www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

Perhaps I should create a page describing some of the "characters" on these forums

Gary (Gruditch) is one of the "Canonista" - a bunch of highly-intelligent individuals that make extensive use of Canon equipment

But we also have the Nikkor mob and the Sonyites among us - and others.

Cheers,

- Pete

Point taken,,,,, so pretty elitist then? Sorry, being antagonistic ,,sorry again.

So....How much is a Canon then?

You peasant, how dare you call us elitist.

You can have my 50D for five hundred quid, I.......Must........ have........new 7D.

Gruditch

Aren't there any Nikon users on here?

Yes a couple i think, and someone else could be too with the D80 that I have for sale in the classifieds forum

Sorry, cant do linky things

Gruditch wrote:
You can have my 50D for five hundred quid, I.......Must........ have........new 7D.

Gruditch

Interesting that you're keeping your 40D in preference to the 50D. Is it the better of the two? I'm not ready to jump ship, just curious.

I ain't got a 40D

Gruditch

Gruditch wrote:I ain't got a 40D

Gruditch

Hmm, the last photo of yours I saw was taken with a 40D if I recall correctly, so either it wasn't yours or you've sold that one too. If you're thinking of jumping to Sony, the A700 is at a cracking price at the moment....

eccles wrote:If you're thinking of jumping to Sony

I'd rather jump off Tower Bridge.

I have a 50D for wildlife/macro ( soon to be a 7D ), and full frame 5D Mk 2 for landscape, best of both worlds

Gruditch

Gruditch wrote:

eccles wrote:If you're thinking of jumping to Sony

I'd rather jump off Tower Bridge.
Gruditch

Wow! You must really like diving.

The bitter truth is that Sony make a better compact zoom than Nikon. I've just sold a Nikon P80 bridge, and was glad to see the back of it,,,more noise than a flock of parrots. I do luv me D200 tho.

WE selling these for £999 - that's £500/stop! Cheaper to get a decent lower noise camera - perhaps I should change to Nikon now (only semi-serious as I've just acquired another Sigma - back to taking pics like I used to take 'em!)?

And I most definitely do use my 300mm f/4 IS for shooting birds - excellent lens even if I do use my 150-500mm OS more these days (better and more useful than 100-400mm IS)

I'm sure I'll see the point of the 7D sometime, especially as I use MF most of the time and not interested in video......... I'd go FF before spending on that, I think

Markulous wrote:I do use my 150-500mm OS more these days (better and more useful than 100-400mm IS)

You must of really have gotten a dud

Markulous wrote:not interested in video.........

For those that are interested in the video, and I know there are quite a few, it is awesome.
HD video, with all those interchangeable lenses, WOW. Its not for me, but after playing with it on the 5D MK 2, I can now at least see the point of it.

Gruditch

Zonda wrote:..... I do luv me D200 tho.

(D300 myself )

Pete Eeles wrote: Gary (Gruditch) is one of the "Canonista" - a bunch of highly-intelligent individuals that make extensive use of Canon equipment ...

You will note the humility of the Canonista......
Pete, Gary (and the others) may see the light and move to Nikon sometime (possibly when hell freezes over.... )
Even so, they make the most of their limitations and post some great images - just imagine how much better if they'd use a Nikon
N
(Why not the D3x (24.5mp - "hubba, hubba") next Gary, if you have money to waste on another Canon...)

You mean the 1Ds MK 3, 21mpix full frame hubba hubba, no I have a 21mpix full frame in the 5D MK 2.

To go with it, what I want is something as powerful and efficient as the 1D MK 3, but this side of 2 grand. Give it a few months and the 7D will be around the £1300 or £1400.

Gruditch

Yes - Inexorably drawn to a full-frame offering - D700 might have to do.....or keep saving for the D3x

Nick said

(D300 myself )

I have thought about upgrading to a D300. I think they're about £1000 for a body. You can get a D200 body for £600, maybe less. So is the D300 400 odd quid better??

Used a D200 before I got the D300 - and liked what the D200 did and produced.....a great camera. And Nikon are very robust - so I don't worry too much about carting it with me everywhere...(For a D200 user, the wheels and buttons are the other way round which makes switching a bit tough)
Is the D300 better? I think that the extra features and pixels are probably worth it (battery life for one thing is 3X better!); put it this way - given the choice I WOULD spend the extra for a D300....(but then the D700FX will soon be down to £1500.....)
(Should stop chasing pixels...but boys need toys; it is SO difficult .... )
N

Hmmm! Thanks for the gen Nick. Thats the trouble these days, things are soon bettered. I remember the days when an FM2 lasted half a lifetime.

D300 over D200 - Auto White Balance v good (hardly set it myself now)...51-point AF etc v good AF - much quicker AF than D200, esp with macro or big prime...Active D-Lighting IS good for eliminating deep shadows... "engine" upgrade to next gen EXPEED image processing...6 shots per second burst...12.3 mp-a few more to play with...low noise at high ISO.....sensor clean at start-up....lots of small but important differences, I guess.
N