I am still slobering all over myself with drool and saliva. One of my clients gave me the oportunity to play around with his Mark II. Man what a sweet camera. The thing shoot images so fast it will make your head spin, plus the view screen on back is amazing compared to my Xti, Oh ya not to mention the 16mb sensor. I am still turned on.
Oh Ya, we went up the roof of their office building and put my 100-400 on it to see if we could get the nesting parigan Falcons across the street but couldn't see them today.

If I only had an extra 5,000 around. Oh well that is why most people should never test drive a lamborghini.

It was fun while it lasted. He got to drool on my new lense and I got to drool on his camera. His normal combo is a 70-200 2.8 and does about 12000 shots a week doing sports photos, form everything to the USA cup hockey champion ships (all 65 games in 3 days) to the Babe Ruth Team photos. I offered him a straight up trade glass for body but he wouldn't bite.

Which Mark II Paul? Sounds like the 1DsMark II which has 16.7mp full frame sensor and used by mainly wedding and portrait photographers. Most sports shooters use the 1D Mark II or Mark IIN at 8.2mp and 1.3 crop sensor. The other big difference is the fps capability, the 1Ds is only 4fps and the Mark II and Mark IIN are 8.5fps.

The back LCD is 2" on the 1Ds and and the Mark II. The Mark IIN has a 2.5" LCD. The price difference is pretty different as well, the Mark II's go for under $2000 the IIN's for about $2300 and the 1Ds Mark II's for about $3800.

I've had my Mark IIN for about a year and am looking at one more as a back up and keep my 20D and 30D as remote camera's. The Mark II's are nice to shoot but the button and menu system takes a bit to get used to, requires two hands to make a change to a function. My camera has the 300/2.8 for the most part welded to it. Often with the 1.4TC attached. I know Finnbay (Ken) also uses that combo regularly on his Mark II.

They have actually held their value because the Mark III has not been a huge success. Many folks especially sports guys are keeping the Mark II's because they give reliable consistent results every time out. That is THE reason why I haven't moved to the Mark III.

Right on, Dan! All correct. Wouldn't trade my Mark II's for anything.

Sorry to all for not being very active this week. Five golf meets and two college graduations have kept my hoppin'. Back into the groove next week I hope! Lots of good stuff happenin'!

Well you had better never pick up the Nikon D3 brother, Ken.

Figured you've been busy Ken, I won't even tell how many miles and how many events I've had the last two weeks. This one especially is a week from you know where!

This reminds me of a photography podcast I listened to the other day. It seems this Canon guy was pondering trading out all his lenses and bodies to switch to Nikon-because of the D3 and it's low noise virtues. It's his money and gear and he can do as he pleases,but it sure sounded stupid to me-NOT BECAUSE HE WAS SWITCHING TO NIKON! but.......doesn't he think Canon will counter with their own offering that meets or surpases the Nikon? The competition between the 2 companies is what makes their gear so great.
Canon will counter,then Nikon will counter back-who benefits? we do!
This was no small affair either as the guy listed some of the gear he will be getting rid of to make the switch:
1DS MKIII,1D MK2N,70-2002.8 is,300 2.8 is,500F4is,600F4is,24-70 2.8,16-35 2.8 and other misc.
What will this guy feel like in 12-18 months if Canon comes with something better in low noise?
Some of the other dudes on the show were considering it too.
All to shoot at iso 6400 with low noise? For a few months?
If he thinks Canon won't come with something similar,that would explain his intentions-he's a nutburger.
I think I'd just wait for the sun to come out-alot cheaper.
Would I switch? You bet! All it will take is a D300 with a street price of $1100 and a 150-500mm F4 Nikkor Vr for $1500
Does this sound nuts,or is it me?

There's no doubt it's fun and challenging to play with new gear.

There's not enough difference in IQ between top quality Canon and Nikon gear to matter. The same is true with the so-called "prosumer" and so-called "entry level" bodies both companies have to offer.

Either company's entry-level DSLR bodies will allow an artist to compose compelling images that can be printed at excellent quality to 20x30, and sometimes beyond.

While there are specialized applications that really make a high burst rate or tremendous noise performance shine, for the vast majority of digital photography, the entry and pro-sumer level bodies are plenty, and that includes all my nature, wedding, action portrait and other work.

I've had a lot of play time with the 1D Mk2n (8.5 frame per second max burst) and 1Ds Mk2 (4 fps max burst), and there's no doubt it's more fun to spin around the block in a sportscar than a station wagon, but I don't worry that I don't have enough camera with my 30D bodies and XT backup -- I worry that I don't have enough vision.

In this day and age of phenomenal entry-level DSLR image quality, the old adage that there are more great cameras out there than great photographers is even more true.

If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with.

Good point.
But I want:
19 FPS!!
975mm F.02!
IS good for 9 stops!!
ISO 24,000 and NO NOISE! ZERO,NADA,ZILCH!
J/K

[in reality,all this is probably 5 years away ]