The Age Old Question... Canon v Nikon

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>Afgan Girl. Do a Google search and you'll find the National Geographic cover taken , reportedly with a Nikon 75-150mm series E lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>At the risk of nitpicking and even further digression, that seems unlikely. Before committing to digital Steve McCurry had stated in interviews that he considered even an f/2.8 zoom too slow to be practical for his use with slow color slide film, and that he usually needed fast primes. So that particular Nikkor zoom would seem a less likely candidate for that particular photo, not because it was an economy model but because it was too slow for the conditions and low ISO color slide film.</p>

<p>Over the years I've read many claims from folks other than McCurry about what he actually used, including an auction that claimed to be for the N90 used to photography Sharbat Gula - an interesting anachronism since that particular model didn't exist when the photo was taken. Only McCurry would know for certain which equipment he used and so far I've never been able to find a direct quote from him specifying the Nikon camera model and Nikkor used.</p>

<p>Sally, as of this writing Nikon has a slight edge over Canon in some respects: bodies, high ISO performance, TTL flash. Canon still has a slight edge in terms of IS telephotos. And if you wait a few months or another year, you'll see both companies trading lead positions several times, but always by a very small margin.</p>

<p>If you are a pro or serious amateur, choose a camera based on the entire system, not on hyperbole. If you are a wildlife photographer specializing in handheld photographs of birds in flight, Canon may be the best choice for their specific lenses suited to that particular type of photography. If you need the best TTL flash system for weddings, events or photojournalism, Nikon may be the best choice for on-camera or single flash-on-bracket use. If you need to occasionally rent high end equipment for specific assignments, the two are about equal.</p>

<p>And if none of those apply, don't limit yourself to Nikon and Canon. Pentax and Olympus offer very good values in dSLRs that would be suitable for many amateurs. I would seriously consider switching from Nikon to Olympus for the smaller, lighter bodies if not for the fact that it's not a sensible choice for me because I already have some very good Nikkors and a Nikon TTL flash.</p>

<p>For many working pros and most serious amateurs who are generalists rather than specialists, there's very little difference between Canon and Nikon - and that's been true for several years, including the entire dSLR era. I switched from Canon FD manual focus gear to Nikon about 10 years ago for one particular lens and because I preferred Nikon's ergonomics. That's all. The control layout of Canon bodies simply didn't feel intuitive to me. Other photographers find exactly the opposite.</p>

[johnw63]

<p>Ah... Lex! Don't go being a myth buster ! It makes me feel good about my lens. " This lens, in my hand, is capable of a cover shot for a world famous magazine. " It makes you feel all warm and fuzzy about it.</p>

<p>I always figured the choice of lens was due to it being light weight and small for a zoom. In a hostile environment, those might be good qualities. Given the shot was during the Soviet time in Afgan, I didn't think it far fetched. Maybe the best myths are the plausible ones.</p>

<p> </p>

[jay_kayrouz]

<p>I think you will take better pictures with what feels comfortable to you no matter the brand. I chose Nikon because when I decided to get serious about my photography, one of my good friends recommended Nikon because that is what he used. It was a pretty simple choice for me. I stuck with Nikon. I guess I just dont know what I'm missing but I do like what I have and that's good enough for me. </p>

 

[sallydouglas]

<p><em><strong>When you can really put pro caliber gear to use, you wont have to ask what you should get. You'll know already. </strong> </em><br>

Thank you John... This is really the answer I was looking for... You are 100% correct, and I can see your point clearly...<br>

Lex, thanks for your advice, it is very informative and gave me clarity as to what to do... I am now sure that it is best to keep going with my Nikon D70, until I decide what field of photography I want to pursue, and THEN see what gear will suit the best... I realise now that I need to improve my skills considerably prior to making any purchases, and the D70 is absolutely good enough to help me do that... It is really nice of you to take the time to help me, and it is very much appreciated... You are a gentleman indeed...<br>

