Slashdot Mirror

There is also a review in Steve Digicams. I like their reviews because they also include some sample pictures you can use to compare to other cameras (of course the pictures are taken of the same buildings, etc. but they differe in light available. The sample pictures are still good).

Sadly, durable stuff is likely to outlive its usefulness.

I've got an old Toshiba laptop somewhere - powered by a 7.14MHz 8086. The machine is heavily built and works fine, has decent battery life and, apart from being a bit grubby and yellowed, works just the same as it did when new.

Except it's almost entirely useless when it comes to working alongside modern computers. It and my modern iBook have no ports, disks or anything in common. I'd need a third computer to get data between the two.

Then there's digital cameras. I've got a Fuji FinePix 6900 Zoom, which I've had for a bit over two years now. It still takes really good photos, and continues to work extremely well, but I have a feeling I'll be replacing it because of obsolescence rather than it breaking.

I'm eyeing up Canon DSLRs, looking at new things they can do which my camera can't - new advances that simply hadn't been (affordably) available when my camera was designed. Long, low-noise exposures, high-capacity rechargeable AA batteries, higher resolution, and so on...

Technology advances ridiculously quickly. Yes, you can stick around with something prehistoric, but unless you have very limited needs you're likely to constantly lust after what's you're missing on a newer device. I'm not advocating disposable hardware, but at times I understand why things now are rarely (over-) engineered to last. By the time they break, they'll be dinosaurs surrounded by smaller, faster, cheaper descendants...

I only wish my laptops had as good a display in sunlight. Unlike most basement dewlling slashdotters, I perfer to code in briliant sunlight preferably overlooking a lake. Now where can I get a laptop with a display that is even somewhat legible in direct sunlight.

I was forgetting this is more on topic than it seems - Seagate has announced a 5GB CF microdrive supposedly available for under $150 in Q3 of this year (http://www.steves-digicams.com/microdrive.html). In other words if you can wait, don't buy expensive Hitachi CF drives (which they hope you will do now that the Muvo option is gone) - cheaper alternatives are on the way.

This sig shameslessly plugs my work with tandem recumbent tricycles and the severely disabled

Off topic but related and affects many people who are still buying the Nomads thinking they are getting a 4GB microdrive usable in their digital cameras etc. (like me recently burned after buying directly from Creative). Hitachi has followed up on their threats (from http://www.steves-digicams.com/microdrive.html): "Other OEM drives with different part numbers are also not CF compliant and meet the requirements of that customer. All are subject to change without notice as well. So if you have an OEM drive that works now, one from that same mfg may not work later on...."
This thread http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1 019&message=9153930 and others on digital camera forums confirm that the MD in newer Nomads do not work in CF devices (it even says so on the package in fine print) .

Image vaults are now available today for about $300. They contain a harddrive (often on the order of 30 gigs) and a cardreader. They're about the size of an mp3 player. Just plug your card in and dump the images. Some of them can even burn a CD.

here are several reviews of many varieties

Addonics MFR, runs off battery or wall power: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/addoni cs_mfr.html

But there's a huge benefit to this tech-race. More digital cameras. People with them, use them a lot more than they did with film. No cost to take, no cost to view, low cost to print or mail. I wrote an open-source project to make building galleries free-and-easy (primarily for my family initially, see it at Picture Pager on SourceForge) and that too is a benefit of digitals... they gain from the open source world.

So the only downside of 8MP cameras is that they're the Ferraris or Porsches of consumer-land. They push the technology, in a few years us mere mortals will benefit, but serious drivers and photographers benefit, at least slightly, now while bearing the hefty early-adopter price.

There is a waterproof housing WP-DC700 that fits the Cannon Powershot A60, A70 A75, A75 nd A80 digital cameras.

If you have a tight budget and are relatively experienced at handling decent (read expensive) camera equipment, I'd suggest visiting a good camera store and renting a pro-level camera, and a bright zoom lens. The pro level Canons are weather-proof and relatively rugged and will give you great quality pics, the kind of which you can even enlarge and sell for obscene prices...

If you are not too keen on renting equipment then there are a bunch of waterproof cameras out there...

Oops...I'm sadly outdated: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ10, 4MP, 12x optical zoom.
Review
There's one I wouldn't mind to own.

