sirocco

Hi Guys, I'm interested to know if you would recommend this hackle. I'm planning to get the brown hen cape (the one for dry flies?) Thanks! Erik

haha, I've been wondering the same.

No cardboard derivatives... Ha!

Sorry Lynn, dryfly's on the money. There are lots of good cameras out there these days that will probably get you more value than your poor Kodak.

Interesting responses, thanks guys. I was not aware of the double hook regs in BC which is definitely good info.

So I've been reading the Bully Flies threads in the fly tying forum and I'm interested to know the risks (if there are any) that are involved in using trailer hooks. According to my visualization/logic of how they work, wouldn't there be a much greater risk of hooking a fish in its throat with these hooks compared to normal hooks, thus increasing the risk of causing harm to the fish? I'm all for increasing my chances of success if this method works better, but not if it means greater damage to the fish! Thanks Erik

knock on wood, but i've been using vista since June and I quite like it. I think it really comes down to what you're used to and what works for you. I use Adobe Lightroom on it with no problems.

Looks good to me. Just curious as to why it's too much for fishing?

Hey Din, what did you use to glue the rabbit strips together?

2007 -

My feeble attempt at an Adams...!

Awesome, thanks everyone. That was fairly straightforward. And thanks to Hawgstoppah for the list. Are there any recommended streamers other than Zonker, Clouser, and Wooly Bugger?

Hi Guys, I'm new to tying this year and I'm hoping to improve on my skill by learning the most common/best dry flies for southern AB streams. I'm hoping you can give me a list of the necessities, what every person should have in their box, so I can learn them over the winter. So far I have: 1. Elk Hair Caddis 2. Griffith's Gnat 3. Adams I know how to tie the first two, but I haven't learned the adams yet. I'd love to hear the others you would recommend! Cheers Erik

Hydropsyche, I don't own any older lenses so I'm not entirely sure. I'm fairly certain that most lenses are compatible with the DSLR's, however on some of the older ones certain functions are impaired (i.e. no matrix metering with "X" lens). According to my manual, type G and D CPU lenses are recommended (all functions are supported). It explicitly says IX Nikkor CPU lenses can not be used. The AI, AI-S, and Series E non cpu lenses do not have in camera metering but can be used. Let me know which lenses you are wondering about and I can try and provide a more detailed response. Sorry I couldn't be of much help!

Nikon All The Way. This is my personal preference but, think about it like this: You'll often see a lot of olympus shooters switch to Nikon or Canon later on, whereas you would rarely see it the other way around. Here's my take on your questions: 1. Forget about the kit lenses, from either brand. The 18-55's are junk (poor construction quality, poor glass quality... that's why they're so cheap), and the 75-300 is a little bit of a step up, but not a big one. Buy the body and a better lens. 2. Both lenses are of relatively poor quality. Therefore, I wouldn't buy either. An 18-200mm is a great choice, because it covers such a large spectrum, however this is also why it has a specific drawback. The fact that the lens is built to handle such a wide range brings with it compromises in image quality (really hard to explain without visuals). That being said, Nikon's 18-200 VR is supposed to be killer, and the VR is worth it if you're not regularly using a tripod and if you're relatively new to photography. I'm not sure what Olympus offers, but like I said, I'd stay away from them. 3. Nikon and Canon both have huge third party support as far as accessories go, wheter it be flashes, lenses etc. Olympus probably has more limited support, as most smaller companies do. I think it's a big deal, because I like accessories and lenses etc. As far as lenses go, you're going to find that they can get expensive, even more expensive than the body. Now, if you're serious about photography, just buy the expensive stuff ($1000-$2000+) now and forget about it, if it's within your means. You'll avoid having to upgrade in the long run. If you're a casual shooter, buy mid-range stuff ($400-$1000). You'll get decent quality and decent images. You can buy the cheap stuff but you'll probably end up upgrading down the road. This is all personal preference here, but I would stay away from Tamron, and buy either Sigma or Nikon, preferably Nikon (or Olympus, if you choose to buy their camera). Going with the manufacturer is almost always your best best. Based on my experience, Nikon's lens construction is better than Sigma's, but the image quality is about the same, and Sigma is cheaper. However, NEVER buy a cheap Sigma lens. You'll be throwing away your money. I own the Sigma 50mm Macro, and the 70-200mm f/2.8 which are both solid choices. That being said I'll probably buy Nikon from now on. 4. The crop factor is a whole different discussion on its own. The 1.5x crop factor means that a lens that goes to 200mm actually gives you 300mm in 35mm film terms (this is good). However, on the wide angle end, it means that an 18mm lens actually gives you 27mm (which isn't as wide, which isn't as good). For a 2x crop factor, these numbers are both exaggerated a bit more. Based on this, macro capability wouldn't be affected since it only affects focal length, not focusing distance. Now don't hold me to this, but I'm pretty sure that the Olympus sensor is smaller than the Nikon (this is why they have different crop factors), and therefore since the Nikon sensor is bigger, the image quality is inherently better because the pixels are physically larger in size. The D40x is an awesome choice. Various pros use them as back up cameras. I don't know a single pro who shoots Olympus. I use a Nikon D70s, which is considered "a step-above" the D40x, but for your needs I'm sure it would suit you well. Hopefully this helps. Bottom line: buy the Nikon. The 24-120 VR and the 18-200 VR would both be good first lenses until you decide to upgrade. Also feel free to check out my site to check out what the D40x would be capable of. All of the photos were taken with my D70s, but like I said, the D40x would be comparable. Don't forget though that those shots aren't "out of the camera", they've been enhanced using photoshop.... www.ehphoto.ca Cheers Erik