Wouter, I am only a BEGINNER... How am I to know this is a controversial and fire filled topic amongst photographers?... I have only been taking photos for A FEW MONTHS... I know NOTHING about gear, that is WHY I AM ASKING PEOPLE WHO DO KNOW here in the <strong>BEGINNERS FORUM</strong> !!!...Yes, after reading all the posts made it appears that my question was a little naive, I probably should be shot for it!!!...<br>

JDM, thank you so much for the time and effort you put in to help me with my dilemma... The link you provided me with really gave me an insight into which camera equipment to purchase!!!... In fact, your comments encompassed so much wisdom and insight, I was astounded!!!... What would the BEGINNERS FORUM do without you?... (Hey, I hope you are not offended by my sarcasm!!)... I have added a little footnote to assist you with your LIABILITY...<br>

<em>Q. Why is it that some people feel an overwhelming and uncontrolled need to demean and belittle others?... <br /> </em><br>

<em>A. The act of belittling another has the purpose of lowering that persons self esteem, whilst temporarily heightening that of the offender. In reality people who belittle others tend to already have a rather low self esteem which is why they attempt to fix it by putting others down.</em><br>

<em>The effect is rather like that of a see saw. As the importance of the victim falls, the importance of the perpetrator seems to rise. This rise is short lived and has no real value, which is why the act is repeated continuously as the perpetrator seeks to try and solve their own problem.</em></p>

<p> </p>

[William Michael]

<p>I frankly don't care two hoots about all this side issue “sarcasm” and “buggering off” stuff, though it does make for light reading . . . and it is amusing . . .</p>

<p>But really it is not productive and it is not a real all-in passionate brawl with articulate, creative vernacular and metaphor. (And I am not suggesting it should be)</p>

<p>So . . . , Sally you wrote:</p>

<p><em>"The problem I have with the D70 is it is extremely difficult to get good crisp shots off the tripod in low light... It constantly frustrates me"</em></p>

<p>Which if I understand your question (as a put by a beginner) is the premise for you wanting new gear?</p>

<p>I see this premise as a mistake.</p>

<p>Hence I wrote, (as a person with some experience in using cameras):</p>

<p><em>"Also - I doubt buying new gear will enable you to magically get good crisp shots with on a tripod in low light - I suspect that is technique rather than your D70. I encourage you to seek answers in that regard”</em></p>

<p>So whilst banter is fun . . .</p>

<p>More specifically to YOUR CAUSE – and now being prescriptive with a request, as the hint was not taken up:</p>

<p>If you could please post an image or two from those which are constantly frustrating to you - and ensure the EXIF is intact I am very confident I and others will be able to make suggestions on technique, which will:</p>

<p>Ø assist relieving some of your frustrations,<br>

Ø perhaps save you money on items you might not need to purchase<br>

Ø moreover, stop wasting time on silly backwards and forwards chatter.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

[bobcossar]

<p>Well said, WW.....that would help us all.....</p>

[andrew robertson]

<p>"That's crap, for two reasons:<br>

-It's not true.<br />-It doesn't matter to you."</p>

<p>Actually, by asking whether or not the current system was right for the OP, it is clear that it does matter.</p>

<p>And it is true.</p>

[sallydouglas]

<p>Hi William...<br>

Thanks for taking the time to comment... Your advice is very sound indeed... I really appreciate your offer of help, it is extremely generous and kind, and I would absolutely love to take you up on it...<br>

I am totally aware that the silly backwards and forwards chatter is a complete waste of time, but honestly, those irrelevant and unhelpful comments give me the stirks, and I just couldnt help myself... Its very immature of me I know, but I enjoyed it nonetheless...<br>

On the serious side of things, this is what I have learned from this forum thread to date :<br>

- the debate regarding the Nikon v Canon issue is a hot and voliatile topic, and not to be entered into by beginners!!!...<br>

- it would probably be better for me to do some initial research in the PhotoNet forum histories prior to listing a question, as many of them have already been answered... Then I can be more specific in my requests for information...<br>

- I am absolutely nowhere near ready to purchase new equipment at this stage, I will know when the time is right, and I will know what gear I will need... This knowledge will come with more experience and research...<br>