Slashdot isn't a photography website, but I'll respond to this anyways. Optical zoom wouldn't have helped you much here. As others have responded, it probably would have hurt more than anything.

The shutter was open for 1/8 second. Usually the most stable hands can only hold a camera still for 1/focal length. ie, for a standard camera you shouldn't shoot any slower than 1/30 of a second.

Having a longer focal length would have exacerbated the problem. What you need here is a greater light sensitivity (higher ISO). A higher ISO would have allowed you to shoot with a faster shutter speed.

I would suggest reading up a bit at www.dpreview.com or www.steves-digicams.com before buying a new camera.

If you want to see my credentials for making this comment take a look at: http://www.pbase.com/efatapo

I think this is a great idea, although I'd like to be able to check boxes of stuff I don't like to see. Imagine being able to tick off commercial sites as a negative. Then, when I'm searching for info on my new digital camera I won't have to wade through dozens of commercial sites offering it for sale.

The Microdrive does need "AIR" to float the heads and typically above 10,000 ft the mass of the air is too low and the drive requires a pressurized environment similar to an aircraft or spacecraft. At high altitude the air bearings begin to loose support from the air molecules needed to provide the "air bearing" for the Negative Air Bearing Surface (NABS) design of the head. If this "air bearing" is removed or lowered (as is the case with low density air at high altitudes) the head damages the media and you could have loss of data ... The OEM Functional specification defines the warranty range for operating altitude as 3,000 M or 9,000 ft (3ft/M). If the customer is mountain climbing with a GPS or digital camera above 9,000 ft the drive might have problems. (Mt Fuji ~ +13,000ft, Mt Raineer ~ +14,000 ft).

The Microdrive does need "AIR" to float the heads and typically above 10,000 ft the mass of the air is too low and the drive requires a pressurized environment similar to an aircraft or spacecraft. At high altitude the air bearings begin to loose support from the air molecules needed to provide the "air bearing" for the Negative Air Bearing Surface (NABS) design of the head. If this "air bearing" is removed or lowered (as is the case with low density air at high altitudes) the head damages the media and you could have loss of data ... The OEM Functional specification defines the warranty range for operating altitude as 3,000 M or 9,000 ft (3ft/M). If the customer is mountain climbing with a GPS or digital camera above 9,000 ft the drive might have problems. (Mt Fuji ~ +13,000ft, Mt Raineer ~ +14,000 ft).

I just picked up a Canon S9000 for $170 new. It prints just as good as the Epson, it prints up to 13"x19", it's faster, and the drivers are better. It has 6 separate tanks and they are not chipped. The print head itself is replacable for about $70 if I do have a problem. I have found tanks as low as $2.00 (ink4art.com) and I just bought a refill kit with 6 blank cartridges and 4 oz ink in each color for $70 (inkjetgoodies.com). I also have a Canon Digital camera (S230) that I love.

Canon may not be making as much off me by my not buy their ink cartridges but they do have a loyal customer that is willing to recommend their products in public. I will continue to purchase Canon products in the future because they are not screwing me over now!

Instead of using NiMH or Alkaline AA battery pairs, Li-ion batteries are fantastic too. A comparison with 2xAA batteries and CR-V3 batteries show that CR-V3 battery charges last longer and have a longer lifespan.

If you do, point them to this page. The author there recommends buying a Creative Nomad MuVo. It has the same 4G drive and sells for $200.

...I bought one by Kodak. Why ? To this date, I still wonder.
It was one of those DC-3200 camera's(opinion definitely not mine), which provided 1 megapixel resolution with the camerasize of a polaroid.
After one first try, I brought it back when I found out that the batteries (AA) would only last 30 minutes. Since then, I regarded Kodak in the digital camera business for what it proved to be to me: crap.

My second camera was a Fuji A-101, which was a lot smaller, more power-friendly, and gave me a lot of pleasure for my money. I stayed with Fuji ever since.

Kodak indeed can't hack it in the digital age. I would say to them: put up with it, or .....

...I bought one by Kodak. Why ? To this date, I still wonder.
It was one of those DC-3200 camera's(opinion definitely not mine), which provided 1 megapixel resolution with the camerasize of a polaroid.
After one first try, I brought it back when I found out that the batteries (AA) would only last 30 minutes. Since then, I regarded Kodak in the digital camera business for what it proved to be to me: crap.

