TTQ B4U

This is the first real issue I've ever had with them. I LOL at Verizon at work as no one can't use their GPS while being on a call it seems. Maybe that's changed but I don't think so as I always see people saying "I'll call you back because my GPS won't work if I'm on the phone." I was immune as with AT&T I can stream music, use the GPS, talk and email whatever all at once with no issue. If AT&T doesn't resolve this within the kit-kat update due out anytime (rumor is it begins tomorrow...but we'll see), then I'm going to warranty exchange it and likely end up either working it out for another phone (HTC M8 ?) or I'll leave them completely and move to Verizon.

It's on most of the major Android Boards. AT&T support forums is the main place it's on. http://forums.att.com/t5/Android-Discussion-and-Support/bd-p/Android

On crop bodies like the 70D you need to insure your shutter speed is at minimum 1.5x the focal length. You're in a better boat than most as your primary lens has a great 4 stop IS advantage so you can get away with a bit less. However, technique or lack of can impact that. Fire on a slight exhale. Try setting up your camera on a remote trigger, use longer exposure times and practice bouncing the flash off the interior too. ISO can impact the appearance of the image but even there, it's all about exposure. Here's a 100% crop from a now 7yr old 10mp crop body exposed to ISO 6400 via a simple ISO push. Hand-held with a 24-70L. Hardly soft. In fact it could be printed at 13x19 with no sense of softness or visible noise. http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/118911533/original.jpg On your lens/body, anything above f/11 is pointless really. Read up on Depth of Field. You can obtain greater depth of field with a decrease in aperture (larger f-stop) and decreasing aberrations, but there's a point at which diffraction begins to erode sharpness. This is very likely what you're seeing. It's even more dramatic on a crop body camera vs a full frame. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ there are many links but IMO tell the yahoo requiring f/22 that until he understands the phsysics of light and photography, he needs to step aside. F/22 and up is really best for Macro photography. With today's newer mirror-less cameras and 4/3'rd systems, I am far more likely to use one of those however than even my macro lens on a true SLR. The images are far better in my experience. That debate will live on beyond Ford vs Chevy though Lastly, I stand by my previous points that your "soft" images won't matter 1 bit in a magazine print. My images are use for corporate photography/ marketing needs and displayed on projection screens for large audiences and for large marketing material with minimum sizes of 36" often much larger. Even there I can hide the rare minor focus issues with ease. Magazines, you'll never see them. I'll try and dig up some of my out of focus images that have been printed and show you what I mean. Post up a link to some full size shots being called soft and I'll chime in with feedback.

No boobies, then no, not worth 6 pages of reading. although" more for entertainment value " tells me it's not completely for nothing.

IMO hang onto the money and enjoy looking. If you don't know it the instant you see/drive the car, then it's not the right car. 6 pages on CR says you've not come across the right one. Convertible at all? Something you'll keep in the third garage for many years or is this just a fling car?

I love Doc! That would be awesome to have one of his rides in there. I'd go Bentley

Buy that man a drink!

and people who sign these types of deals are allowed to vote, raise children and live life among the rest of us...sigh.....

(937) 830-2797 Julius is great. Has done several of my cars.

We had Pella put in the ones we have now. Installed in 2003 and have been 100% happy. They are great about service. Have had a couple Sashes replaced over the years due to broken seals and fogging, but overall, we're good. They dropped off a dozen or so springs too for our various sizes just in one pops. I've replaced 2 in 11 years.

Gotcha. Wasn't sure. I saw someone the other day with a skylight filter over a portrait lens and sometimes shake my head when I see a $100 filter over a $1k lens. With polarizers just be sure to account for the drop in light coming in when it comes to exposure settings. It's usually 1.5-2 stops of light. Your kinda bad is better than most good elsewhere. Keep up the good work :thumbup:

What filter and why? Fire them in RAW and bump up the exposure a bit. Depending on the capabilities of the camera, the shadows will likely need to be lifted. One drawback to the 70D is the Dynamic Range. Based on the below Exif I would do the following. Shoot f/8. Any higher isn't necessary. ISO 100 on a tripod but honestly you won't need one. Get lower. Shoot RAW. Better yet, pop on the 70-200 you had, step back and zoom in. You'll have plenty of DOF and yet the background will blur and help you isolate the subject more. Camera Maker: Canon Camera Model: Canon EOS 70D Lens: EF-S17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Image Date: 2014-02-07 18:52:34 (no TZ) Focal Length: 35.0mm Aperture: f/14.0 Exposure Time: 0.010 s (1/100) ISO equiv: 400 Exposure Bias: none Metering Mode: Matrix Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto) White Balance: Manual Flash Fired: No (enforced) Color Space: sRGB GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined Software: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3 (Windows)

Indoors you'll likely need studio lights. Outdoors would be great because not only will lighting be better but glimpses through windows won't involve shop surroundings.

I'd turn in pics without EXIF or just edit it and appease him.

Awful? Not to me....but to each their own. http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj84/crms3er/tint_zpsaa007b18.jpg

18-35-50% back sides and fronts. I have that on my Mazda and love it.

My two cents.....buying new is a Mcsteak. Buying anything Dodge "new" is a double McSteak samich. The only exception is perhaps a turbo or a sports car that could have been abused. You'll be upside down money wise faster than the car can hit 60mph. Your money though. Personally, there are plenty of suggestions in this thread that would meet what you've suggested. Step one, get with our friend over in Cambridge at Jet. Can't go wrong with proven referrals and good people. Step two, work with him on the previously suggested cars. FWIW, the Dart is one of the better looking sedans for what it offers. I like others better but at least the one you pictured isn't a turd looks-wise. Good luck.

In follow up to our conversation I'd really like to know why this guy is calling your other shots "soft". Does he realize that anything above f/11 is not going to help? Especially on your camera. Sharpness of any shot is going to be relative to print/display size. It's a magazine print. Soft is a relative term but in print such as what he's using them for softness won't be visible. Even a slightly back-focused show can be made to work with zero efforts. Oh well....he's the boss right...

Looks great! Just needs some tint IMO

http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/ Scroll down to Part IV and read up. Key with using a flash is to do the very best not to indicate one was ever used. Inside cars is going to require and off camera cable and positioning. You have a great lens with IS built in and a nice wide aperture already, so practice in Av mode and stopped down enough to get good DOF. Canon will balance ambient light and use the strobe as fill flash. You will likely be able to get away with it nicely. Trick is going to be avoiding any hot spots so a nice diffuser will help. I have several I can lend you to practice with when I return your gopro.

No, there is a 1.4L turbo but it's still lame at 160hp.

Love my Note 3 but don't go with AT&T. They have some GPS related issues and if they don't get it resolved soon I'm moving to Verizon.

I'm okay with it but can't give too much credibility to a guy who couldn't even Google the AirCanada DC9 incident of 1983 to get the details of his story accurate. He's recanted some of it too. http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/a-problem-with-the-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-fire-th-1546500628/@flyingphotog

" However, experts are probing deeper into the footprint of the homemade simulator, which he had at his home in Shah Alam."

If you assembled one like his that would be impressive and IMO a bit more than even the guy who's really into it. Would doing so make me suspicious all by itself no. However, if down the road you flew a massive commercial airliner and it disappeared with all the circumstances that occurred like this guys plane did then one would be blind and stupid for such a set up not to raise suspicions.