- Nikon products are just a good as Canon, and each brand has its pro's and con's depending on the required application and relevant field of photography...<br>

- I need to work harder on my technique, as it is my inexperience that is responsible for my not being able to get the shot it want with my D70...<br>

- purchasing pro gear will not help me achieve better photo's... Practise, perserverence and the gaining of a deeper knowledge and understanding of photography will... It is not about the gear, its about the person holding the camera...<br>

- a GREAT photographer can take a GREAT photograph with the lowliest of equipment...<br>

and finally...<br>

- there will ALWAYS be idiots who insist on putting their useless two bob opinions into the mix, offering nothing helpful or constructive... <strong>These are to be ignored</strong> ...<br>

All in all, this has been a very informative forum thread, and I am very grateful to all those who contributed...<br>

Best wishes to all...<br>

Sally...</p>

<p> </p>

[William Michael]

<p>. . . yeah, but?</p>

[johnw63]

<p>Sally,</p>

<p>I think the topic has evolved, ( or devolved ) to a "what is the right gear for you" sort of thing. That's a toughy. Kind of like, " what is the right car for me ? " question. However, both can be answered with a few questions.</p>

<p>I'm going to use ME as an example, since I know the answers to my questions. I do not own a DSLR, at this time, but I have been window shopping for years. ( Much to the annoyance of some of the long timers who must , by now, be really tired of my questions on the topic. )</p>

<p>Here is my question list.</p>

<p>1) What type of photos do you want to take ?<br>

Scenic, ( Landscape mostly ), motor racing stuff, general ( the catch all, " Hey that looks cool, I think I'll take a picture of it ! ) .</p>

<p>2) Is weight or size of the camera an issue ?<br>

Not really. I've been lugging a Nikon F4s around.</p>

<p>3) Do you already have a brand of lenses that you would like to use ?<br>

Yes. Nikon lenses. About 9 of them. Only 2 are auto focus and none are AF-S.</p>

<p>4) Are you happy with an info screen and menus, or would you like some knobs and stuff ?<br>

I would really like to keep a wheel or knob for shutter and aperture.</p>

<p>Question 1 should narrow down the main feature that are important to me. Scenic stuff means I probably want good colors, and very little noise at normal film like ISOs. The racing stuff would indicate I may want a camera that focuses fast and may take multiple shots in rabid fire order. So, a nice high frames per second.</p>

<p>Question 2 tells that I don't require a light weight camera body, so the whole product line of what ever brand I select is in play.</p>

<p>Question 3 tells me that I should stick with a Nikon brand DSLR, unless I have no problems with buying all new lenses. It also indicates I want a body that can work with MF lenses. My body choice just got small , real quick. It's either a Dx or Dxxx body, or those MF lenses aren't coming to the party. I could start a collection of new lenses around the two AF ones, but since they are not AF-S, I need a D90 or better. The lower end ones won't AF those lenses.</p>

<p>Question 4 tells that I would not be that happy with anything below a D90, since it has two control wheels, which would be my preference.</p>

<p>So, where does this leave me ? Well, two choices, Either a Nikon D90 and build a new set of AF lenses to replace my MF ones, or a D300 or better and still use my manual focus lenses. I did some calculations, and to replace some of my favorite glass with AF versions would exceed the cost difference between the D90 and the D300. Sounds like the D300 would fit my needs rather well.</p>

<p>Which comes to Question 5. What is your BUDGET ? Can you afford of justify spending what the short questionnaire tells you is the camera for you ?<br>

I am still window shopping, so you can guess how this last question worked out !</p>

<p>Try out your own mental questionnaire. Since you are new to the game, you probably have little invested in gear, so the brand choice is still mostly open. Like many have suggested, tryo to get your hands on a few cameras and see what fits your hands and what controls fit your way of thinking. If you fingers don't fall where the important buttons are and the menus are sort of frustrating, that will make a lot more difference in the long run.</p>

<p> </p>

[William Michael]

