Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Saturday, January 24, 2009
In-body vs. in-lens image stabilization
Among DSLR users there are many who debate over and over ad nauseum the advantages and disadvantages of in-lens vs. in-body image stabilization. Most of the arguments are filled with speculations, marketing spin (trying to sow FUD), hopes, and fears rather than facts. I hope the following helps to separate the two.
This is a summary of the known advantages and disadvantages of in-body and in-lens stabilization -- in contrast to speculations, marketing spin, hopes, fears, etc..
In-body stabilization advantages:
1. Stabilizes *any* lens (new, old, camera company's lens, 3rd party lens, AF lens, MF lens, lens mounted with an adapter, etc.).
2. Price of DSLRs with in-body stabilization are similar, sometimes less, than comparable bodies without it (Sony A200, Pentax K20D, Sony A700, Sony A900).
3. Stabilization gets upgraded regularly and is put in new bodies (2005 KM 7D/5D has 1st generation, 2006 Sony A100 has 2nd generation, 2007 Sony A700 has 3rd generation; 2006 Pentax K100D has 1st generation, 2006 Pentax K10D has 2nd generation). Of course, you don't get the advantage of the new generation of stabilization unless you buy a new body. No doubt there are some people that don't upgrade their DSLRs for many years and are still using a Nikon D1, Canon D30, etc., but most enthusiasts and professionals that use DSLRs upgrade every few years (or even more often) because of the fast advance in overall technology (AF, megapixels, speed of operation, new features, etc.).
4. Stabilization is available instantly with no delay.
In-body stabilization disadvantages:
1. Optical viewfinder is not stabilized. DSLRs with liveview (Olympus E-520) do have a stabilized view when using liveview.
In-lens stabilization advantages:
1. Stabilization works with DSLRs and FSLRs.
2. Optical viewfinder is stabilized.
In-lens stabilization disadvantages:
1. Only available in a very limited set of lenses. And sometimes you have to choose between a mediocre optical and/or build quality IS lens or a much better optical and/or build quality non-IS lens.
2. Rarely, if ever, updated. The only case I know of where an IS lens was updated is the Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS lens got updated to the 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS lens. The old one came out in 1995 and was finally updated in 2005, but it didn't help any of the owners of the 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS. The 1998 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS is still waiting for an upgrade and so are many other lenses (Canon 70-200mm f2.8L, etc.).
3. In many cases it adds a lot to the cost of the lens (Canon 70-200mm f4L vs. Canon 70-200mm f4L IS, Canon 70-200mm f2.8L vs. Canon 70-200mm f2.8L IS, Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 vs. Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS, Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 vs. Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS, etc.).
4. When the IS system is asleep there is approximately a 1/2 second to 1 second delay when you half-press the shutter release while the IS system initializes and starts to stabilize. If you shoot too quickly you will often get a blurry photo because the IS lens elements are still getting set and are moving around.
Speculations, marketing spin, hopes, fears, etc.
1. Issues such as whether in-lens stabilization is more effective or, at least, more effective for long focal length lenses is not proven. Various tests that I have seen in multiple places seem to leave it still as an open question. I think the only fair thing to say about this is both systems seem to work pretty well. For one person one system may be a bit better and for another person another may be a bit better. Also, a particular generation of one system might be a bit better than a particular generation of another system, but with different generations of each the results might be the opposite. Frankly, I see this whole issue as sort of a wash. Neither system is perfect, neither system is going to consistently in all situations give you exactly 3 stops or 2.5 stops or 4 stops or whatever.
2. Another issue concerns whether in-lens is mechanically more or less reliable than in-body. This is just speculation too. I'm sure inside the various companies they have their confidential information about the MTBF of their sysytems. It isn't likely they will want to share that info with the whole world though. Since most people replace their DSLRs from time to time for many reasons (mostly because of the fast evolution of the technology) the average user (this is my guess) probably never experiences a shutter failure or failure of other moving parts in the body before the DSLR is replaced for some other reason. In-lens IS is, no doubt, quite reliable too, but it also is a mechanical system and has an MTBF. I think that most people hold onto their lenses for a much longer period than their bodies though.