Hi guys, I'm bogged down in school work tonight and wasn't able to make the open house here in Calgary. Just wondering if anyone has had the chance to go and learn more about what's going on? Cheers Erik

Thanks Brett, that was great!

http://www.sigma-dp1.com/ Hey Brent, I think this would be a great unit if it ever makes it into full production. Pros: - Size of a normal Point and Shoot - Instead of a normal point and shoot sensor, you get a DSLR sized sensor, meaning way better image quality. - Fixed focal length lens, which would be great for landscapes Cons: - Fixed focal length lens is limiting depending on what you want to shoot. Would be great for fishing photos. - Was announced a long time ago and there's no word yet on if it will actually make it to production. - Sigma is not really a popular camera maker. Their main business is 3rd party lens production. Therefore one shouldn't be surprised if quality control isn't as strict as that of Canon, Nikon etc.

What's your budget for the non waterproof one? Are you looking at getting a digital SLR or just a fancy point and shoot?

Thanks for all the replies. I'm liking the Charlie's Flybox method especially. I've been uncomfortable using lead to weight my bodies, and I'm wondering if anyone could advise me as to which alternative metal is preferred? Cheers

So will this be comparable with BC's classified waters licensing system?

Hi guys, Up until now I've been tying my zonker bodies by just wrapping white yarn over the lead wrap and sliding on the mylar tubing, somewhat like this: http://hipwader.com/2003/bonkers-for-zonkers However, I've seen several versions like the one on this page: http://www.ickyflyworks.ca/catalog/index.p...t=1a&page=3 and I'd like to know how it's done. The body shape looks way more appealing. Thanks!

Never caught anything bigger than 6 inches, and they're few and far between. All brookies for me.

Had a great day with TinTin, Don and LK2. Thanks go out to Rich and Pipestoneflyguy for organizing the event, and also to Icky Fly Works for the awesome box of flies. It'll definitely come in handy. Also thanks to Toolman and Speyghillie for the demos. Can't wait till next year!

6MP isn't the problem with this camera. I'd be more concerned with the fact that it is a relatively unknown and untested brand. It only supports memory up to 1GB, which is ridiculous, the fixed focal length limits it's flexibility, and the macro capabilities (i.e. close-ups) are pretty bad compared to other cameras. It's also doubtful that the optical quality of the lens will match that of the more major camera manufacturers. Ladystrange makes a good point about noise problems on point and shoot digital cameras, but I wouldn't shy away from them based on image size output. The limitation in the size of a print that you can make is largely based on the size of the sensor (the bigger the sensor the bigger the print you can make). Since most digi cams are small, the sensors are also small (much smaller than 35mm film and digital slr sensors) and therefore can't produce the quality that these cameras are capable of. That being said, a 6MP digital point and shoot can definitely print a solid 8x10 photo provided you buy a camera from a maker who is known for their sensor technology and processing algorithms (canon, nikon, pentax, fuji are all good bets). I seem to be rambling. My point is, avoid this camera, but don't avoid good cameras because of the price tag.