<p>This has thread has been moved to Casual Conversations and therefore I understand it is not within the aegis of the Beginner's Forum and the more rigid boundaries of comment thereof.<br /><br />So, regarding the continual to and fro "buggering of" type banter . . .<br /><br /><em>I expect to make a lot of mistakes and produce many flawed photos . . . I believe to learn, you need to take on board all advice offered, stick it in the mixing pot, and pick out bits you like and can relate to... </em><strong><em>Therefore, I really appreciate any comments, criticisms and suggestions... They will ALL be very much appreciated, good or bad... </em></strong><em>I just want to do my best and be the best I can... </em><br /><br />A quote from the Photographer’s Profile . . . IMO one would do well to harvest comment, not drive it away . . .the filtering and subsequent worth of the comment can be adjudicated in private – who cares about sarcasm – debating it won’t make one a better image maker<br /><br />In the time taken to make that response to my last post one could have posted three images and specific technical assistance would most likely be forthcoming, now . . .<br /><br />What is the purpose of this thread - to seek knowledge - or to debate the method in which one desires the delivery of it?<br /><br />Facta non Verba <br /><br />WW</p>

 

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Sally,</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>...my question was a little naive, I probably should be shot for it...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nowhere did I imply that you crossed borders too far. Two points about all this, though: your question is in the end about an annoyance you have with your D70. It was not needed to bring in the "wise words" (since you don't mind sarcasm) of some pro who made you doubt about your brand. Formulate the question in such a way that it invokes the answers you do seek.<br>

You posted a question in the beginner's forum, and Lex is right people should be more relaxed there. That said, can't we expect the question to be about the actual real question you have? Which was not Nikon versus Canon, but about "Is my D70 the right camera for me?".</p>

<p>Second thing, you state "if you have nothing to bring to the table, don't come for dinner". Well, you asked a question, and people offered to help. It was not the help you wanted, that is bad luck. If people come to help me paint my house, and they are basically constantly in my way, I will still thank them for offering their help and for being so kind to free up time for me. Even though they only costed me time. So shouting at us what we all did wrong in our responses to you is maybe also not the response any of us expected in the beginner's forum. You don't tell people who try to help to bugger off. Simple as that.</p>

<p>Now moving on, as I said in my first post: you will always run into some limitation with your gear. Something it cannot deliver. Learn to identify those limits, and how to handle that. Buying new gear is never going to solve the fact that you must learn how to work with your gear and what is fair to expect and what not. The D70 is an excellent camera, which like ALL cameras will suffer from camera shake when shutter times go down, handheld. So, the thing to learn here: how low can I keep my shutter before this happens, and when it comes to that, which solutions do I have? Does a flash solve more than the ~1,5 stops I may gain with a D90? Etc.</p>

[mark_loader]

<p>Hi, Sally...have you done a Nikon D70 search on Flickr? Click on "interesting" and have a look at what others have done with your camera...hopefully it might inspire you...and don't give up on the photo.net forums. They're not all as firey as this! Just don't mention photoshop or there'll be torches and pitchforks at your front door...love from Downunder</p>

[sallydouglas]

<p><!-- [if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} p {margin-right:0cm; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0cm; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --><br>

Hi William...<br>

You have quoted a statement from my profile, and it is true... I welcome and appreciate all criticism, both good and bad, about my PHOTOGRAPHY!... If I posted a photo and another photographer said it was terrible, I wouldn't be offended in the least, I would ask him why it was terrible, and what I could improve upon... What I do not welcome and appreciate is ridicule of my naivety and lack of knowledge... Any comment that is mean spirited and plain out demeaning is not welcomed or appreciated by anybody...<br>

And William, none of my silly comments were directed at you!... You were the one who made me realise the reason I cannot get the images I want are not because of my gear, but because my technique is lacking... I am now resolved to work harder in this area and stop thinking it is my gear thats the problem... This was a fantastic piece of advice, and I really appreciate it...<br>