3. Another issue that gets brought up pretty often is what optical degradation occurs because of the IS lens elements in the lens. Klaus Schroiff at Photozone.de believes it does degrage the optical performance though and he does lots of lens testing. I didn't mention it in the above lists because it is sort of speculation, I guess.
4. In-body stabilization seems to have little effect on the size and weight of the body since comparable bodies from the competition without stabilization are not smaller or lighter (in fact, they are sometimes bigger and heavier). In-lens stabilization seems to add size and weight to the lens, at least in some cases (Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 vs. Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS, Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS vs. Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, Canon 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS vs. Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, etc.). I put this in the speculation category because it is not known definitively that it is the IS mechanism alone that is causing the size and weight increase.
I'm sorry that I used so many Canon examples and didn't say much about Nikon. I have owned 2 Canon DSLRs and I have owned 3 KM/Sony DSLRs (currently an A700) so I am more familiar with those two systems.
This is a summary of the known advantages and disadvantages of in-body and in-lens stabilization -- in contrast to speculations, marketing spin, hopes, fears, etc..
In-body stabilization advantages:
1. Stabilizes *any* lens (new, old, camera company's lens, 3rd party lens, AF lens, MF lens, lens mounted with an adapter, etc.).
2. Price of DSLRs with in-body stabilization are similar, sometimes less, than comparable bodies without it (Sony A200, Pentax K20D, Sony A700, Sony A900).
3. Stabilization gets upgraded regularly and is put in new bodies (2005 KM 7D/5D has 1st generation, 2006 Sony A100 has 2nd generation, 2007 Sony A700 has 3rd generation; 2006 Pentax K100D has 1st generation, 2006 Pentax K10D has 2nd generation). Of course, you don't get the advantage of the new generation of stabilization unless you buy a new body. No doubt there are some people that don't upgrade their DSLRs for many years and are still using a Nikon D1, Canon D30, etc., but most enthusiasts and professionals that use DSLRs upgrade every few years (or even more often) because of the fast advance in overall technology (AF, megapixels, speed of operation, new features, etc.).
4. Stabilization is available instantly with no delay.
In-body stabilization disadvantages:
1. Optical viewfinder is not stabilized. DSLRs with liveview (Olympus E-520) do have a stabilized view when using liveview.
In-lens stabilization advantages:
1. Stabilization works with DSLRs and FSLRs.
2. Optical viewfinder is stabilized.
In-lens stabilization disadvantages:
1. Only available in a very limited set of lenses. And sometimes you have to choose between a mediocre optical and/or build quality IS lens or a much better optical and/or build quality non-IS lens.
2. Rarely, if ever, updated. The only case I know of where an IS lens was updated is the Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS lens got updated to the 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS lens. The old one came out in 1995 and was finally updated in 2005, but it didn't help any of the owners of the 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS. The 1998 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS is still waiting for an upgrade and so are many other lenses (Canon 70-200mm f2.8L, etc.).
3. In many cases it adds a lot to the cost of the lens (Canon 70-200mm f4L vs. Canon 70-200mm f4L IS, Canon 70-200mm f2.8L vs. Canon 70-200mm f2.8L IS, Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 vs. Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS, Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 vs. Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS, etc.).
4. When the IS system is asleep there is approximately a 1/2 second to 1 second delay when you half-press the shutter release while the IS system initializes and starts to stabilize. If you shoot too quickly you will often get a blurry photo because the IS lens elements are still getting set and are moving around.
Speculations, marketing spin, hopes, fears, etc.