My second camera was a Fuji A-101, which was a lot smaller, more power-friendly, and gave me a lot of pleasure for my money. I stayed with Fuji ever since.

Kodak indeed can't hack it in the digital age. I would say to them: put up with it, or .....

http://www.steves-digicams.com/digvideo.html

I went through the same problem of looking for a camera to record vacations and my children growing up. I ended up buying a SONY DCR-TRV50 when they came out a few years back. I still use it all the time.

I would recommend buying a collapsible tripod as well for those times you record long plays, talent shows, etc. (holding a camera for a long time can put your arm to sleep no matter how light they are)

Also, if you plan on doing digital editing on your computer (and who doesn't) get the fastest transfer capability from the videocam to the PC. The DCR-TRV50 has firewire which makes editing a snap. Enjoy!

I've found Steve's digicams to be an excellent source Of in-depth reviews.

The main site has volumes of info on cameras, printers, software, and even batteries.

Good luck

I've found Steve's digicams to be an excellent source Of in-depth reviews.

The main site has volumes of info on cameras, printers, software, and even batteries.

Good luck

This is the best, unbiased site I've found for reviews of cameras: Steve's Digicams

You might be interested in the Nikon DX series. There are actually many digital SLR cameras on the market. Be prepared to say "ouch" when you check out the price tag though.

I know you're looking for an analog camera, but the Canon A40 is a great camera for about $200 or less these days (I got mine for $240 a year ago + a free 32meg cf disk).

At the time it was the only digital camera with SLR-like functionality available in the price range. There are only 3 lenses available (closeup, telephoto, wide-angle), but they are fairly inexpensive. There is also water-submersion kit available.

It has 3 modes: Automatic, Program, and Manual - where program is something in-between the difficult of Automatic and Manual.

good review.

Be sure to check out Steve's Digicams great Holiday Wish List section categorized by price range. I generally agree with their picks (and reviews).

http://steves-digicams.com/cameras_digpro.html

This is a great camera website. Click on the name of an SLR camera in the list to get a review, specs, sample images, etc... This website also has other reviews of other types of X megapixel digicams as well.

Loomis

Steve's Digicams always has great reviews.

Your project sounds very similar in needs to another application I'd discussed with a friend some time ago. When the Civil Air Patrol gets called out on a search-and-rescue mission, they frequently fly over the suspected area with a video camera, sending frames down to the ground with slow-scan TV so that an expert on the ground can identify likely spots to search. The image quality sucks and the data rate is worse.

It'd be nice if these folks could carry a multi-megapixel digicam on the plane, snap pics of anything interesting, and have the images sent to the ground for viewing/zooming on a laptop. The only trouble is, the search area is usually several miles on a side, well over the range of normal 802.11a/b. The solution we came up with involves a cadet on the ground with a high-gain dish antenna being told "keep this pointed at that plane". Cheaper and more reliable than an automatic antenna tracker, for sure. :)

So what we need here is a way to interface with the digital camera. As soon as a photo is taken, we should suck it of the camera's memory and buffer it for transmission to the ground station as soon as possible. Point to ponder: Assume that wireless connectivity is intermittent. Do you transmit the most recent pictures first, or the oldest pictures first, to make sure the base station has the most useful data possible? (LIFO or FIFO?)

Some time ago, I proposed a bluetooth CF module which would appear as a large FAT filesystem. It would have a limited amount of "cache" memory, where images would immediately be written, and then it would then link to a large hard drive sitting in the user's pocket and free the cache for more images. An 802.11b version would suck more battery than bluetooth, but allow longer range operation. The trick isto emulate a filesystem, so firmware hacks aren't needed. (If you could mess with the camera's firmware, you could use an existing CF wireless card and let the camera handle the protocol, right?) Nikon seems to have released a similar product but it's vaporware and only works with one particular camera.

In lieu of sitting straight in the camera's media slot, there's always software that controls the camera via serial or USB. The problem is, most of it seems designed for interactive use. I don't know whether the protocols support lurking in the background to just suck files off the flash card, without interfering with the camera's normal operation. Several of the packages are based on a common code base with a protocol that's fairly well documented, so rolling your own isn't out of the question. Let's assume for the sake of discussion that your camera supports this and suitable software can be found or written.

