Originally Posted by
FlyerFoto
As long as you comply with instructions regarding not using electronic equipment when asked not to do, i.e. landing and take-off
Solution is to use nice old-fashioned manual SLR. Even for my hybrid Nikon FM3a, setting to manual disables all the electric's and, to be sure, I even remove the battery. No risk. Suppose one objection during take off and landing is that anything loose such as a camera could become a projectile in the event of something going wrong. Case of balancing the risk and not drawing attention to yourself.
Originally Posted by
RingwaySam
I know theres places where getting a camera out is asking for trouble in places like Dubai Airport and other places. But while it's in the UK, US, Europe I assume it's ok?
Even then it is variable, as the example quoted by Rainboe so accurately describes. The difficulty is that there is no consistency and some of the laws are unenforceable. For example, I understand that it is illegal to take aerial photographs in Russia without permission, so this will get me into trouble...
...even if in reality it could be anywhere!
Would not be sure about the UK. Amongst the puffer nutter community there have been a number of high profile incidents, where the law, Network Rail guidelines and the opinions of the person on the ground are in sharp divergence. And always, the jobsworth uses 'security' as the basis for unreasonable interpretation of their duty. Even a casual read of PPRuNe will indicate that this goes on in aviation, so in the UK I personally would not push my luck ... well, not too far anyway.
Not UK, but example of a photograph taken discretely where I would get my hands slapped if noticed by officialdom (actually, this photo does nothing to help the discussion along, just wanted to show off):
