John Andrews is a Competitive Webmaster and Search Engine Optimization Consultant in Seattle, Washington. This is John Andrews blog on issues of interest to the SEO community and competitive webmasters. Want to know more?

johnon.com  Competitive Webmastering & SEO
January 26th, 2008 by john andrews

What Price, Worldwide Embrassment?

I supposed we’ve gotten used to our Federcal Communications Commission (FCC) failing to do much useful with the 300 million taxpayer dollars we give them every year. But now we have a new value consideration for American taxpayers: what is world wide embarassment worth? What is the value of the FCC propping American’s up as the laughing stock of the world, and hypocritcal to boot?

Our FCC just fined a television show $1.4 million dollars for showing a bare bottom (from the side) and a small portion of the side of a woman’s bare breast (from the side, across the room), nearly 5 years ago, before 10pm. No, I’m not kidding. Eerily Taliban-like, no? reports are everywhere… making the worldwide part of the embarassment a sure thing. You can read the details here and here and here.

Personally I cringe whenever I see any of the following these days:

  1. an American criticizing a European nation, yes, that includes France
  2. the value of my US dollars compared to the Euro, the Canadian dollar, the Chinese Yuan, the Jananese Yen…or almost any other modern currency
  3. the prospects for the current crop of presidential candidates actually changing the current disaster we call our government
  4. an American saying “stop bitching… we still have it better than other countries“. Yeah, that’s the spirit. Celebrate mediocity all the way until we are just a hair better off than the worst. What then, a “yea we’re not the worst” celebration?

For all those who say we don’t need to get involved because our voters and our government will work it all out eventually, I have to ask, at what price?

Topical Tags:
★★ Click to Share!    Digg this     Create a del.icio.us Bookmark     Add to Newsvine
July 29th, 2007 by john andrews

Canon MkIII Autofocus Problems: Update

It seems the Internet is changing things for the better. In my last post about the Canon EOS-1D MkIII autofocus, I commented how camera manufacturers get away with shipping inferior computerized cameras because we users cannot afford to properly test the single units we purchase. If you get a soft focuser or a stutterer you really can’t make a case with Canon or the dealer, because there are simply too many variables and it is too difficult to prove.

Well, that back focusing issue I highlighted has become a big issue, and the fine work done by the folks at ProPhotoHome is making big waves. NatureScapes now has a lengthy thread describing the issues nature photographers have had with the new MkIII, especially those trying to shoot flying birds. The Rob Galbraith people seem pissed, and were quick to test the new firmware release to see if it fixed the problem: it didn’t.

If the Internet enables grass roots action, we see it happening here. Some of the commentary from the very influential digital photogaphy websites, regarding this new $5,000 digital camera from Canon:

From Rob Galbraith.com:

…on sunny, warm days, the EOS-1D Mark III’s ability to grab focus initially, hold focus on static subjects and track moving subjects is both unusably poor and no match for the camera’s predecessor, the EOS-1D Mark II N…We’ve now shot and analysed about 3400 track, soccer and test frames taken over two days… and the results are effectively the same as before: lots of out-of-focus frames that should be crisply focused. And, as before, simply putting the EOS-1D Mark II N onto the same lens and shooting the same stuff produces a high percentage of in-focus photos.

Ouch. If we looked at the PPC payouts, for the DP sites, as a measure of how close they are to the purchase decision, we would see they are VERY INFLUENTIAL for high-end digital camera buying. That has got to hurt. Canon must be paying attention, but can they fix the problem?

Topical Tags:
★★ Click to Share!    Digg this     Create a del.icio.us Bookmark     Add to Newsvine
July 8th, 2007 by john andrews

Canon 1DMkIII back focus problems

No cat posts for me but sometimes I want to post about my non-SEO work (Mountain Biking, Digital Photography, Kayaking, Sailing, Hiking). I’ll keep it to technology, though, because I do have another blog for family stuff.

Those who know me as a photographer have likely heard my rants about how computerized (digital) cameras  provide easy excuses for manufacturers. They have become so complex with so many variables effecting image quality that we feeble users can’t really hold the manufacturer’s accountable for quality any more. You don’t know if your camera is a lemon, and even if you sense it might be, you can’t prove it. Sometimes you can’t even test it unless you’re an engineer with a home testing facility. When you drop $2k on a DSLR body and experience back focus issues or sharpness “problems”, what can you do? Pro shops know of these issues — visit a serious equipment room and there are certain bodies that kick around the lab looking like new because everyone knows “don’t take that one”. For every 5 totally beat up EOS 10Ds there is one that looks like new except for one major dent: the dent caused by the guy who slammed it on the counter after it cost him yet another crucial shot. Bite me once.
I’ve been shooting a 10D for 4 years and I’ve been waiting for the Canon 1DMkIII for two years.  Fast, robust, with clean sensor technology and > 8MP resolution. Now that it’s here, I’m agast at the reports. Back focusing problems that make it less desirable for action than the MkII? This can’t be!