I do harvest comment constantly... I constantly ask for photo critiques, when I see a photo I like, I post a note asking how it was done... I am hungry for criticism, and seek it out all the time... I just don't tolerate idiots well who like to belittled others... It irks me...<br>

I absolutely don't see anything wrong with telling an idiot to bugger off if they so deserve it...What can I say, I am an Australian woman, I am blunt and outspoken, and a bit silly sometimes too, aren’t we all?...<br>

You are right, the purpose of the thread is to seek knowledge, and from now on I will adjudicate comments privately as per your advice, and promptly throw rubbish into the bin where it belongs without a second thought…<br>

<!-- [if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!-- [endif]--><br>

Hi Wouter…<br>

I would NEVER tell anyone who tried to help me to bugger off, but these people did not try to help me, they just wanted to make a smart alec comment at the expense of another…<br>

I truly and honestly do not see how the question I posed “deserved” responses like these… I really don’t…<br>

However, I do appreciate your comments and say thank you…</p>

<p ><!-- [if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!-- [endif]--></p>

 

[tomwatt]

<blockquote>

<p>Sally wrote I have decided to stay with Nikon, as I really love the feel of my D70...</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />I think that sums the issue right there. Late to the food-fight as usual, I was going to recommend examining and playing with a Canon system before making any leap. If you're used to one or another, or are not used to either, it's what works for you that matters. Unless you have a penchant for big white lenses!<br>

Happy shooting!</p>

[sallydouglas]

<p>Hi Mark...<br>

Thanks for the tip, I will go and have a look... I will run my next question by the "forum police" to determine if its suitable or not...lol... Dont want any of those scary pitchforks at my door!... I'm from Downunder too... Maybe we folk just see things a little differently...<br>

Sally...</p>

[leon_b1]

<blockquote>

<p>The problem I have with the D70 is it is extremely difficult to get good crisp shots off the tripod in low light</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If this is the main reason you feel you're hitting the limitations of your equipment, I'd suggest posting a couple of images you feel are unsharp, along with all relevant EXIF data. It might be possible to establish exactly why this is happening, and whether changing your gear might correct it. As others have said, a D70 is no bar to crisp low-light photography, especially if you're using a tripod....perhaps we can help this way.</p>

<p>Once you <em>know</em> you've hit the limitations of your gear, it's time to consider changing. Mine can usually achieve far better than my technique can manage, so far.</p>

[philip_ashley]

<p>Hi Sally. I tried to find out from your profile if you are English, but now I see you are Australian. It came to mind that your comment, "Bugger Off" may have upset Americans because they don't understand the terms in which it is used by both the English, (myself) and Australians. I have to say, I have been accused of using "harsh" language since my arrival in the US in 1983, the use of the expression, "bugger off" in England is the same as the American expression, "what the hell", it really has no meaning, bugger off in the original English language has no "sexual" meaning as it appears to have in the US. The expression can mean as little as "oh go away", it is an "off the cuff remark", with no attempt at being unpleasant towards the person it is spoken to. In fact, the expression can be as innocent as when an American says, "have a good day"? We should all, from all nations, take some time to think that the writer's in PN., may not be from the US and we can all be guilty of misunderstanding the other's meaning. When I arrived in the US, I used the expression, to friends, "I'll knock you up in the morning"? This in England means, I will arrive at your house early and bang on your front door to get you out of bed. The American meaning of this was soon pointed out to me. Its amazing how far off base this thread has gone from this small difference in language. (Smile)</p>

[m_b39]

<p>I am in a similar situation - I have a D80 that I got about a year ago and love. I am looking at the D700 as the next upgrade, but Canon's 5D MKII looks like so much more camera for the same price!<br>

And yes, I do plan on using the full HD video here and there, so that is important.<br>

I have little invested in Nikon - the 18-135 kit lense and a SB800 (and a few accessories), so not a huge deal to switch.</p>

<p>I am patiently waiting for a D700x/s, but it seems less and less likely Nikon will step up to the plate. If they don't, then I'll have to opt for Canon as it is a far greater/versatile value, imho.</p>

