TomTom and Motaquote call it Fair Pay Insurance. A driver in the UK gets a modified TomTom Pro 3100 portable GPS with Active Driver Feedback and Live Services, and a Link tracking unit “allowing driver behaviour and habits to be monitored.” The feedback on “driving events” covers speeding, sharp cornering, and heavy braking. Since it’s location-based, the service might be able to tell if you’re driving the speed limit on on a high-speed road or 20 mph over on a local road.

There are upsides. A driver with speeding tickets and at-fault accidents could use this to afford insurance or maybe it’s the only way to get insurance. The TomTom PND does provide instant feedback so it may collectively improve driving so the total number of accidents (and claims) goes down. The insurance industry in the U.S. has talked about geofencing as another part of usage-based insurance: you pay less if you don’t drive late at night when drunks are out and about, or if you don’t drive in or near high-crime neighborhoods. (That’s a problem if you’re a lower-income person and that’s the only place you can afford to live.) The baseline factor is how many miles each car is driven.

Of course usage-based insurance already exists. The TomTom project is news because it’s a new function for portable GPS systems at a time when they’re under pressure from above and below. Thilo Koslowski, VP of Gartner’s automotive consulting group, says the highest growth rates for navigation devices are smartphone-based and in-dash (as prices come down), with dedicated GPS devices lagging. So PND vendors created more features. Some were a yawn (built-in MP3 player, hotel alarm clock) and some had the potential to be helpful (near real-time traffic). TomTom is also in the news because it rolled up the information gathered on vehicle speeds from early GPS units and sold that off to the Dutch police who used the info to place speed traps. Not exactly the You’re in Good Hands people.

TomTom’s implementation involves adding a black box, the Link device. A neater installation, not so good for TomTom, would be using a telematics system already embedded in the car. The Pay As You Drive (PAYD) program of GMAC Insurance uses the OnStar system already in most GM cars. GMAC Insurance notes all subscibers get a discount just for using PAYD, but you have to factor in the $200-$300 yearly premium for OnStar. GMAC says you get at least an 11% discount. Another U.S. provider, Progressive Insurance, offers reduced rates for drivers who install monitoring devices. Where GMAC tracks miles driven (only), Progressive is TomTom-like in tracking other driving behaviors.

As the cost of embedded telematics falls from about $500 a decade ago to around $100 for a system with a 3G cellphone (it will go back up with 4G phones), it’s possible to have telematics in most every car. Parents could monitor teen driving from a web browser which is good or bad depending on whether you’re the parent or teen. Spouses with marital fidelity concerns might also find web-based real-time tracking to be attractive.

From a driver’s point of view, the concern over usage-based insurance is whether this will move from opt-in to the norm. If so, drivers looking for a little privacy (“what have you got to be afraid of unless you’re hiding something?”) may wind up paying more. In the US, in most or all states the changes would have to be approved by state insurance commissions. It might also require insurance companies to separate out things that seem to be risk factors from the ones that really are. Driving over the speed limit may not be as hazardous as following it too closely, constant lane changes, tailgating, or failing to wear a seat belt. All of those situations could be monitored. GM is now starting to offer a $295 collision warning system (essentially a tailgating detector) along with lane departure warning in cars such as the GMC Terrain and Chevrolet Traverse. Right now it connects to a flashing icon atop the center stack but Version 2.0 could be linked to the OnStar tattletale – er, feedback – mechanism. As long as usage-based insurance remains opt-in, odds are not many people will opt in. At least in the U.S., the majority of drivers rate their skills as above average, but they may rethink their abilities if a black box is watching.

Big Brother or a big step forward for safer driving and cheaper insurance? Perhaps both.

See the TomTom press release

The same sources went on to add that the iPad 3 will indeed have the droolworthy 9.7-inch 2048×1536 Retina-class display — but unfortunately, that’s where the insider information dries up. What about the processor, RAM, and mobile radios?

There are two options as far as the SoC goes: Apple will either die shrink the A5 from 45nm to 28nm for increased battery life (important with the new, power-hungry display), or it will launch the A6. The A6 will likely be a 45nm (or 28nm) quad-core Cortex-A9 chip, or a 28nm dual-core Cortex-A15. There are hints that iOS 5.1, which should accompany the iPad 3 when it’s released, will support quad-core processors — but my bets are on a more power-efficient dual-core chip. iOS 5.1 should also bring some updates to Siri and a fix to the ongoing battery issues that some users are experiencing.