1. Issues such as whether in-lens stabilization is more effective or, at least, more effective for long focal length lenses is not proven. Various tests that I have seen in multiple places seem to leave it still as an open question. I think the only fair thing to say about this is both systems seem to work pretty well. For one person one system may be a bit better and for another person another may be a bit better. Also, a particular generation of one system might be a bit better than a particular generation of another system, but with different generations of each the results might be the opposite. Frankly, I see this whole issue as sort of a wash. Neither system is perfect, neither system is going to consistently in all situations give you exactly 3 stops or 2.5 stops or 4 stops or whatever.
2. Another issue concerns whether in-lens is mechanically more or less reliable than in-body. This is just speculation too. I'm sure inside the various companies they have their confidential information about the MTBF of their sysytems. It isn't likely they will want to share that info with the whole world though. Since most people replace their DSLRs from time to time for many reasons (mostly because of the fast evolution of the technology) the average user (this is my guess) probably never experiences a shutter failure or failure of other moving parts in the body before the DSLR is replaced for some other reason. In-lens IS is, no doubt, quite reliable too, but it also is a mechanical system and has an MTBF. I think that most people hold onto their lenses for a much longer period than their bodies though.
3. Another issue that gets brought up pretty often is what optical degradation occurs because of the IS lens elements in the lens. Klaus Schroiff at Photozone.de believes it does degrage the optical performance though and he does lots of lens testing. I didn't mention it in the above lists because it is sort of speculation, I guess.
4. In-body stabilization seems to have little effect on the size and weight of the body since comparable bodies from the competition without stabilization are not smaller or lighter (in fact, they are sometimes bigger and heavier). In-lens stabilization seems to add size and weight to the lens, at least in some cases (Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 vs. Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS, Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS vs. Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, Canon 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS vs. Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, etc.). I put this in the speculation category because it is not known definitively that it is the IS mechanism alone that is causing the size and weight increase.
I'm sorry that I used so many Canon examples and didn't say much about Nikon. I have owned 2 Canon DSLRs and I have owned 3 KM/Sony DSLRs (currently an A700) so I am more familiar with those two systems.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Honolulu Fire Department
The Honolulu Fire Department was finishing up on a call as I walked by and I was fortunate to have my camera with me. They were done and just cleaning up so I missed any action that might have occurred earlier. :-)
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Photo gear for travel
Sometimes people ask me what kind of gear I carry when I travel. By the way, for some more info on how I usually travel take a look at my 2006/12/15 post:
http://bakubo.blogspot.com/2006/12/travelling-close-to-ground.html
A travel kit really depends a lot on how you will travel, where you are going, and how much gear you are willing to put up with. :-) I have traveled a lot over the years, but mostly it has been with a backpack and traveling close to the ground (public transportation, small guesthouses/hostels/etc., *lots* of walking). Also, quite a lot of it has been in rather hot, humid parts of the world where 8-14 hours of walking in a day for several weeks or even longer can really tire you out.
Having said that, I will tell you what I carried on a few recent trips:
2006/3 - 2006/4: Morocco -- KM 7D, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, Minolta 50mm f1.7, 1gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 7D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2006/4: France -- KM 7D, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, Minolta 50mm f1.7, 1gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 7D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2006/10 - 2006/12: Japan -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2006/12 - 2007/1: Thailand -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2007/9 - 2007/12: Japan -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 OS, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2007/12 - 2008/1: Thailand/Cambodia -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 OS, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2008/4 - 2008/5: Mexico -- Sony A700, Sony 11-18mm f4.5-5.6, Sony 18-250mm f3.5-6.3, Minolta 50mm f1.7, Sony HVL-F36AM flash and 4 nimh AA batteries, 8gb of CF cards, charger and 2 batteries for A700; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
I don't plan to use the X-Drive psd anymore though. I now have 24gb of CF/MS cards and before my next extended trip I will probably buy another 16gb CF card so it would be *very* unlikely that I would need to reuse a card. Recently I bought an Asus EeePC 900HA netbook (8.9" screen, 1.6ghz Intel Atom cpu, 1gb ram, 160gb hd, WinXP) so I may carry it next time for wifi internet use. I can also back up my memory cards to it. I haven't decided for sure whether I will take it though. The size and weight of the netbook is a bit over double the psd, but provides much more functionality -- including being able to use Skype to make phone calls.