<p>Any thoughts? I am looking more at value and versatility, I fully understand the photo quality is in my hands, not my cameras.</p>

<p>Cheers (and yes, I am from the US, I hope I can use that also!)</p>

[sd_woods]

<p>Canon and Nikon are as good as the other, although if you're looking to get into manual focus film cameras get Canon because it's waay cheaper. You're with Nikon now so you might as well stick with them, rather than having to learn a whole new set of abbreviations.</p>

[William Michael]

<p><strong><em>"I'm from Downunder too... Maybe we folk just see things a little differently..."</em></strong><br>

<br>

Yes . . . WE do . . . but I still don't like wasting time - I get frustrated.<br>

<br>

AND "bugger off" does have different meanings, in different parts of the world. <br>

<br>

And I didn't ever think your were telling me to "bugger off" - if I had, I would have told you to: ”get nicked.”<br>

<br>

WW</p>

 

[sallydouglas]

<p>Oh William... You are funny!... "Get Nicked" is a good one too... What about "Get Stuffed?"...</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Not very nice, Sally. You could start off better than this on Photo.net</p>

[William Michael]

<p >Sally, by absolute coincidence as you were telling many people to “bugger off”; I was reading an email from a very good friend in the USA. My friend used a particular phrase which WE take to mean something quite different to how it is used in the States. I thought it was hilarious that my friend would use such a phrase and I commented on it and returned the email with a feast of expressions WE brought from the outback and which have been entranced in both my wife's and my families - I grew up on 'strine and the very sharp repartee which verges on vulgarity and is indeed vulgarity in many other parts of the world - oops - my face is now quite red . . . my friend was referring to a roll of notes (money) in one's pocket . . . and not something else . . .</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The written word is a very difficult medium from which to judge nuance and meaning, especially when one chooses to use vernacular which is local in substance and/or meaning.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I have found that reading forums completely literally and playing “a straight bat” with answers has stood me in good stead, but, on occasions I too have become angry at sarcasm . . .</p>

<p > </p>

<p >BUT . . . and there are two BUTS here:</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I have been around Photonet for a while and IMO for the most part members are genuine - those who are not really don't last long because they are weeded out or the fun of being and pain in the arse wears thin . . . so your classification of "idiots" is IMO incorrect. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Over the years, I have read many of the posts from the people to whom the "idiot" remark was directed. They are not idiots. They indeed have much to offer, compounded to that, telling some males in some cultures to "bugger off" is akin to you being told to “. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .” to which you might not take so kindly?</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The second BUT, is something already touched upon - sometimes many people don't read the whole thread and often don't read what Forum it is placed in, nor do some folk think through what is actually being asked - some just respond to the topic line as if it is the total question - which is reasonable, to some extent . . .</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Consider these two topic lines: </p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong >"The Age Old Question... Canon v Nikon"</strong></p>

<p ><strong > </strong></p>

<p ><strong >"Beginner wants to know which Camera is better - Nikon or Canon?"</strong></p>

<p ><strong > </strong></p>

<p >The first conjures up a DEBATE and all the emotions thereof.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The second makes one take pause and offer "help", lest the "beginner" be lead astray by bullsh1t.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >So in some ways whilst it is incumbent upon the Reader <strong ><em >to read carefully</em></strong>, it is also incumbent upon the Poster <strong ><em >to construct the question so that they might to get the best results.</em></strong></p>

<p ><strong ><em > </em></strong></p>

<p >So, when someone writes a comment like “poor start on Photonet”, well, I agree . . . it was a rough start, BUT . . . none of us will get anywhere by seeking to attribute blame . . . </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I suggest just adjusting your writing style a tad and doing the shifting of wheat from chaff at home, in private – I could also make suggestions to those who want to continue the Witch Hunt – but my choice of words might be considered . . . inflammatory.</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > . . . and we need to see some of those images posted with the EXIF so we can begin analysing what it is that you need to do to fix.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >WW </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

 

[john_liberty]

<p>As a guy, I can tell you w/o any doubt that the Age Old Question is an entirely different question.</p>