Or not.

There's that cloud word again. As much as I'd love to save £400 over Jessops, they seem a little sketchy to me on the backup front. I could buy from HK for very little more.

Where I'm going, I need to know that warranty and backup is first rate.

Ok, fresh news and questions....

As I said before I'm gonna go with price as a prime consideration and with that in mind, I decided to compile a list of the lenses I would want in either system. It went like this:

Nikon 16-85 VR £445
Nikon 35 f1.8 £150
Nikon 70-300 VR £440

or

Canon 15-85 IS USM £579
Canon 28 f1.8 £380
Canon 70-300 IS USM £406

Firstly, what do you guys think of those as selections? For utter cheapness, the 16/15-85 could be replaced in either system by a kit lens, but I'd rather not. Seems to me that they cover everything I'm likely to want for now i.e. one long zoom, one short zoom and a low light prime. All will be worlds better than just a kit lens and cheap tele and I think that's a requirement for either a D7000 or 7D with their high res sensors.

As it stands, the Nikon selection is cheaper (a fair bit) AND so is their camera. So I was leaning that way.

HOWEVER

My Danish friend (and winter partner) has called me today to say that they have an offer on at her work and she can get my the L series 70-200 IS f4 for about 5000kr which is £520!! I'm thinking that if it's only £150 (including shipping) more than the 70-300 and nearly £400 cheaper than normal, it's a bargain. No? Which would put me back in the Canon camp.

Thoughts?

JUST DECIDE!

Mark

You know I'm gonna say go with the Canon!

At the end of the day, and despite the amount I mock the wobbly wrong for making the wrong choice, it matters diddly squat.

All flippancy aside, you now have enough knowledge that the purchase should be all down to you.
There's little enough difference between the two choices as to render any further questions redundant.
You know how you are going to use the camera and in what situations.
I'm sure you've read enough about the lenses you mention to know what you'll get from them (if not, you should do before buying).
Yet you are dithering. (8+)
Make your choice and be happy with it.
I don't regret going Nikon.
I don't think Edd regrets going Canon (he can correct me if I'm wrong).
I don't think Heather regrets going Canon (she can correct me if I'm wrong).
I don't think Veato regrets going Pentax (he can correct me if I'm wrong).
Alex likes his film, but you're not going down that route.
Whatever you decide, you'll likely end up not regretting your choice.
You just have to make that choice now. (8+)

Mark

You can get the non-IS version of the 70-200 L for £500 http://www.wexphotographic.com/canon-fi ... &PageNum=6
Also the Sigma 30mm 1.4 is generally compared and often favoured to the Canon 28 1.8. Of course it's APS-C only though

And oh yeah....

CHOOSE ALREADY!

get the nikon

I quite agree. I think at this point, it's hard to make the wrong choice.
Unless you don't buy the Canon.

But seriously, both should satisfy your needs just as well as each other (or near as damn it).

+1
MTFU.

After everybody's delightful patience in the latter half of this thread, I thought I was ask another question if I may.

I would like a tripod that is light, collapseable (preferably not much bigger than a Gorillapod SLR when collapsed) and relatively cheap for use primarily in low light. Can it be done? Any recommendations?

Tripods. Hmm. Now there's a can of worms.

The best advice I can think of is "don't buy cheap". It's a false economy. The cheap tripods that you get in the high street will be fine for a while, but it may be too flimsy, something will wear out, or it won't take the weight of the camera and a monster lens, you end up having to buy another, then another, and another. (Having said that, a friend of mine buys cheap tripods from charity shops and rarely uses his expensive model. YMMV.)

Consider tripods that let the legs open wider - quiet at the back! Also consider tripods that let you change the head. I have a traditional 3-way pan and tilt head, but I use a ball head for preference. I can swap them about as I want. Most good tripods have a quick release system, with a plate that fixes to the camera.

If all you want to do is hold the camera/lens combo steady to take long exposures, perhaps something like the Joby Gorillapod would suit (though even those have different models depending on the weight you expect it to carry). Move up the scale to the Manfrotto and Giottos and Gitzo 'pods and you're looking at prices from under £40 to over £1800.

As with the camera advice, have a good think about what you want the tripod for. How often do you think you will use it? Will you want to carry it everywhere (which means you'll want small size when collapsed and light weight)? Do you really need a tripod or will a monopod do as well? And how much are you prepared to spend?

http://www.wexphotographic.com/photogra ... pods/b3037

This is on offer: Giottos carbon fibre tripod with 3-way head. 58cms when folded and 1.12kgs. It's cheap for £100. But like HK said it can be a false economy to buy cheap. It depends what you need really. If you have a DSLR with standard zoom then this is fine. If you have a zoom longer than my arm and heavier than my leg then forget about it!

http://www.fotosense.co.uk/giottos-mt8223-50-carbon-fibre-tripod-kit-special-offer.html

My intended application is long exposures, but it needs to go small and be light as I may have to go in a back pack on occasion and even when it doesn't, ease of transport will be a primary concern. Everything that I do during the day will be handheld and as I'm using a Black Rapid shoulder strap (AWESOME - seriously, try it), the tripod attachment will only go onto to the camera with a bit of prior thought as it currently has the Black Rapid connector always in the tripod thread. So I'm reluctant to spend a lot of money, because it probably won't get TONS of use.

I looked at a Gorillapod (I have the magnetic one for my compact and love it) but they are £65 with the ball head and only support 3kg. Plus as it no longer fits in a pocket (like the compact one does) I thought maybe I should consider a "real" tripod. That Giottos looks reasonable, but at 116cm it's a little too long.

Can you get something that will collapse to 30-40cm, or is that ridiculous?

I chose a minimum height of 25-50cm on WEX and ordered by cheapest first

http://www.wexphotographic.com/photography-tripods/b3037?minheightcmfloat=25.0%26lt%3bminheightcmfloat%26lt%3b50.0