From: The Older Gentleman on
petrolcan <petrolcan(a)SPAMgmail.com> wrote:

> > Somewhere in the same place as your auction for the empty camera box?
> > ;-)
>
> <stern glare>

<fx: looks at sky, whistles innocently>
>
> That went for �20 in the end :-)
>
> > Incidentally, I've been playing with my new D300S. What a lovely piece
> > of kit. That's four Nikon SLRs I've got now (F100, D100, D200 and D300)
> > which is, er, sufficient, so the next thing will have to be some more
> > glassware :-)
>
> Ah, glassware, the really expensive bit. The cameras themselves are
> almost throwaway now.
>
> Out of curiousity, why bother keeping all 3 DSLRs? Surely you should
> bung one on ebay for the glassware fund.

Dunno. I like to have a back-up, especially when I'm working, and it's
nice to have (for example) a different lens mounted on two bodies, so I
can quickly grab the right camera for the shot instead of having to faff
about changing lenses.

That said, three bodies is perhaps a bit excessive. I've offered the
D100 to my son, who's turning out to have rather a good eye since I
bought him a D50 for his birthday last autumn. In fact, at weekends he's
working in a nightclub snapping the punters - the club has the gadgetry
to put the image directly onto drinks coasters and key rings as well as
paper, and it offers these for sale to the happily pissed punters.

He's done some research and reckons the 50 is a better camera. I've said
it's certainly more modern, but he can be a bit more creative with the
100, which is still a dazzling piece of kit even though it's a decade
old. Both are 6.2MP.

What do you think?


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: petrolcan on
In article <1jggvlo.1s0u646143ycyqN%totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk>, The
Older Gentleman says...
>
> petrolcan <petrolcan(a)SPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Somewhere in the same place as your auction for the empty camera box?
> > > ;-)
> >
> > <stern glare>
>
> <fx: looks at sky, whistles innocently>
> >
> > That went for £20 in the end :-)
> >
> > > Incidentally, I've been playing with my new D300S. What a lovely piece
> > > of kit. That's four Nikon SLRs I've got now (F100, D100, D200 and D300)
> > > which is, er, sufficient, so the next thing will have to be some more
> > > glassware :-)
> >
> > Ah, glassware, the really expensive bit. The cameras themselves are
> > almost throwaway now.
> >
> > Out of curiousity, why bother keeping all 3 DSLRs? Surely you should
> > bung one on ebay for the glassware fund.
>
> Dunno. I like to have a back-up, especially when I'm working, and it's
> nice to have (for example) a different lens mounted on two bodies, so I
> can quickly grab the right camera for the shot instead of having to faff
> about changing lenses.

For work I can understand that. If I had 2 DSLR bodies the missus would
kill me. I recently upgraded my 400D for a 40D and she hasn't noticed
:-)

> That said, three bodies is perhaps a bit excessive. I've offered the
> D100 to my son, who's turning out to have rather a good eye since I
> bought him a D50 for his birthday last autumn. In fact, at weekends he's
> working in a nightclub snapping the punters - the club has the gadgetry
> to put the image directly onto drinks coasters and key rings as well as
> paper, and it offers these for sale to the happily pissed punters.

That young fellow will never be short of a bob or two!

> He's done some research and reckons the 50 is a better camera. I've said
> it's certainly more modern, but he can be a bit more creative with the
> 100, which is still a dazzling piece of kit even though it's a decade
> old. Both are 6.2MP.
>
> What do you think?

Looking at completed listings the D100 and D50 body is only worth about
£150 - £170. How much glassware could you get for that? (1)

(1)I only do Canon but £150 would only buy a half decent lens, certainly
not any of the pro stuff.


From: petrolcan on
In article <me2p87-u4v2.ln1(a)nermal.internal.unix-consult.com>, Timo
Geusch says...
>
> petrolcan wrote:

> > (1)I only do Canon but £150 would only buy a half decent lens,
> > certainly not any of the pro stuff.
>
> Nottalot. More on a bank holiday, though (I just got a Nikon 55-200 VR
> lens for 120 incl postage, they're usually about 140 + pp but that's
> not what you'd consider a pro lens). Probably would buy him the 35 or
> 50 primes, which are both superb lenses. I have the 35mm and I'm very
> happy with that one.

A Canon 50-250 IS is about the same money. My current fave lens is a
50mm 1.4 which literally cost me nothing :-)