Well I've read what you wrote, and it takes the cake for aggression and snideness around here.

I don't know enough about the numbers themselves, but I will take issue with this:

[quote="You"]Company X moving from a market share of 1% to 2% enjoys an imperceptible increase in market power. Clearly a claim that they had increased market share by 100% is a gross misrepresentation of the actual situation, since there is a complete disconnect between the percentage change and the base amount involved.[/quote]This is simply claptrap.

It is perfectly acceptable to measure percentage changes in anything, even if those things are themselves percentages of something else.

In your case, company X has doubled its market share. Presumably you wouldn't object to such wording, yet it means exactly the same as "it's increased its market share by 100%".

Only people that don't understand numbers interpret such a thing as additive rather than multiplicative.

Further, a percentage change in something is often more meaningful than the numerical difference. For instance, a change in market share from 1% to 2% is likely to be a lot more significant than a change from 50% to 51%.

Particularly when both the absolute percentage, and the percentage change in that percentage are given, there is no confusion, and therefore any suggestion of an intent to mislead is highly inappropriate.

There's not much left still standing after he does, is there?

George Lazarambo we should call him.

______________
Edit: I enjoyed the Morlocks reference.

With the pop-up in Controller mode, as opposed to Master, I'd hope its output is unchanged by what you do with the e-Dial in the flash Fn menu.

It's supposed not to contribute to the exposure. It does a bit, especially if you're very close*, but hopefully it would only put out enough to fire the slave.



_________
* I've used my finger to cover up 3/4 or so of the popup when very close to a subject to get round this problem

Ah. That makes sense. Cheers.

Dumb question of the day:

Presumably the dSLR is on one side of the bridge.

What's on the other?

Sometimes, aircraft in silhouette, going away can look for a moment as if they're approaching, and vice versa.

However, not in this case. The aircraft in the last photo is clearly departing, not coming in to land. One of the wheels looks like it's on the way up (it swings up and forward), which is normal for the gear up process shortly after departure. Not on the approach, of course, where they'll both be very much down. A look at the tailplane confirms this.

So saying that you took the shot as it was coming into land seems a little suspect to me for a start.

The other fishy thing is that all four propellers are at exactly the same angle. This would be believable for a single engined aircraft, but not for a four-engined one.

So there's clearly only one aircraft, and it's become duplicated somehow.

Is it possible to split threads with this forum's software? This one would appear to be a classic candidate for a thread split.

You can always tell when Don's been down the pub.

I'm sure they can, but by removing the option to edit as well.

Something of an own-goal for the OP, methinks.

Did they actually mean shutter lag, or did that include other things? It may be that the definition has changed over time, with cameras doing more and more stuff between the button press and the exposure.

If it's really just the time, after all the exposure calculations and AF lock, between the final press of the button to the shutter opening, then it's got to be one of the most pointless statistics out there.

For a human being to time any physical action to a precision of less than 1/10 of a second is probably not reliably achievable, and the time taken to do all those other things must be very variable as well, and often a lot longer than 70ms.

So I'm not sure we're comparing apples with apples here.

It would be nice to know what it is they're really measuring.