If you can get by on RS232's peak speed of 115200bps, and if the software can be worked out, there are several hardware options. Several other posters have suggested PDAs with wireless cards. That's a great idea, especially if you can strip off the screen and case to save weight. Some suggested the Soekris net4511 or similar. It's got a low-power 486 chip, serial ports, ethernet ports, and a PCMCIA slot for your wireless card. Or, you could hack up an existing 802.11b accesspoint to run linux and use its console port to connect to the camera. (Note: The Eumitcom-based APs are getting hard to find now. Not a platform with future potential.) There's a similar project for the Apple Airport base station, but it's limited to etherbooting, probably not suitable for this application.

You could use a pair of Ricochet modems dialed to each other (auto-answer on the chopper, and dial from the ground), in which case they simp

Actually, it's not. At least, not yet. Pixelvision was so great because it was liberating. It was the video version of the portable 4-track tape recorder. It brought the DIY/Garage ethos to movie making.

This thing is all about consuming licensed content ("Collect Them All") from the major media players, as if that's any big surprise. Sure, Zoc_All_Alone is reverse-engineering the file format, but until someone can hack a Mavica to record in that format, I don't think it will be as compelling to fiddle with.

Good point. Don't see why not .. somehow ... eventually, considering that micro-drives are available for use with electronic equipment, notably digital cameras. It looks at though 1 GB is available now, with 4 GB perhaps this fall.

First off:
Go to Steve's Digicams and check the ratings for batteries; they have done extensive testing using a custom test jig that simulates actual use.

Now my comments:
I use two different varieties, for different purposes.

NiMH - The *best* for high drain devices, and stuff that you will use for a short period of time then shelf. Digital cameras, FRS radios, gameboys in our house all use these.

Pros: Great power delivery, great capacity. Actually lasts several times longer than alkaline in some devices such as digital cameras. Can be recharged hundreds of times, especially if charged in a high quality charger. Landfillable (though you should still recycle them).

Cons: Self-discharges; charge them up, put them on the shelf, a month later they're half dead. Only deliver 1.2V so some (very few, actually) devices think they're nearly dead when you put them in. However, they stay at 1.2v until they're about totally dead.

Rechargable alkaline (Ray-O-Vac Renewals) - I use these in low drain devices, and things that must sit around for a long time before being used. Palm pilot, remote controls, flashlights get these.

Pros: puts out full 1.5v, some devices like these better. Long charged shelf life; can be charged and still retain most of the charge months later.

Cons: proprietary system, somewhat expensive. You must buy Ray-O-Vac's charger, and it's not a very good charger. Can only be charged tens of times. As toxic as alkalines; should be taken to recycling.

Also still around are NiCad. Don't bother. Lower capacity than NiMH, not much cheaper, all the cons, not all of the pros, plus they're toxic (cadmium) and should DEFINITELY be recycled rather than landfilled.

To make rechargable alkalines last longest, you should recharge them when they're no more than half full when possible; top them off when you get the chance. Running them totally dead really kicks their ass; I've had them last only 10 charges when doing that.

The vast majority of my use is NiMH. Not all are the same, and many mAh ratings lie. Best source of really good chargers and batteries is Thomas Distributing. The Maha charger they have, with both 110v and 12v charging options, is awesome.

I can't imagine why more people don't use rechargables. I'm a pretty disorganized person, but I'm able to keep a plastic box full of charged batteries, ready for use in the house. It kind of makes me sick to see the huge bulk packs of AA cells in the store, on the endcaps in every department, moving like hell, while the rechargables are hidden on the bottom rack in the back of the photo department.

What's really sickening is when I go to the recycling center; they fill four 30 gallon trash cans with alkalines every week. Consider that this is mid-sized town (Ann Arbor, MI), and that probably, at best, 5% of the batteries make it there (AA is a pretty green town, but even so 5% is almost certainly high). This means there are probably millions of tons of batteries hitting the landfills every year.

(disclaimer; I have no affiliation with sites mentioned in this post, I'm just a happy customer)

Agreed for B&W absolutely... I have had a laser printer for about 8 years or so, and the original toner cartridge just ran out last year. Sure the cartridge costs $150 (CDN), but it lasts forever, and the text is sharp enough to shave with, and blacker than hell.

However, colour has its place, so when I finally bought an inkjet printer to print out photos from my digital camera, one of the primary factors was long term operating cost.

