Ed/Bob-
A comparison test is warranted, I think...
-Don

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Combining a rangefinder and clinometer for convenience
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:03:20 -0400










Don,
 
I don't want you falling off any limbs, 
but I fear you are mistaken about this one.  The iPhone's triple 
accelerometers use a digital version of their readings with some innate 
sensitivity limitation of that digital conversion to interpolate the 
direction of tilt, i.e. the difference from down.  The suunto 
clinometer is a purely mechanical device that does not have any inherent 
sensitivity limitations aside from the printing of the numbers on the 
dial.  There is no interpolation of anything. Its measurements are based 
upon the idea that gravity points down and that the weighted point on the dial 
will align straight down with gravity.  The only limitation on its accuracy 
is how well the dial can be read.  So it follows that a mechanical 
clinometer will be be more precise - the data will be more repeatable than an 
electronic one.  You can argue that the dial may stick or that there may be 
some similar problem with the mechanical instrument, but the same can be said 
of 
the iPhone.  That is not a question of precision.  The mechanical 
instrument by any reasonable assessment is more precise.
 
Ed
 
 
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. 
It is 
the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: 
  DON 
  BERTOLETTE 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 11:39 
PM
  Subject: [ENTS] Re: Combining a 
  rangefinder and clinometer for convenience
  
Ed-
'Tis true, the 550 does have I believe a digital 
  one...had I not purchased a 440 just weeks before the 550 came out/Bob gave 
it 
  his stamp of approval, I'd probably not be having this conversation...as it 
  is, I'm trying to work with what I have.
By the way, check me out on this, 
  but I'll go out on a limb and say that iPhones triple accelerometer based 
  Clinometer IS more accurate than the gravity-based clinometer!  The 
  challenge, and it can be met, is to choose a means of precise sighting (I'm 
  working with a solution that involves a simple 'gunsight groove' that aligns 
  the iPhone with the target.
-don


  
  From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ENTS] 
  Re: Combining a rangefinder and clinometer for convenience
Date: Mon, 20 
  Jul 2009 23:32:32 -0400


  

  Don,
   
  Perhaps the iPhone clinometer is as 
  good as you say it is.  On the other hand because you can read something 
  to 1/5 degree, does not mean it is accurate to 1/5 degree.  The 
  limitation on angle measurement for most people is how steady one can hand 
  hold the instrument.  That limitation is in the same range or greater as 
  the reading given by the iPhone, so I don't really see that this is any 
  improvement over a standard clinometer.  According to Bob Leverett, 
   who owns one, the Nikon Forestry 500 has a clinometer and rangefinder 
  sharing the same optics.
   
  Ed
   
  "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. 
It is 
  the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
  
    ----- 
    Original Message ----- 
    From: 
    DON 
    BERTOLETTE 
    To: 
    [email protected] 
    
    Sent: 
    Monday, July 20, 2009 10:56 PM
    Subject: 
    [ENTS] Re: Combining a rangefinder and clinometer for convenience
    
Steve/Ed-
For me, with my iPhone and its clinometer app, 
    I'd be pushing for an iPhone with a laser rangefinder...the three 
    accelerometers the iPhone has are more accurate than the clinometer (can 
    read with a vernier like device to 1/5 degrees)!
But yeah, I'd like 
    my  Nikon 440 to have a digital or optical clino, particularly sharing 
    same optics!
-Don


    
    Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:31:57 -0400
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Combining a 
    rangefinder and clinometer for convenience
From: 
    [email protected]
To: 
    [email protected]

Ed-

Yes, even though the 
    resolutions differ, it's easier to shift from one to the other and maintain 
    the sighting position. Perhaps we can encourage Nikon to pair with Suunto 
or 
    Brunton to create a clean instrument.

Steve


    On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Edward Frank 
    <[email protected]> 
    wrote:

    
      
      Steve, Don,
       
      Even if they were not 
      precisely aligned.  It would save the problem of them jangling 
      against each other.   Also even with sighting each individually 
      on a single sprig, having them side by side would be a minimal adjustment 
      from instrument to instrument when looking at the same point as opposed 
to 
      dropping one to its lanyard and raising the other while trying to keep 
the 
      same point in your view...
       
      Ed
       
      "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. 
It 
      is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
      






    
    Bing™ brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try 
    it now.<BR



  
  Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Search, add, and share the web’s latest sports 
videos. 
  Check it 
  out.<BR




_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Search, add, and share the web’s latest sports videos. 
Check it out.
http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_videos_072009&cat=sports
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org
Send email to [email protected]
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
To unsubscribe send email to [email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to