Hmm, how appropriate, an umbrella challenge:
http://www.ephotozine.com/challenges/c1240

That mode always makes me laugh... at myself...
When I first started out I read the manual on how AF-C worked and though it was the most magical invention. I mean, how could the camera be smart and fast enough to track a moving object.
Oddly, every time I went out and tried all I got was out of focus subjects with in focus backgrounds.
Finally it was explained to me that it is simply continuous focus and tracks the object in the focus sensor.... it has no way to determine an object is moving laterally and keep focusing on a subject that moves away from the sensor. (definitely one of those whack yourself in the head moments) Now that we have multiple focus sensors perhaps this works better, but I still get a laugh when I turn on that switch.

Still, I have a hard time keeping the subject on the sensor so I tend to get a lot of blurred subject photos. Using auto to make use of all of the focus sensors seemed to make things worse. The camera could not keep track of what I was trying to focus on. One the subject moved off the current sensor, the tree in the background would become very interesting.

The system probably works much better for birds against a plain blue sky. Tracking herd dogs running back and forth in a open field is quite tricky.
Still, got about 30% hit rate with AF-S but upped to about 50% or more with AF-C and center focus. (probably less than 10% with AF-C and auto select)

Sorry for rambling, but just thought some might get a laugh at my "insights"on AF-C.

Argh, y'all almost had me convinced to go with a K20 myself. But that last bit is consistent with what I've been fighting with.

I've been hired to do more sports, where even outdoors can require ISO800 to keep up the shutter speed with a 300mm lens. So the higher frame rate, the higher ISO, and the decreased noise of the K7 is wedging me into a corner. Time to save my pennies for Xmas if I can hold out that long.

Either that or dump my whole kit and go with another brand. With that in mind, the K7 pricing really doesn't look so bad after all.

The K7 is also a lot less than a f2.8 300+mm lens. I don't even know where to get something like that, legitimately, for Pentax no matter the cost.

Hmmm, maybe someone knows the algorithms better, but as I think about this a bit more...
If an image was embedded in a jpeg and the image was recompressed (resized or cropped for example), I suppose the low order bits would be mostly stripped anyway.

Would this effort end up being pointless?

Before I trudge through the depths of coding such a beast, I was wondering if anyone knew of a steganography program that would embed a non-encrypted 1-bit image in the low oder bits of another image. Basically performing a near-imperceptible watermarking of the main image.

I found a lot of programs that will encrypt text or other data into an image, or sound file, but I want the watermark image to remain "visible", therefore it must remain un-encrypted. It must also be spread through the low order bits of the image and not just tacked into the EXIT/IPTC section.
This way if the image is resized, recompressed or otherwise mildly modified, most of the watermark will still be recoverable. (encrypted data would be destroyed and unrecoverable if the image is modified in any way).

Sometimes people have trouble with the ball head with regards to adjusting the tension screw while moving adjusting the camera. Probably more of an issue on a mono-pod than a tripod if you tried to adjust that way, but have heard some complaints for both.

The pistol grip is nice, but mine sticks and takes a good amount of effort to initially move. The tensions is then very nice to work with.
Very fine adjustments (such as using for macro work) with the pistol grip become difficult as the movement of gripping and letting go will inevitably move the head.

So the ball head is likely better for small adjustments but I am personally not as ambidextrous and I would probably also have some troubles fiddling with tightening and loosening the screws.

Otherwise, they both operate on a ball, so I don't see much else as a benefit for one over the other.

Does any software really do that good of a job at CA correction? Even if you missed a button, I would argue that it may not be that worthwhile.
I often resort to manual processing anyway and in most cases I do not spend much more time and effort than fudging over partially fixed images from the automated processing.

To me it is nothing more than marketing gimmickry -- one more feature to add to the bullet list. I wouldn't get upset over not having the capability.

One example; nice for travel. When you get home your images are tagged with the coordinates where they were taken. Upload them to something like Flickr and let people see where you've been.

I don't believe any camera has a "find me" feature. Also, no turn by turn directions from your camera... yet.

Before anything else, check terms of service.
More and more are claiming ownership of anything that passes through their servers. I thought Picasa had some issues for a while... don't know about now. Just check and make sure you are not allowing someone else to sell your work.

Sadly, the OP may be correct with some of the comments.
I believe there is in fact a law governing how and where photography is allowed and it is quite specific with allowing photography. But last I dug that up, the only references I could find were pre- Sep 11, 2001. So I am certain changes have been made.

e.g. Washing DC put some changes into effect a couple of years ago that threatened to prohibit "professional" photographers from taking photos of one of the most photographed events of the year -- the Cherry Blossom Festival. Thousands upon thousands of cherry trees donated to DC from Japan (actually I think many died of disease, but were replenished). Anyway, tens of thousands of photographers come to walk around and photo the trees throughout the day. Probably several thousand are there before 8am with their DSLRs.

If you are a "professional", and of course this means if you appear to be, you are subject to the requirement of carrying a photographer pass for the day or be subject to fines.

In all reality, they have been pretty good except when you are obviously with a wedding party, for example. But the laws are there, and some park police are looking for excuses to keep the public on its toes.

I have been approached a few times, just walking through the Washington DC area with a camera bag and tripod. Luckily nothing came of it, except when I accidentally stepped to close as if I was about to walk on the marble steps of one of the monuments. Two security guards came quickly as if I was about to beat an old woman with her cane.