If you travel by car, stay at hotels, and/or tend to not be on the move a lot then, of course, taking more/heavier/bigger gear would be welcome. When I go on a road trip I, naturally, carry more and somewhat different gear, but for backpack travel my Mexico kit worked out well and is closer to what I used to carry when I used film SLRs.
http://bakubo.blogspot.com/2006/12/travelling-close-to-ground.html
A travel kit really depends a lot on how you will travel, where you are going, and how much gear you are willing to put up with. :-) I have traveled a lot over the years, but mostly it has been with a backpack and traveling close to the ground (public transportation, small guesthouses/hostels/etc., *lots* of walking). Also, quite a lot of it has been in rather hot, humid parts of the world where 8-14 hours of walking in a day for several weeks or even longer can really tire you out.
Having said that, I will tell you what I carried on a few recent trips:
2006/3 - 2006/4: Morocco -- KM 7D, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, Minolta 50mm f1.7, 1gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 7D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2006/4: France -- KM 7D, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, Minolta 50mm f1.7, 1gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 7D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2006/10 - 2006/12: Japan -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2006/12 - 2007/1: Thailand -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2007/9 - 2007/12: Japan -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 OS, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2007/12 - 2008/1: Thailand/Cambodia -- Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 OS, 4gb of CF cards, charger and 3 batteries for 30D; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
2008/4 - 2008/5: Mexico -- Sony A700, Sony 11-18mm f4.5-5.6, Sony 18-250mm f3.5-6.3, Minolta 50mm f1.7, Sony HVL-F36AM flash and 4 nimh AA batteries, 8gb of CF cards, charger and 2 batteries for A700; Canon A540 digicam, SD cards, 4 nimh AA batteries and charger; 30gb X-Drive II portable storage device and charger; old-style extension cord with both prongs straight, plug adaptor; UV filters to protect lenses, polarizer filter
I don't plan to use the X-Drive psd anymore though. I now have 24gb of CF/MS cards and before my next extended trip I will probably buy another 16gb CF card so it would be *very* unlikely that I would need to reuse a card. Recently I bought an Asus EeePC 900HA netbook (8.9" screen, 1.6ghz Intel Atom cpu, 1gb ram, 160gb hd, WinXP) so I may carry it next time for wifi internet use. I can also back up my memory cards to it. I haven't decided for sure whether I will take it though. The size and weight of the netbook is a bit over double the psd, but provides much more functionality -- including being able to use Skype to make phone calls.
If you travel by car, stay at hotels, and/or tend to not be on the move a lot then, of course, taking more/heavier/bigger gear would be welcome. When I go on a road trip I, naturally, carry more and somewhat different gear, but for backpack travel my Mexico kit worked out well and is closer to what I used to carry when I used film SLRs.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Beach women with cell phones
There is something about beaches that gives women the urge to whip out the ol' cell phone. :-)
Monday, January 12, 2009
Installed PSE 6 on EeePC 900HA netbook
I installed Photoshop Elements 6 on my netbook (see my 2008/11/17 blog entry) and it went smoothly. Of course, I don't intend to do any serious photo editing on the netbook since it only has an 8.9" 1024x600 screen, but when I travel it will be nice to occasionally do simple stuff and then resize so I can email a photo. The nice thing about PSE 6 is that it uses Adobe Camera Raw 4.6 which supports the raw format for my Sony A700 (and also my older raw files from the Canon 30D, Sony A100, Canon DRebel/300D, and Minolta D7i cameras) so I can convert raw files even when I am traveling. The EeePC 900HA has an option to change to a 1024x768 display and that turns out to be great because I discovered that ACR won't work with anything less. To use ACR I just made the quick switch to 1024x768 (there is an Asus tool icon in the system tray) and then used ACR. Not as convenient as a bigger computer, but that isn't the point since this isn't something I would need to do much. Just having the capability though is cool! I also installed a few PS plug-ins and they work fine too.