The GPU found in the current A5, the PowerVR SGX543MP2, is technically capable of pushing pixels to a 2048×1536 display, but in all likelihood the iPad 3 will have something newer and faster, the SGX554 perhaps. Bear in mind that 2048×1536 is a higher resolution than most desktop or laptop displays: Delivering games at a decent frame rate will be quite a challenge — and a battery-draining one at that. We can only speculate about the RAM, too; 512MB or 1GB are both possible. Likewise, the iPad 3′s cameras will probably receive an upgrade, but whether the backwards-facing unit will match up to the iPhone 4S remains to be seen.

And now the important bit: Battery life! Rumors point fairly strongly towards a larger battery in the iPad 3, both to make up for the larger screen (which will draw a lot more power than the 1024×768 display in the iPad 2) and the possible inclusion of 4G/LTE radios (though I think this is unlikely; LTE modems aren’t mature enough yet). The iPad 3 should have Bluetooth 4.0, too.

Finally, we should add that there’s one other nagging rumor that just won’t die: There’s an iPad Mini in the works. This is meant to be a 7-inch device that competes with the Kindle Fire, but this seems very unlikely while Apple is enjoying record-breaking revenues on the back of the iPhone 4S and 9.7-inch iPad 2.

Read more about Apple, the iPad, or iOS

Launched Wednesday night, it reached its goal of $400,000 before I’d even fired up my computer Thursday morning. But it didn’t stop there. It had hit $600,000 well before noon. I looked once when it was hovering around $800,000, then stepped away from the computer for, say, ten minutes, only to find it shooting past $820,000 when I returned. Someone I know, who was just as astounded as I was at the success, estimated it was averaging $1,000 in new funding every minute for considerable portions of the day. As of Friday at midnight, after just over 24 hours in existence, the project had attracted nearly 31,000 backers and its pledges had exceeded $1.15 million… and there will still 32 days left to go until the funding deadline.

This response may seem astonishing at first, but it doesn’t take too much digging to discover the source of the excitement. Double Fine Productions, the San Francisco–based gaming company founded in 2000 by Tim Schafer (who was responsible for some big adventure gaming hits of yesteryear including Day of the Tentacle, Full Throttle, and Grim Fandango), has been building up its street cred in recent years with games like Psychonauts and Costume Quest. Challenging current gamers’ notions of entertainment and often forcing them to think beyond the boundaries of the first-person shooters that have long flooded the market, Double Fine has developed a devoted audience interested in the company’s blend of old-school know-how and contemporary technology.

This latest venture looks set to continue that trend. The Kickstarter project page doesn’t offer a lot of specifics about the intended game, except to say that it will be a “‘Point-and-Click’ graphic adventure game for the modern age,” presumably along the lines of the titles that catapulted Schafer and his cohort Ron Gilbert (Maniac Mansion, The Secret of Monkey Island) to prominence, and be created over the course of roughly the next six to eight months. Investors are being asked to make something of a leap of faith, but judging from my own past experience with Schafer’s work alone (I found Day of the Tentacle an unbridled delight when I played it in 1993) I’d say there’s real reason for optimism.

I would submit, however, that the frenzy has a secondary source as well. Double Fine isn’t just proposing that people give them money so they can make the game in isolation before releasing it and moving on; the company wants to involve the backers in the creation process itself. The project promises exclusive monthly video updates in a professionally shot “documentary series” that will encourage “total transparency” with the people putting up the dough for it. An online discussion forum will let backers interact with developers and even vote on crucial game decisions. Naturally, they’ll also have access to both a private beta test and the finished version of the game. And note that these aren’t premiums you get only with exorbitant donations: Anyone ponying up $15 or more gets to be a part of it all.

Tiffen’s Listec PromptWare PW-04, $320 list, includes a bracket the holds your smartphone and camcorder on a tripod (you could hand-hold), the mirrored glass that mounts at a 45-degree angle, a hood that blocks stray light, and a remote control to run your script. The smartphone lies flat, display facing up, just below the camera lens. The text on the display is reversed and the mirror reverses the text back to normal. A similar kind of see-through mirror technology makes an automotive head-up display ($1,000-$1,300) appear to float vital information just above the hood of the car; in cars the mirrored surface is applied to a patch at the base of the windshield in front of the driver. For professional broadcast work, an LCD display, often 17 inches, provides a bigger viewing area with more text. With the Listec smartphone prompter, you’ve got to choose between about five lines of really big text with 3-4 words per line, or smaller text and more lines and words. The mirrored surface doesn’t provide any magnification; you’re looking at 4-inch screen from 5 or ten feet away. So when Tiffen says this could also be used for school plays, that suggests junior thespians with beyond-fighter pilot vision levels.

