dan

I just scanned the article but iirc he says he was spending $50k/yr on polaroid, if he's primarily using it for the test and it's cost effective why not. We used 5x4 and 10x8 polaroid for years to check the shot and that certainly wasn't high resolution either. dan

​+1. the market for these wont mind the price and the body wont need much in the way of rigging. will this camera run ML? probably not relevant given canon's new codec.

i know this thread is mostly preoccupied by the c300ii but i think the form factor of the XC-10 is really good and could/should be a template for cameras to come. not unlike a hasselblad or pentax 645. no evf could be a mistake but there is an eyepiece for the camera.

the rycote - effective, strong, good value. don't forget wind protection.

​Aside from your verbose bragging, littered with ad hominem and accusation, the jouissance you obviously get from convoluting and conflating facts and arguments really seems to keep you going (long after it was relevant). Care to post the name of your blog so we can follow your homilies unadulterated (and maybe save a bit of Andrew's bandwidth for 4k video)?

​No. But respect to you for sticking with your polemic and even though you've thoroughly failed to defend the indefensible, trivialise the important, beatify the abject and turn our worlds upside down etc etc i'm sure you were good for site traffic, so your extensive efforts were not entirely pointless.

Not sure if its been said already (but despite many things i don't like about the institution) the bbc they have handled this clarkson melt down quite well in the circumstances: ~ Conducted a thorough and professional investigation into the incident. ~ Let tank driving clarkson fan boys blow themselves out with their misplaced rhetoric while keeping mostly schtum. ~ Then drop the facts and make the correct action. TV shows change and finish, people will move on. The sky wont fall in, the bbc will keep going. For those who think he is a troubled anti-establishment comic genius and/or offers some kind of satirical critique of our 'PC' times or whatever, we could argue forever about how sadly confused i think you are but there is no need - he's gone, it's over. The people charged with disposing of large sums of public money for on-screen talent have correctly decided even money making fictional cult figures need to keep their fists to themselves to stay on the payroll. This isn't crazy "PC world gone mad" kind of stuff - it's called the modern 1st world where people with money, power and connections still quite often 'get away with it' but in any given time and place there are some limits and the limits (and principles) in this case are widely understood and accepted. The outcomes were inevitable the moment clarkson acted out in the way he did. Why he or anyone else would think there could be another outcome is a mystery to me and maybe represents some kind of wider cultural dissonance but probably not and its all just been a wonderful opportunity to learn a bit more about each other :-) Andrew, I can see these threads have been popular, thank you and well done for hosting them.

It is funny to laugh at your employer especially when they pay you £4m/year (and what employer should not be laughed at, especially a public sector 1 paying £4m/y.) But it's not that funny trying it to do the same thing about an ex-employer, it just looks bitter and angry. So some new material for JC's new show or a broadcaster who'll want to make him the poster boy for faux anti-establishment rhetoric?

​http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mzungu

The only person who has jeopardised the show and these jobs is Clarkson. Stop blaming others for calling his unacceptable behaviour unacceptable. He's had a few warnings, has any of them prompted him to consider his responsibilities and what is at stake in this regard? If this well educated and remunerated person did, the outcome is clear, he doesn't give a fuck. He prefers to take the money and present himself at odds with the job requirements.

​Uggh, yourself. "'multi kulti' bullshit". I guess Berlin really missed out on something when you left - but the history of that city as a centre for progressive politics, the avant-garde and artistic movements would suggest what they've missed on with you they have seen before and can live without.

If jeeza does get fired, i'm sure he'll get snapped up by someone. But i wonder how many prime-time brands will really want to be seen sponsoring his crass attempts at edgy humour. DAVE is 1 thing, ITV/CHANNEL4/SKY is quite another - he'll be on a much shorter leash and will blow it sooner or later at which point he'll need his own TV channel to deliver witty insights/incites to his fans - Al JEZeera anyone :-)

lens flare and adapters? Nikon e series 135 2.8 (built in lens hood) onto A7s. Chronic lens flare in daylight and not good looking either, not as ugly at nighttime but hard to avoid. Solved the issue for now with a black masking tape hood but i'm wondering if lens adapters have an influence here. dan

The irony is Clarkson told the producer he was going to have him fired. He can make offensive class, gender, sexuality and race based jokes and statements (in and out of character), verbally abuse a co-worker, psychologically threaten a co-worker but it's ok because some people think he is funny. But if someone can't supply the dinner he wants they should get there matching orders. No wonder he looks so sheepish about this given all the second chances he's had. The BBC probably spend a fortune trying to keep him out of trouble and scooping up when he does make a mess. I don't think anyone is abusing the site owner or JC, it's not like anyone has made the 'joke' of having you or him shot in front of your family, or suggested your sexuality is questionable, or your place of birth makes you inferior, etc etc etc. This is run of the mill material for this hero of free speech and authenticity.

maybe he wants to get fired. someone has offered him loads more money but BBC have him under contract. every few months he tries to think up some new way to be fired without destroying his brand. if that's the case BBC should keep him and force him to do his own reality show where he rides bicycles up hill till his contract expires, preferably in a country less enamoured to his style of class, sex, race and cultural put downs than we seem to be :-)