I am looking forward to doing some traveling and using the netbook to get wifi access and also be able to see some of the photos I take on the netbook's larger screen -- compared to the size of the display on the back of the camera.
I am looking forward to doing some traveling and using the netbook to get wifi access and also be able to see some of the photos I take on the netbook's larger screen -- compared to the size of the display on the back of the camera.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Steve Earle and Emmylou Harris - Goodbye
Wonderful song and wonderful performance by Steve Earle and Emmylou Harris.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Avoid getting a virus!
Last week a friend struggled to recover from a virus infected PC. He tried to get it removed using several anti-virus programs (some he went out and bought, some were free ones). After a week he thinks he may be okay now, he has his fingers crossed. After early attempts were unsuccessful I suggested that he bite the bullet and reformat his hard disk and then re-install Windows since that would fix everything. He never responded to that suggestion and continued trying to clean his PC. Finally, I found out that he had nothing backed up so if he did as I suggested he would lose all of his data, family photos, bookmarks, etc.
To help out other people I thought I would pass along this list of things I do because it might help you out too. This is not an exhaustive list, but if you carefully follow it then you will greatly reduce your chances of having the big problems my friend has been having. Oh, and I am using the word virus to cover all the bad stuff of various types.
Having a PC connected to the internet, particularly a Windows PC, is a constant struggle to keep it clean. In addition to all I do, which has kept me virus free since my first home PC in 1998, I back up everything several times a week. Currently, I have 2 external hard disks and they have identical stuff on both. Data, photos, bookmarks, etc.
1. Backup your data often!
2. Vista is more even secure than Windows XP. I have been using Vista for about 2 years.
3. With Vista or WinXP make sure you do all your normal PC usage with a user account and not an admin account. A user account has fewer privileges so bad software is much less likely to be able to do serious damage. Only use the admin account on rare occasions to set something up.
4. Make sure you keep Windows up to date with all the security fixes. New ones come out almost everyday. Set Windows to automatically check for them and download.
5. Consider not using Internet Explorer. It is relatively unsecure and lots of people get viruses that come through security holes. In fact, Microsoft had a big security alert just a few weeks ago about some major problem and everyone should have immediately stopped using IE until the bug fix was released. I think the release came out a few days later. I have been using Firefox for the last few years. It is more secure or, at least, fewer virus writers are targeting it since not as many people use it. I also like using it a lot more than IE.
6. Of course, use good anti-virus software and update the definitions daily. Also, run a full virus scan often, even everyday.
7. Anti-spyware and anti-adware software are important too.
8. A firewall is important too.
9. I only use webmail (gmail, yahoo, etc.) because they do automatic virus scans on everything and also because they don't actually download stuff to your computer unless you specifically ask them to do it. I have used only them for the last 8 years.
10. Be very careful about what you actually download to your PC.
Of course, you can do all of this and still get a virus, but I have been careful and never have. Knock on wood.
Ultimately, the best protection is not to have your computer connected to the internet -- ever. Take it out of the box make sure no internet connections (wire or wireless) are possible and then use it until it dies or you buy a new one. Oh, and never insert a CD, floppy disk, USB flash drive, etc. that can bring something from the outside into your computer. These days though, except for a few special purposes, the PC wouldn't be of much use to most people though. :-)
The Mac gets fewer viruses, but that is not necessarily because it is more secure, but because it is targeted less since it is less common than Windows.
Linux gets fewer viruses, but that is not necessarily because it is more secure, but because it is targeted less since it is less common than Windows.
Oh, and cell phones can get them too. Yep, the iPhone too.
Also, you can even get bad stuff from putting a CD you bought at the store. check out the Sony CD rootkit fiasco.
To help out other people I thought I would pass along this list of things I do because it might help you out too. This is not an exhaustive list, but if you carefully follow it then you will greatly reduce your chances of having the big problems my friend has been having. Oh, and I am using the word virus to cover all the bad stuff of various types.