Epson printers are the top of the line for visual quality, and a very cheap initial purchase, but they gouge you on replacement cartridges later... so I went for a Canon (s820) instead, and am extremely pleased with both the print quality, and ink economy. It has SIX refillable cartridges (photo, or "light", magenta and cyan in addition to standard CMYB) as opposed to Epson's microchip crippled, non refillable 1 or 4 cartridge solutions.

The Canon is also way faster and quieter to boot, and everytime I show someone a photo I've printed, they want to know what professional Photo Lab I went to. :)

How about a RAID of IBM/Hitachi Microdrives? They're IDE compatible with the right cabling, use less power than any other rotating storage, and are super shockproof. Of course, given their size, they weigh very little relative to other rotating solutions.

The only problem I can see is that they're only good for 1GB each right now, but 4GB is coming soon.

Of course, you'll need some kind of off the shelf motherboard and some IDE controllers - but you can GLUE that together to avoid stuff shaking out of slots. But I guess you'd have the same issues with any RAID solution.

Jonathan

Umm, the IBM/Hitachi Microdrive is a hard drive, not a flash drive. It just happens to be the same size (about one inch) and have the same interface as a Compact Flash type 2 card.

Being a mechanical device, the Microdrive draws more power and is more fragile than a flash card. Its main attraction used to be high capacity, but Compact Flash is rapidly catching up.

There's a 4 GB version of the Microdrive coming this fall, says Steve's Digicams

Check out Steves Digicams or any other digital camera site for info.

Steve's Digicams

Epinions

Digital Camera Resource Page

Digital Photography Review

CNet User Reviews

Google Search

I recently bought a Fuji FinePix 2650 digital camera, which uses xD picture cards. They are the smallest standard on the market (i think). Here's a picture of all the different types... xD is on the right. Its small, but unlike smartmedia it is not thin. Its rigid and feels durable. I think capacities can scale up to 1GB with the architecture. The only drawback is that the standard was created by Fuji and Olympus, and I don't know if it will be offered by other manufacturers.

Yah, Canon have done it. They seemed to have walked away from the gouge business model (whilst the likes of epson are still flogging that dead horse like there's no tomorrow.

Canon have the 'Ink Tank' thingamy. A little plastic box that is clear, so you can see inside, and doesn't do any of the funny business with chips or vacuums, so you can refill at will.

In practice, I'll likely keep buying Canon ink for my new S9000 (a3 six colour photo jobbie) 'cos I want the lovely results, long life, etc, etc. That aside, I still love the fact that I get to choose.

Canon seem to be doing ok with the ink tank thing. People who sell aftermarket refill kits actually reccomend the Canon printers. So long as they aren't epson-dumb enough to give the printer away and make their money on the gouge later (and the slightly higher price of the Canon models that do have ink tanks suggests they're not), then it's a big win situation for Canon.

Yah, Canon have done it. They seemed to have walked away from the gouge business model (whilst the likes of epson are still flogging that dead horse like there's no tomorrow.

Canon have the 'Ink Tank' thingamy. A little plastic box that is clear, so you can see inside, and doesn't do any of the funny business with chips or vacuums, so you can refill at will.

In practice, I'll likely keep buying Canon ink for my new S9000 (a3 six colour photo jobbie) 'cos I want the lovely results, long life, etc, etc. That aside, I still love the fact that I get to choose.

Canon seem to be doing ok with the ink tank thing. People who sell aftermarket refill kits actually reccomend the Canon printers. So long as they aren't epson-dumb enough to give the printer away and make their money on the gouge later (and the slightly higher price of the Canon models that do have ink tanks suggests they're not), then it's a big win situation for Canon.

Here's a Sony press release about a "giga vault" handheld 40Gb hard drive gizmo, with USB2 and Firewire but no 802.11. They do seem to be getting into the portable storage biz.

Anyway, the presentations look compelling. I await cameras with reasonable numbers of megapixels (say 4Mpixels +) and reviews...

Then check out the Sigma SD9 reviews at Steve's Digicams and Digital Photography Review as it comes pretty close at 3.5Megapixels (and claims to create images equal to a 6Megapixel camera).

Heres a snap from a model rocket pointed downwards whilest in flight from a Kodak DC20.

