one from this patent.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2020 at 23:28 UTC
Total: 38, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »