I wish polls didn't exist. They can never hope to give an accurate picture, so the effect is that they invariably give a wrong result, and are therefore worthless at best and very misleading at worst.

G

It's just a camera body cap. You get one if you buy a body on its own. The old black ones were properly made, and the new ones are flimsy white plastic things.

You should find one on Ebay, but don't pay too much for it.

ETA: Here you are: link

G

The BBC website says that Mexican Police have arrested the leader of a drug gang. They found him in the appropriately named town of Aguascalientes.

He's in hot water now, for sure.

G

Well, there are a couple of forum members......

Darn, they're not Welsh.

G

Chester is a good argument for retaining the aristocracy.

Unlike so many British towns and cities, it hasn't had the guts ripped out of it to make way for car-parks and supermarkets. As a result, people drive all the way from Yorkshire to see it.

The Duke of Westminster (I believe) owns most of Chester, and he is rich enough not to need the Sainsbury shilling. Long may that continue.

G

I think we can all agree that the 31mm is superb. And nobody is upset (I think).

G

I use the 17-70 as my default lens. I do have one or two others. (About 30!)

It's by no means a bad lens, but in my view the 16-50 is rather better.

G

One last thing. Reviewers and pixel-peepers tend to concentrate more on the bad points of a piece of equipment, and less on the good.

This is madness. It's the good points that make a great lens, or whatever, not an absence of bad points.

The 77mm suffers from purple fringing on occasion. If one's chief buying criterion were to avoid lenses with PF, one would miss out on one of the great portrait lenses of all time.

The 16-50 is a great lens in nearly all circumstances. That's what matters.

G

Well done, Stefan. Quick change of subject.

I would suspect it would be many tens of thousands, if not more.

G

You wouldn't do that.....

G