In-Flight

This looks similar to the Kite photography that was on /. before.

From Steve's Digicams website

Heres a snap from a model rocket pointed downwards whilest in flight from a Kodak DC20.

In-Flight

This looks similar to the Kite photography that was on /. before.

From Steve's Digicams website

I have a Toshiba PDR-M70 3 megapixel digicam. It allows one to manually control both the shutter speed and F-stop. It can leave the shutter open for up to a minute. It works pretty well, but the longer exposures do suffer from a bit of CCD noise.

Most other decent "prosumer" digicams can do the same thing. There are also digital SLR's like this 11 megapixel Canon EOS-1 DS that are simply incredible. Check out the sample photos (3.5MB JPEGs) to see what I'm taking about. It's better than (most) film!

And you can't use rechargables, because these bad boys need the full 1.7 volts from those Alkaline cells -- the 1.3 from NiCd just won't cut it.

NiCad? What is this, 1982?? Try high-output NiMH instead. I've got a couple of sets for my digicam (which will destroy a set of alkalines faster than it takes to fill a CF card), and they're great. See Steve's digicams for a rundown of what's out there.

i usually read digital camera reviews at dc resource

but looks like he didnt put it up yet, but this link may be useful too... ::aky

p.s. just curious, how do i put up a link on /. so that it opens in another new windows, tried that bfore(target didnt work)..couldnt make it work, it would be so cool if i could.

I waited years to buy a digital camera. I wanted a digital camera that took pictures as good quality (or better) as 35mm. The Canon D30 is the first digital camera that has received critical acclaim for its ability to take photos which surpass the quality of 35mm cameras. So I bought one of these cameras and a nice 28-135mm lens and entered the digital realm. I also bought a 1GB IBM microdrive for the camera which holds about 800 photos. This camera takes absolutely fantastic photos. I use a very inexpensive inkjet printer, the Canon BJC-8200 to print photos on glossy photo paper and visitors to my home are astounded when I tell them that all the photos hung around my home were taken with a digital camera and printed on an inkjet printer. They look at least as good as traditional photos.

There are several advantages to digital photos over 35mm:

1. Since my microdrive holds 800 photos and each digital photo has no real cost to me (besides a small amount of battery power), I will often take several photos of the same subject / scene whereas with a 35mm I might only take one photo because of the cost of film.

2. Before printing a digital photo, you have the opportunity to crop, enhance and edit it. While you can certainly crop, enhance and even edit 35mm photos, it takes far less time and money to do so with digital. I use Adobe Photoshop for this purpose. Besides providing tools to do simple enhancements, Photoshop also has many built-in filters (and more available third-party) which are a lot of fun to play with.

3. Digitial albums are extremely easy to organize. I use directories to create albums. I create a new folder under the "My Photos" folder for each new event. I use the naming convention "YYYY-MM-DD Event Name" for each subfolder, so it's easy to browse the albums in chronological order.

4. Digital photos are far more permanent than prints. Formats may change over time, but you'll always be able to convert to the new formats. The key is to keep copies of both the original photos AND the ones you've spent the time editing. I backup all my photos onto CD. While you only have one copy of a 35mm negative, you can easily create as many copis of your photos CDs as you like and share these with friends and family members or just store them for safekeeping.

5. Digital photos are much easier to share. I live a great distance from the rest of my family and use my photos to help stay in touch. When I first got my digital camera, I kept my online photos at zing.com. Unfortunately, they went the way of the dodo about a year ago. They made a deal with ophoto.com before unplugging and all my albums were transferred, but I didn't like ophoto's interface all that much and eventually found a new home for my photos at ImageStation. It's a free service and it's owned by Sony, so hopefully it will prove to have some staying power. If you're interested, please visit my photos. I have over a hundred albums online - I think this one is the best.

I also started digitizing my older 35mm and APS photos using a film scanner. A film scanner produces far better quality digital photos than a flatbed scanner does, so consider investing in one if you want to digitize / preserve your old photos. I can recommend the Canon CanoScan FS 2710 that I bought. It was inexpensive and besides producing much higher quality photos than a flatbed scanner, it's also a lot faster!

If you're interested, there are a few reviews here, here and here which influenced my decision.

I love my 602 and certainly wouldn't have gone for anything else - if you've got any questions feel free to give me a shout.