The kit is ingenious given its cost. It’s also limited to lower-cost miniDV and similar camcorders or, more properly, to camcorders with lenses less than two inches wide (46mm, 43mm, 40.5mm, 37mm and 30.5mm screw threads with 55mm coming). For higher-end cameras, including video-capable DSLRs with lenses often three inches wide (77mm), you’ll need and want the iPad edition. You send the script to your smartphone by emailing it or using Apple’s TXF file transfer protocol. The included remote scrolls at a single speed that you set beforehand; if you want to speed up or slow down the script with the camera running, you need to buy a higher-end Listec remote.

Steven Tiffen, president of Tiffen, notes his company is “the first to market smartphone-supported prompters … [with] a viable impact on the world of business and consumerism.” In other words, look for competition real soon. Smartphone or tablet, Tiffen or competitor, so long as you take the time to write a script and rehearse once or twice, your videos will be more professional. All you need is a comped wardrobe, a makeup artist, and then an agent.

Read more at Tiffen

Chrome on the desktop has gained some real attention, even surpassing Firefox to become the second-place browser with 25.7% usage share according to StatCounter. Google is backing that name up with its borderline-magical cloud services. In the new Chrome for Android beta, all your tabs, bookmarks, omnibox entries, and passwords just show up on the phone with no configuration. It is a very compelling experience to say the least.

Chrome for Android is going to eventually become the default browser for most Android users, but it’s going to come in the form of another Google app like Gmail or Market. OEMs will have to be certified to have it on the phone, and that means a Google inspection. Chromium will be the fully open source version of the browser on Android, just like it is on the desktop. All the fancy cloud features that make Chrome so interesting will be kept in the official Chrome build.

As Google seeks to subtly nudge OEMs in the right direction, Chrome for Android is going to give Mountain View a powerful new lever. Since Google only allows the closed apps to be loaded on approved devices, it has all the power. The Chrome name and features will sweeten the pot for device makers, and could get Google more compliance as it makes requests. With better Google apps, maybe that anti-fragmentation initiative has another shot at becoming a reality.

Google knows that it needs to keep innovating with its Android app package because that’s essentially the only method they have of controlling the platform. The Kindle Fire might not be the fastest device running Android, but it’s one of the most successful. As much as Google would like to applaud Amazon’s efforts publicly, it definitely needs to work behind the scenes to make sure top-tier Android OEMs don’t get any similar ideas about forking the platform. Chrome and its cloud services can help Google do that.

Google might also be able to hand out a little tough love to Android OEMs if its position is strengthened. HTC has been sticking to its gimmicky device strategy (LTE, 3D), and in recent quarters that hasn’t been working for them. HTC needs to change things up, and Google might be able to give it the gentle guidance it needs. More robust Google apps could be just the thing to get HTC to listen; after all, it will want Google certification more than ever before with Chrome on board.

While Chromium will be available to non-certified devices, we can safely say that OEMs and users will be clamoring for Chrome. The cloud syncing features take it from being a good browser to an essential part of the phone. Chrome-starved users may be able to shame OEMs into updating more phones to ICS, and manufacturers will be even more beholden to Google. This is the power Chrome is likely to wield as Google seeks to keep its platform together.

Download Chrome Beta for Android

One of the most significant challenges Microsoft had to overcome was the degree of variation that can occur between ARM developers. In the PC world, the battle over interface standards has been over for decades — but there was once a reason why users’ referred to the PCI card installation process as “plug and pray.” In WOA, the ACPI firmware has been extended to address and understand how SoC devices are configured in order to ensure it can enumerate them properly. The Windows HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) that handles things like interrupts and DMA in conventional PCs has also been modified and extended to support current and future SoCs.

Standards and bus support has also received a lot of attention. The SoCs that ARM manufacturers use don’t support the same standards as conventional PCs, which required Microsoft to design a new set of low-level device drivers. WOA will support low power buses like I2C/UART, SD I/O, and eMMC. In some cases, Windows itself had to be rearchitected; Sinofsky’s post states that Windows “expects a fast disk and very high bandwidth data transfer.” The team made several performance optimizations that result in fewer read/write cycles to ensure systems weren’t hamstrung by a lack of I/O performance.