Having a PC connected to the internet, particularly a Windows PC, is a constant struggle to keep it clean. In addition to all I do, which has kept me virus free since my first home PC in 1998, I back up everything several times a week. Currently, I have 2 external hard disks and they have identical stuff on both. Data, photos, bookmarks, etc.
1. Backup your data often!
2. Vista is more even secure than Windows XP. I have been using Vista for about 2 years.
3. With Vista or WinXP make sure you do all your normal PC usage with a user account and not an admin account. A user account has fewer privileges so bad software is much less likely to be able to do serious damage. Only use the admin account on rare occasions to set something up.
4. Make sure you keep Windows up to date with all the security fixes. New ones come out almost everyday. Set Windows to automatically check for them and download.
5. Consider not using Internet Explorer. It is relatively unsecure and lots of people get viruses that come through security holes. In fact, Microsoft had a big security alert just a few weeks ago about some major problem and everyone should have immediately stopped using IE until the bug fix was released. I think the release came out a few days later. I have been using Firefox for the last few years. It is more secure or, at least, fewer virus writers are targeting it since not as many people use it. I also like using it a lot more than IE.
6. Of course, use good anti-virus software and update the definitions daily. Also, run a full virus scan often, even everyday.
7. Anti-spyware and anti-adware software are important too.
8. A firewall is important too.
9. I only use webmail (gmail, yahoo, etc.) because they do automatic virus scans on everything and also because they don't actually download stuff to your computer unless you specifically ask them to do it. I have used only them for the last 8 years.
10. Be very careful about what you actually download to your PC.
Of course, you can do all of this and still get a virus, but I have been careful and never have. Knock on wood.
Ultimately, the best protection is not to have your computer connected to the internet -- ever. Take it out of the box make sure no internet connections (wire or wireless) are possible and then use it until it dies or you buy a new one. Oh, and never insert a CD, floppy disk, USB flash drive, etc. that can bring something from the outside into your computer. These days though, except for a few special purposes, the PC wouldn't be of much use to most people though. :-)
The Mac gets fewer viruses, but that is not necessarily because it is more secure, but because it is targeted less since it is less common than Windows.
Linux gets fewer viruses, but that is not necessarily because it is more secure, but because it is targeted less since it is less common than Windows.
Oh, and cell phones can get them too. Yep, the iPhone too.
Also, you can even get bad stuff from putting a CD you bought at the store. check out the Sony CD rootkit fiasco.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Hawaii in B&W
Here are a few of my black and white photos of Hawaii. I love B&W and often shoot it rather than color.
I Knew The Bride When She Used to Rock & Roll
Dave Edmunds and Rockpile sing I Knew The Bride. Rock on!
Friday, January 2, 2009
Well, that looks comfortable :-)
This morning I saw this guy using a plastic bottle of shampoo as a pillow. Looks very comfortable. :-)
Sony A700 control wheel problem
In the last few days occasionally when I press the playback button on my Sony A700 and then use the finger/thumb wheel to scroll through photos it will instead of scroll one photo per click stop of the wheel it will suddenly jump quickly through several photos. This is something that just started happening in the last few days and it doesn't happen every time. :-( I checked around on a digital camera forum and it seems lots of people are having this problem. Hmmm. Several people said it is easy to fix by just spraying some electrical contact cleaner in the wheel slots so maybe I will try that. Others said they had to send their camera back to Sony. I only have about a month left on my warranty and while I am in Hawaii it is going to be hard to send in since I don't know how much longer I am going to be here.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Got a new card reader!
Happy New Year! Best wishes for 2009!
This afternoon I had the chance to go buy a new card reader so I was finally able to download the photos on the memory stick from 2 days ago. Here are just a few.
This afternoon I had the chance to go buy a new card reader so I was finally able to download the photos on the memory stick from 2 days ago. Here are just a few.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)