In article <4718e6$ie@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, mbarnstone@aol.com says...
>I'm currently in the process of purchasing my first SLR (and my very first
>AF) in years. Like a good consumer, I've visited my local dealers, poored
>over brochures and magazine reviews and memorized just about every detail
>of the cameras in my price range (roughly $600 - $700). So far I've been
>able to narrow my choice down to the Canon Elan II or IIE vs. a few of
>the entry model Nikons. (N6006, N70). Now I'm looking for some open
>opinions from users of these cameras. I'm impressed with Canon's
>technical wizardry and features at the price, but mostly with the silence
>and quickness of the AF features. On the other hand, Nikon's sturdier
>construction and reputation for great lenses also impresses me.
>By the way, I use the camera fairly regularly for my work and can run up
>to 8 rolls a day during busy periods. I'm on the road a lot so I'll need
>something that can take the abuse. I'm also looking for a camera system
>that I'll be happy buying into 5 years from now.

Looks like you have done your homework - guess it boils down to what
is most important for you. For me, overall line lens quality and line
stability are most important. It comes down to the basics: a camera
holds the film and should provide an easy-to-use and accurate viewing
and focusing system; a lens (of any price) needs to be high in optical quality to produce a good image without having to regularly compensate
for its shortcomings; the design and value of the equipment should
remain stable over time so that I can buy new equipment that will be
compatible with my old, and sell my old equipment without losing my
shirt in the transaction. You can probably guess which of the above
two makes of cameras and lenses I favor.
Hope this helps.