While he doesn’t mention ARM’s big.LITTLE initiative by name, Sinofsky notes that WOA will also support offloading specific tasks on to specialized co-processors. The x86 version of Windows already does some of this — programs can take advantage of GPU hardware acceleration for video encode/decode — but Windows 8 may make it easier for programmers to shift tasks to lower power processors.

One of the problems Microsoft has had when it comes to creating software tools for ARM systems is the lack of currently available products. The company got around this limitation by building its own server hardware and intends to have over 3200 WOA systems on-hand (deployed in rackmount servers, pictured above) by the spring. According to Sinofsky, the tight connection between SoCs, peripherals, and firmware on the hardware side led to an unusual degree of crossover on the software teams. “This is an effort where software people on the Windows team end up debugging silicon with soldering irons, and hardware engineers end up in Visual Studio, debugging timing issues with user interface code.”

This is why buffer overflows ought to be diagnosed in software

The WOA systems that ship come launch date aren’t being assembled by vendors with light input from Microsoft; the company stresses that it’s worked with Qualcomm, Nvidia, and TI from the beginning to create reference designs that’ve been thoroughly vetted and expressly manufactured for WOA. As part of the developer seed effort, MS is going to distribute a small run of WOA systems to testers, with the understanding that they aren’t in any way representative of shipping hardware. The rest of us are advised to download the new Community Preview when it becomes available at the end of the month; Redmond stresses that any PC that carries a Windows 7 logo will run Windows 8.

Now read about Windows on Arm killing the Windows software ecosystem

Now, this doesn’t come as a complete surprise: At its I/O conference last year, Google demonstrated Android @ Home, a “smart home” automation system that uses an Android OS-powered “Tungsten” cube as a central hub (pictured below), and a smartphone or tablet as a remote control. At the time we assumed that Tungsten was a prototype device for an OEM (like Logitech or Sony) to work from, but according to The Wall Street Journal it’s going to become a bona fide, Google-designed and -marketed consumer electronics device that will be launched later this year.

Judging by the WSJ’s sources, though, it sounds like the device isn’t a full-blown smart home system; rather, it’s just a WiFi music streamer, much like a Sonos music system. All but confirming the WSJ is an FCC application filed by Google requesting that 252 of its employees test “throughput and stability of home WiFi networks using an entertainment device” between January and July 2012. The FCC filing says that the device will connect to the internet via WiFi and “home electronics” via Bluetooth, which probably means Android smartphones and tablets. We can only guess, but this device will presumably tie in with Google Music (and Google Drive).

Why Google is popping its consumer electronics cherry with a home entertainment system is a riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a primary color ribbon. At first blush, it really makes very little sense. Sonos, which sells a similar product, had a revenue of $200 million last year — so Google certainly isn’t in it for the money. If the new device does any more than stream music, it will encroach on Google TV territory, too (and a bunch of other media streamers from the likes of Sony and Western Digital).

One possibility is that a music streamer is so far removed from Google’s core search business that Larry Page and co figure they have nothing to lose. If it fails, who cares? If Google failed at designing and marketing its own Android phone, that would be a different matter entirely. Perhaps, then, Google is testing the waters.

This makes even more sense when you factor in Google’s Motorola Mobility imminent acquisition, which is expected to be approved by the Department of Justice next week. In Motorola, Google has a top-notch consumer electronics manufacturer and a real chance to compete with Apple’s vertically integrated software-and-hardware juggernaut. In all likelihood, this home entertainment system will be manufactured by Motorola.

There’s still no avoiding the fact producing hardware devices is completely at odds with Google’s current “more wood behind fewer arrows” push, though. Google has spent the last year shutting down services and consolidating its efforts into Google+, Search, and Android. I don’t see how a home entertainment system fits into that — unless we’re overanalyzing it, of course.

Maybe this home entertainment system is the equivalent of Google dipping its toes into the hardware pond. If this device is well received, maybe the next Nexus device will have Designed by Google in California on the back of it — and then after that, maybe own-brand Google TVs and Chromebooks, too. And after that… primary color retail stores!

Read more at The Wall Street Journal

Redmond intends to ship WOA and Windows 8 x86/64 simultaneously, with strong channel support for both products. One significant difference between the two platforms is the degree of control MS is wielding. WOA systems, for example, will ship with desktop versions of Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote. Microsoft has ad-supported versions of Excel and Word that it distributes to OEMs in the PC space, but you’ll never see the company say “All Dell and HP systems will ship with Office.”

