Ha Ha Ha, Very Funny Prank...... >:D

[grawk]

Nikon's dSLRs are ...okay (except for the new D3, which is sexy in the extreme, but you may not want to spend $5000.) Until very recently, Canon has been fully a generation ahead of Nikon. You can get an adapter to mount any manual focus Nikon lens on a Canon EOS body. I don't own any Nikkors, but I have a bunch of M42 screw-mount manual focus lens, and a adapter to attach them to my two Canons. I've had a lot of fun using them.

The nikon vs canon pissing match. Any modern dslr is plenty good for any purpose short of gallery printing. Even 5-6 mpix can do 20x30 prints without trouble.

[aerius]

It's not the camera, it's the guy behind the camera.

Some of my best pictures were taken with $5 disposable cameras.

That's why I have a point & shoot instead of a DSLR, my Canon SD800 goes everywhere with me while the DSLR would spend almost all of its time at home. I can't lug a DLSR and its lenses around with me all the time and as a result I'm going to miss a lot of nice photos.

[Knuckledragger]

I don't mean to imply a pissing match at all. Until 20 years ago, I think Nikon has a serious edge over Canon. Vintage Nikon glass is far better than its Canon contemporaries. That said, Canon jumped into the digital realm with both feet and spent a fortune building their own chip making plant. Canon senssors have had a serious lead of Nikon until the most recent generation. The truth is, the Nikon D3 is a better camera than the $3000-more-expensive Canon 1Ds III. It can use any Nikon lens going back to 1979, including all the DX "digital only" lenses. It even bests Canon in high ISO performance, which has traditionally been Canon's strength.

I should add that a big part of Canon's dominance has been the success with a full frame sensor. They released the Canon 1Ds in the end of 2002, and it wasn't until five years later that Nikon answered.

[JBLoudG20]

Fucking fanboy.

Listen to grawk. They will both work just fine. Your best bet is to use each of them, and see which feels mroe comfortable. That will likely be the one that will give you a better image.

I have very big hands, and I found the Nikon to be uncomfortable for me. My RebelXT with battery grip is sufficient, but I would really like to move to a 30D/40D as it fits my hands even better.

[laxx]

I haven't had any real issues with my digital Elph unless I'm trying to do something dumb like taking long exposure pictures of people at night. The picture below is a hand-held 2 second exposure at night, image stabilization rocks.

http://ca.geocities.com/[email protected]/pix/snow05.jpg

Doesn't look stable to me at all, lol.

[aerius]

Doesn't look stable to me at all, lol.

For a hand held 2 second exposure in 30mph winds, it's pretty damn stable.

[Dusty Chalk]

...Here's a lobster from Maine...and a shrimp from China Town...

Okay, so the short answer is, "yes", you do take pictures of food before pranks (and not before pranks...or rather, "before" "not pranks"). Quite a bit, it seems. You should submit some of those pictures back to the restaurants, some of them look quite good. (Not the pepper flakes picture, though. I doubt the restaurant would appreciate that.)

I guess there are peculiarities in language and presentation of food everywhere we go

for one, I've never called a pizza a pie.

It's quite common to call individual pizzas "pies". I think most of the chains do it internally.

[JBLoudG20]

Depends where you are from, I guess. Its not uncommon to hear Tomato Pie in New Haven.