I shoot hockey and if you don’t know what that means, it means low-light, off-white, fast-action that strains the best equipment, the most artistic talent, and the keenest eyes. Oh, and in digital camera world, where vertical and horizontal lines are used to define “focused”, there are goal nets and face masks to distract the autofocus systems.  In the world of Canon Digital SLR cameras, that also means you are almost guaranteed  a miss-focus because Canon’s AF system seriously (too seriously?) favors the cross of a vertical/horizontal line for focusing. Shoot a kid behind a face mask and you get a sharply-focused face mask. Shoot at wide aperture, which you have to do because of the fast action and low light conditions of youth hockey, and that 2.5 inches between face mask and face virtually guarantees an out-of-focus face. To shoot kids hockey, you need better technology than the world has so far. Until the Canon 1DMkIII, that is.
The MkIII has less low-light noise than any other camera. It shoots at higher ISO with less noise, which means it shoots faster in lower light. That alone is enough to make it purchase-worthy, but Canon’s engineers also put to work the magic of digital and gave us progammable focus offset adjustment. In situations like mine, where you can predict a needed offset from the focus point (2.5 inches beyond it, to focus on the face instead of the mask), you can now program that offset into the camera! That’s what I needed… it’s the perfect camera!

Alas but the real-world reports are coming in, and just a mnth or so after delivery the AF system on the 1DMkIII is failing the real world tests. Not only is it reportedly not  focusing properly (it seems to choose it’s own AF point instead of the one you preset even though it reports that it used the one you preset), but it’s inconsistently back and front focusing. Sometimes back focusing, sometimes front focusing. There is nothing worse than variability when it comes to precision…. that behavior makes the offset programmability completely useless. Ouch.

At more than $4k  for the body, this is ridiculous. At least we have the efforts of these hard working testers to show us before we waste our money. Otherwise, what do we have? Claims made, promises made, and individual users’ experiences that may disappoint but can’t be easily explained or demonstrated. I am SOOOOO glad I didn’t buy an MkIII yet. Again, hopefully, the consumer web is helping us hold manufacturers accountable for their claims (because apparently no one else is doing that).
I hope Canon USA answers these raised issues promptly and smartly.  I need a faster camera, and would greatly appreciate a programmable focus offset. It would be enabling for me, as there is simply no other way to get the hockey shots.

Topical Tags:
★★ Click to Share!    Digg this     Create a del.icio.us Bookmark     Add to Newsvine

Competitive Webmaster

Wonder how to be more competitive at some aspect of the web? Submit your thoughts.

SEO Secret

Not Post Secret

Click HERE



about


John Andrews is a mobile web professional and competitive search engine optimzer (SEO). He's been quietly earning top rank for websites since 1997. About John

navigation

blogroll

categories

comments policy

archives

credits

Recent Posts: ★ Yahoo GLUE Mashup ★ “Just Make Good Content” is Bullsh*t ★ Reminder: Set Your Clocks and Check Your SSL Certificates ★ Google has Priorities, just like my 8 year old ★ Google’s Brand Arrogance & Typo Domains Revisited ★ It seems EVERYONE is stuffing your local Flash storage… ★ Reputation Management Domains : SEO Online Reputation Web sites ★ Live Blogging T.R.A.F.F.I.C. East, New York ★ Canon 5DMkII debuts with 1080p pro video ★ New York Times trashes AOL Brand ★ Hacking the Nike+ iPod sensor interface ★ Google’s Figured Out Better Ways to Know About You ★ Breeding Bad Domain Names ★ Google Chrome Bait ‘n Switch? ★ Google Chrome and Your Privacy ★ I’m Going to Work for Google ★ What is Google Hiding? 403 Forbidden: “your query looks similar to automated requests” ★ The Platform is Not the Message, Mark Cuban. ★ Automated Rank Checking: Thanks for Helping, Google ★ Consequences of a Baaad Domain Name ★ Pubcon 6 Concurrent Sessions: You Miss 83% ★ Geek Alert: Gotta Love this Industry ★ Another Security Breech - CLEAR ★ What is “Social Media Optimization” ? ★ No Guts, No Donuts 

Subscribe

☆ about

John Andrews is a mobile web professional and competitive search engine optimzer (SEO). He's been quietly earning top rank for websites since 1997. About John

☆ navigation

  • John Andrews and Competitive Webmastering
  • E-mail Contact Form
  • What does Creativity have to do with SEO?
  • How to Kill Someone Else's AdSense Account: 10 Steps
  • Invitation to Twitter Followers
  • ...unrelated: another good movie "Clean" with Maggie Cheung
  • ...unrelated: My Hundred Dollar Mouse
  • Competitive Thinking
  • Free SEO for NYPHP PHP Talk Members
  • Smart People
  • Disclosure Statement
  • Google Sponsored SPAM
  • Blog Post ideas
  • X-Cart SEO: How to SEO the X Cart Shopping Cart
  • IncrediBill.blogspot.com
  • the nastiest bloke in seo
  • Seattle Domainers Conference
  • Import large file into MySQL : use SOURCE command
  • Vanetine's Day Gift Ideas: Chocolate Fragrance!
  • ☆ blogroll

  • Bellingham SEO
  • Hans Cave Diving in Mexico
  • Healthcare Search Marketing
  • John Andrews
  • John Andrews SEO
  • Mixminion
  • PrivateBloggingWiki
  • Privoxy
  • SEO Quiz
  • SMX Search Marketing Expo
  • T.R.A.F.F.I.C. East 2007
  • TOR
  • ☆ categories

    Competition (37)
    Competitive Intelligence (14)
    Competitive Webmastering (406)
    Webmasters to Watch (4)
    domainers (46)
    Oprah (1)
    Privacy (10)
    Public Relations (163)
    SEO (300)
    Client vs. SEO (2)
    Link Building (2)
    Search Engines vs. SEO (1)
    SEO SECRETS (9)
    SEO vs. SEO (1)
    ThreadWatch Watching (5)
    Silliness (22)
    society (6)
    Uncategorized (21)

    ☆ archives

  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006