Contrary to prior reports, WOA users will have access to the conventional Windows desktop — but there won’t be much for them to do with it. Sinofsky writes: “WOA does not support running, emulating, or porting existing x86/64 desktop apps. Code that uses only system or OS services from WinRT can be used within an app and distributed through the Windows Store for both WOA and x86/64. Consumers obtain all [WOA] software, including device drivers, through the Windows Store and Microsoft Update or Windows Update. (Emphasis added)

It’s hard to underemphasize just how huge a change that is. It’s one thing to say that ARM CPUs won’t support x86 emulation; something else entirely to split software delivery and installation. Up until now, one of the biggest differences between desktop and mobile operating systems has been the ability to install software. It’s true that Microsoft’s decision to wall off unapproved software installation is similar to the approach of Android and iOS — but iOS isn’t the same thing as OS X. Combining both of these decisions under the “Windows” brand could be disastrous, not because Microsoft is evil, but because it creates two entirely different user experiences on the basis of which ISA your CPU supports. What’s even more schizophrenic is that the entire point of WinRT was supposedly to eliminate the need to support multiple architectures and recompile code. This change doesn’t impact the programming model, but it undercuts the idea of a unified Windows.

Using Windows means being able to download a program from SourceForge, Download.com, MajorGeeks, or Microsoft’s own web page. Now, x86 developers who might want to recompile software to target ARM won’t be able to do so without going through the Microsoft store. The simple portability that’s defined Windows to such a degree that no one even thinks about it is gone. Sure, if you rely exclusively on things like Microsoft cloud services, or Office, you won’t notice. What about everyone else?

Even if we don’t see them straight away, there are going to be x86 tablets and ARM notebooks. If you own an x86 chip, you’ll be able to do all the things you do now, plus take advantage of the new UI. If you buy an ARM product, you get something that looks very much like a conventional tablet experience. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with that, but it’s not what people think of when they think “Windows.” Microsoft claims that users won’t confuse x86 and ARM devices, but it’s not clear how the company plans to address the problem.

Up until now, Windows 8 has straddled the gaps between its disparate platforms remarkably well, but this could seriously harm the operating system’s uptake. It’s not that the App Store model is morally evil, but that the Windows brand is going to be split between two families of devices. Microsoft might well have been better off calling its ARM effort “Windows Tablet” or even moving it to Windows Phone — WOA devices aren’t going to be Windows products in some of the ways the term has traditionally been applied. That’s not good for the brand, or for users, and it blurs one of the most important distinction between a device that’s essentially a toy and one that people can use for both work and creation. It’s possible that Microsoft will include the ability to load unapproved apps, similar to the way that unsigned drivers can be loaded in a 64-bit OS, but the company’s previous decision to force UEFI Secure Boot on ARM devices make this seem unlikely.

Now read about how Microsoft is rearchitecting Windows for ARM hardware

Path’s new policies go significantly further than a simple notification of contact sharing. The site’s Terms of Service now include the following (emphasis added):

We reserve the right to change or modify these site terms or any policy or guideline of our site, at any time. Any changes or modification will be effective immediately upon posting of the revisions on our site, and you waive any right you may have to receive specific notice of such changes or modifications. Your continued use of our site following the posting of changes or modifications will confirm your acceptance of such changes or modifications.

The Google Cache version of the ToS, from back on February 3, doesn’t contain this clause. In fact, it implied the opposite, noting: “However, we’ll always let you know when the latest update occurred—just check the ‘Effective Date’ on the bottom of this page. If you keep using the Service afterward, we assume that you have accepted the new Terms of Use.” That statement isn’t perfectly clear “We’ll always let you know” implies active notification; “just check the ‘Effective Date’” seems to indicate that the end user is responsible for noticing updates.

Path’s “new” Terms of Service are exactly the same as the ToS from the archived December 2010 version of the site. The problem with this is that Gawker has already published emails between itself and Morin showing that the CEO told journalists that Path didn’t store any user data in December 2010, but stealthily change that policy in the spring of 2011 when it was expedient to do so.

On the one hand, falling back to the old privacy policy is a case of CYA behavior, but the decision to retain the “And we can change this agreement any time we want” clause kills any chance of Morin’s apology being taken seriously. Path is sorry that it uploaded users’ data without their consent — so sorry that it’s re-written the ToS to ensure it can do the same thing without anyone having the right to complain. A close reading of both documents indicates that this clause is one of the few areas where they materially differ — the legalistic sections regarding disclaimers and liability could have been added to the old policy without otherwise modifying its provisions.

