dem beats

I would like that I think. We can wear matching smedium bike shorts

No Better info at the Trek store.

The guy I use for my gym equipment gave me the name of a dude here in Maple Grove at a trek shop. Maple grove cycle. I'm going to head there in just a few moments. I don't understand anything on that spreadsheet.

Flash on a body is only useful if you difuse it massively or bounce it. For an in body flash you can diffuse it. Make a little box with a flat sheet of paper or super thin white cloth and out it in front of the flash. This will create a much better light. I cannot express to you the importance of learning how flashes work. F-stoppers is a great start. So is the strobist. B&H have a ton of free workshop classes you can see on YouTube.

Awesome! WTG Neal!!

Thanks buttercup!

If I could find off-road trails close to here it would probably change to 80% trail and technical.

Budget, I don't care. Don't be unreasonable. I'm rough on my toys, so for me the weight and performance(is that a metric?) are much less important than being able to be beat to shit and be ridden like a jackass. This is mainly just for fitness. I enjoy riding on technical trails. I will probably spend 80% of the time on the road however. It would be cool if I could find something that I could ride in the winter too. If that means more than one bike I might be crabby.

Sean, how do I buy a bike? Need to know what to buy and how to be fitted.

Not just the IS, Sean. The AF is just a different level. Primes usually do resolve better but this thing is just so good I don't care. It's so close I don't care.

The 70-200 is better for shooting people. Like way. It is just too fast and the glass is too good.

Maybe My posts didn't go through. I wouldn't buy an adapter. A large benefit of matching brands is that the AF works together. If you want really nice primes, look into Leica or Zies. They are the best of the best when it comes to sharpness and perfect glass. I don't care if you like Nikon or Canon. Especially when it comes to ergonomics. Nikon's cheep bodies are better than Canon cheep bodies. That's a fact, just like Canon glass is better. I don't care what you choose. I'm only thinking facts here however. My opinion is Nikon focused on short term tech stuff and leaned off the glass tech. They also use Sony for a lot of the critical body parts so they could spend more time on the entry level features. My opinion is that I would like less features and faster ways to use those features. The touch screen for example is amazing for new shooters to learn on. Training wheels if you will. Well, once you really learn how to work the settings a touch screen is so extremely slow and inelegant that I would rather not have it if they reduce The amount of direct control options I need for my shooting. That's all opinion. Low cost Nikon bodies are way better, and they all have better dynamic range. Canon lenses are much better. Not opinion. What have you read that is the opposite of what we are saying? Maybe I could clarify what I'm saying wrong. Canon has better lenses at the moment. Its not a debate, the lenses are superior. Some of that is because of AF, some is because of the actually glass inside the lens. And especially the materials in the lenses that are not glass.

IMHO the best carry pistol is the FNX. Double single. No goofball safety. Hammer. Super dope.

Sorry for the loss. That has been going around.... You got a big soft squishy heart. Maybe just a little bit of a black soul though. :-)

Since I'm looking to trade in I should definitely not go test drive one then.

This

Or use a slower moving large calibre and then use a silencer? Recoil is in relationship to energy you can make small rounds go fast and large rounds go slower and have the same recoil. Bbl wear, maintenance, and perceived recoil is always better with a slower moving round. Humans deal with a shove better than a snap. I digress the what round is better argument and will take a more literal stance. When it comes to what you want to shoot it's all personal. Physics don't change though. The largest usable diameter round is always the best option unless you care much more about total capacity per magazine. You can send the same energy with less speed when you have a larger round, so it makes sense to just be a size queen.

The best handgun round would be a subsonic 50 cal of undetermined grain with the option to run super sonic. Silenced of course. Assuming we are limited to the 50 cal restriction. Unless you define round by being able to carry the most rounds, then again I would say 9mm. I should also mention that I meant pistols as in autoloaders and not all handguns. And part of my rationalizations have to do with availability and ability to afford the rounds so you can practice more. If money didn't matter then I would have not included 9mm in all truth.

I do not understand pistols in anything other than 9mm and 45. Maybe 22. Everything else is esoteric to me.

I hear that from women all the time myself.

I set the shutter with a collar to never go below a certain speed at times. If I'm usually in that some I'm usually shooting manual. The controls on the 6D are so nice. Not having to go through menu stuff is amazing. I'm not at all fast nor efficient, but when I'm outside my comfort zone(aperature priority) I choose manual.

I always shoot aperature priority. Unless trying to manipulate something as you said.

I need to get some more.308 and work out the AR-10 a bit. I found a 25 round magpul for it. That's a lot of bang in one magazine.

Basically 5-90 pounds form <$550. Another $300 (before my hommie hook up) to get to 125. What do you use the 150 dumbell for?