What do you guys think if you have to choose between a reputable supervisor in an area but working in a less prestigious university OR a PhD from a prestigious university (e.g. Oxbridge) but with a less reputable guy?

I think you know the answer to the question

How less prestigious....Edge Hill University? Give people something to work with here.

Personally I chose my supervisor over the reputation of the university. It was an easy decision because she's brilliant, highly regarded in our field, I work well with her and she inspires me all the time. There's no way I could've put up with a lesser supervisor for the sake of being at a 'better' uni.

Yes - how big is the gap? although personally, I'm a great believer in taking your reputation to your institution rather than the other way around. What do you mean by 'reputable'? Is this as in the quality of thier research - or how they are as a supervisor? What about the projects?

This is my expereince. I had to go with the oxbridge option as it's where I live and I had family committments that meant I couldn't move. I did look into it though as even my current supervisor did agree that my interests were a better match with X at another uni. X though, had had bad experiences with long-distance supervision and was reluctant to go down that road again. So I carried on here - but it has been a VERY rough ride and if I had been free to move I would have.

The supervisor is a Fellow of Royal society and a Fellow of Medical Science, he was previously working in Cambridge but moved to the north to act as a director of an institute.

Sometimes I am struggling to choose between a PhD degree from Oxbridge, but working with a great supervisor is also an advantage...

In terms of job perspective in the future, how would you choose?

Instinctively the answer is to go for the supervisor, but the question is - have you met them yet? Could you work effectively with them? As someone who has had to change supervisor (as many of us have) I would love to have a supervisor who could be really in tune with my work. But going for a supervisor alone is putting a lot of faith into one person - and you both have to know that it is going to work.
Sleepy

Well that is extremely close to the choice I faced (and X has just gone back to oxbridge - but the 'other place'). Personally, I think if you do a good PhD with good publications you will do just fine at either place. But definitely meet them and/or find out how they are as supervisors to help with your decision. Just a note - when you have a big name supervisor, usually all you get is the name - they have no time/motivation to actually supervise you.

It is a tough choice if you are offered both. Personally - I think would choose the project that most motivated me.

Thank you all for the comments!

Yes, I have actually met them both, but it's hard to choose really. The one in Cambridge is actually at MRC LMB, I found the laboratory (the building i meant) itself very inspiring. However, the group is averaged size but the project certainly interests me !

The other guy was working in MRC LMB too, he has international reputation for his work, and now he takes the position as a director of a newly built institute. He seems to be a busy person but what he told me about the research is truly encouraging. If I do a PhD there, I will likely be supervised by the post-docs on a daily basis. Is it normal??

Yes that's normal - the more senior the supervisor the less hands-on they are likely to be. All the mrc labs are pretty good and well-kitted out. Sounds like you can't really go wrong with either one. Do you prefer either place to live?

One thing to consider is the wealth of intellectual capital at Cambridge. As well as the LMB there are lots of research groups doing all sorts of very exciting things in Cambridge. Remember what you do for your PhD is not necessarily what you are going to be doing for life and you should consider how this other institute compares in terms of providing a broad education/experience.

Don't have a specific answer to this but if the super is good and the uni is not so good there is always the chance of networking and you are allowed to use lib.resources from other uni's. I'm more drawn towards a understanding super as that can be a crucial point. Think about it, whatever research you do, you only get a phd for a small contribution and there is always conferences, collaborating with other researchers even during PhD. If you are ever down and lost, then a good super is important.

Does it not depend upon whether you are doing an Arts or a Sciences subject? As an 'Arts person', I meet my supervisor fairly regularly, but my work remains my own, i.e. I bounce ideas off them, but try not to be influenced too much by their methodologies. It's fairly informal. I can imagine, though, if you are a scientist, that your supervisor's input is much more influential.

Re: the Oxbridge thing. I was offered the opportunity to remain at Oxford to study as a postgrad. I turned it down purely because I couldn't afford their fees and am now at a redbrick. I work very well with my supervisor, but I still wish that I could have remained at Oxford. Better networking and career prospects, methinks.