When Nikon introduced its new high-end DSLR the Nikon D800 this week, the initial buzz was all about its amazing 36MP resolution full-frame sensor, professional 1080p video capabilities like real-time HDMI output and headphone audio monitoring, and seemingly limitless upgrades to autofocus, metering, white balance detection, and processing speed. The D800 is a unique blend of a full-frame camera with the pixel density of the very popular Nikon D7000 APS-C model, combined with many of the components of Nikon’s new flagship D4 — all at a price of $2,999, halfway between the D7000 and D4. Likely to instantly kill sales of any remaining Nikon D3X units priced at $7,999, just about the only “give-up” in the Nikon D800 is speed. At 4 fps it doesn’t hold a candle to the 10 fps of the Nikon D4. The higher pixel density also means that those craving the ultimate in low light performance will still be happier shelling out the money for the bigger, although lower resolution, D4.

Now attention is turning to the D800′s sibling, the D800e. In something of a revolutionary move, Nikon is giving photographers an option to purchase their new 36MP Nikon D800 without the low-pass filter, in a model called the Nikon D800e. This new option is causing a great deal of head-scratching among potential buyers as they attempt to decide which model is right for them. The truth is that there isn’t an easy answer, but fortunately, since this isn’t the first camera to go without the low-pass filter, there is a lot of data on exactly what the results will be to help buyers compare.

You can almost see the detail from this D800e sample image drip off the screen. Click-through for the full-resolution version if you dare — it is a mind-blowing 33MB JPEG.

As background, the problem of moiré — named for a finely patterned French textile — arises when a photo subject has a repeated pattern that is fine enough so that each repetition falls on the sensor’s Bayer filter array slightly differently. Surprisingly, despite this obvious shortcoming, camera makers have stuck with the Bayer array for decades, mostly just telling their customers to live with the problem — most medium format digital backs don’t feature a low-pass filter, as they are designed for the highest possible resolution — or adding a filter which undoes some of the work they have put into sharp lenses and high-resolution sensors.

In a break with tradition, Fujifilm has just announced that its new X-Pro1 will use a radical 6×6 array, designed to reduce moiré and other artifacts. If it is successful, Fuji is likely to start a trend. In the meantime, DSLR buyers have mostly been stuck with the anti-aliasing filter, although the niche Sigma SD1 has one that is user-removable, which gives the photographer the best of both worlds. Aftermarket company Maxmax will also remove the anti-aliasing filter in your DSLR, providing you with sharpness at the cost of a few hundred dollars and a camera which will no longer be serviced by the manufacturer.

My first experience with a filterless DSLR was after my Nikon D70 was converted to an infrared camera. As part of the conversion the anti-aliasing filter was removed, resulting in blisteringly sharp images like this one of a local vineyard:

Moiré: The dark side of pure sharpness

With results like that, it’s hard to see why anyone would deliberately blur an image with a low-pass filter. Until you look at what happens when photographing a fine texture with a non-filtered sensor. This sample image from Maxmax shows the moiré effect that can result (look at the air conditioning vent in the sample from the camera with the filter removed):

Apples to apples: The Nikon D800 and Nikon D800e

For Nikon, removing the anti-aliasing filter in the D800 to create the D800e wasn’t quite as simple as it sounds. The filter in the D800 is actually two layers, surrounding the infrared filter. The first layer blurs the image horizontally, and the second one blurs it vertically. To create the D800e Nikon has apparently swapped out the second filter with one which re-converges the image that the first layer blurs. This seems a little overly complex compared to just junking the filters all together, the way Maxmax does, but may have been a smaller manufacturing change or been needed to keep the IR filter functioning properly.

Since the two Nikon models are twins differing only in the composition of the filter, it is easy to show both the resolution enhancing and the potential moiré effects of changing the filter. This first pair of image samples show the increase in sharpness with the modified filter:

The next pair shows the downside of the modified filter, with visible moiré in the clothing:

Obviously, anyone spending a lot of time photographing finely patterned clothing would want to think twice about the D800e, but for anyone else the added sharpness and detail really kicks the performance of the camera up another notch. Nikon is charging a premium for the specialty version of the camera, with the D800 selling for $2,999 and the D800e for $3,299.

[Image Credit: Vineyard]