I realise that most pro's use Canon or Niknon to earn their livings and probably that explains the widespread use of Nikon and Canon.

But.......

I remember listening, many years ago to a radio interview with Patrick Lichfield. One of the listners rang in with a comment along the lines of "Yes but you're a professional photographer, and obviously you use the best ( Olympus ), obviously you get good photographs.

His reply was, "No problem, I'll lend you my camera and you lend me yours, and even if it's an instmatic I bet you I end up with better pictures than you.

The moral of that to me is that the photograph is in the eye of the photographer and the resulting photograph is an image that translates his feelings into a form that the beholder can appreciate. I see constant arguments amongst(probably gifted) amateurs over which is the better, how many more megapix it has, how much better the lenses are and so on.

Personally, my argument is, get to know what the limitations of your camera (whatever it is) and learn to exploit its capabilities.

Yes, yes, I know that technical excellence through technically superior equipment will give technically superior images. Notice I said images? Not photographs.

To me they aint "captured" or any of the other modern jargon. They are photographs. Things people, real people look at and admire, usually because they aren't capable of the same skill of the person who took it.

Rant over. But I hope that you will agree that an Olympus E510 is every bit as good as the latest 12 or 20 Mp technical megabeast, under some circumstances, that some people aspire to.

Dave