u dont have budget for lenes but a semi pro body especially a 2k+ body of D300? i dont get u ....
40d / D300
- Thread starter JohN-
- Start date
- Status
u dont have budget for lenes but a semi pro body especially a 2k+ body of D300? i dont get u ....
Because i think that's the usual walkabout lens? I think people will rather use the kit than to buy a f2.8. Please correct me if i am wrong ANYONE
u mean is a waste to buy a f2.8 walkabout lens if u have a kit lens? then nobody will spend $ on a f2.8 std zoom already...
Kit lens are great value for money - why? Because for every consumer DSLR cam Nikon or Canon sells will go with a kit lens so if they make one million units a year, there will be one million kit lens. Think about it - manufacturing cost will be brought down to a minimum because of the economies of scale. I wager to bet, if there is no such thing as a kit lens - the lens itself will easily sell for double (or more) its asking price as compared to being a kit lens - Canon 5D + 24-105 excepted. I have my first DSLR three years ago and I am still using the kit lens because it fulfils my needs and in no way, limit the quality fo the photos I have. There is nothing wrong with starting with a good body and kit lens and add on what you need when your skills exceeds your kit. Its like when I had film cameras and all I have is a 50mm f1.8 and it lasted me years. I reckon if I would use MF one day, I will still have only one lens. And I don't worry about switching sides!
With digital, the quality of the hardware and software is equally important. Yes, good glass is important but sensor technology is still progressing. Compare to film, a camera is just a box to hold the film and film choices can be counted with the number of fingers in your hands. So the lens is important because thats all you get between the subject and the film. With digital, the unfortunate downside is obsolesence. The D300 absolutely cream the D200 even if the D200 is a superb piece of engineering. My take - go for the D300 for about $2k+.
With digital, the quality of the hardware and software is equally important. Yes, good glass is important but sensor technology is still progressing. Compare to film, a camera is just a box to hold the film and film choices can be counted with the number of fingers in your hands. So the lens is important because thats all you get between the subject and the film. With digital, the unfortunate downside is obsolesence. The D300 absolutely cream the D200 even if the D200 is a superb piece of engineering. My take - go for the D300 for about $2k+.
looks like d300 is out of the question for you...the lowest possible price is still slightly above 2k.
40d is the cheaper alternative as for your budget.
- Status
Similar threads
