Easy:
- The units themselves appear to be well made and have appropriate viscosity and bubble size
- Generally accurate means just that. It would be a little like saying that kev curry generally knows what he is talking about. For most purposes I think that both would be acceptably true.
- Not adequate for archeology or forensics means just that as well. In archeology, for example, photographs are often used to determine subsequent metrics for items shown in situ and the standard for such work is very strict.
This whole bubble level thing is getting tiresome. For record:
- I actually own the camera and have actually seen and used the levels
- I have compared them to a 6" bullet (torpedo) level that I own
- While agreement is not exact (sometimes one way, sometimes the other, never more than about smidgen out-of-bounds either way), the difference is not critical for general photography. Remember too that any variance is the product of both the devices.
- As a convenience, I feel that the levels are valuable
- If they were grossly inaccurate (like those on my tripod legs and tripod release clamp, for example), I would say so.
To further muddy the waters, I have two fairly expensive 4' carpenter's levels. Put against the same wall, they never agree. I guess that means they are both junk. Or maybe it means that the house is poorly built.
Steve
(Tongue planted firmly in cheek on that last analogy...)
Bookmarks