Originally posted by: essasin
Originally posted by: Deadtrees
As he's a starting photographer, I doubt if he knows what kind of lenses he'll need and want. Knowing about lenses take more time and it's not something one can give recommandations because it greatly varies from a person to a person.
Also, what about FF cameras and lenses? Would he be hooked on prime lenses? Would he need/want that f/1.5 stop more of depth that FF provides? If so, I would've recommanded him not to get crop factored-lenses but then again, that's something we just can't tell.
As for as camera goes, it's rather simple: Get a camera that offers best price/performance deal. Get a camera that offers more than what one thinks he'll need as long as the price is not so high.
It's so because I've seen starters who bought xxxxxx cameras only to realize that no matter what kind of lens they use, they couldn't really use it because of bad low-light AF ability
I've seen users who changed brands because they couldn't stand the picture quality. I've seen users who changed brands as the other one was better when it came to sports photography.
I've seen users who changed brands because of weather proof.
Unluckly, in the past, unless you drop serious dollars, once couldn't get a camera that was good for pretty much everything. That, I think is changed as D300 happens to offer everything and that's why I say he go with D300.
Especially so because the price of D300 will be stable whereas other cameras are taking a big hit already: even if he decides to go FF camera, he wouldn't need to worry about resale value of D300.
That's why I say he get D300 and only focus on lenses without worrying about all those other cameras and what it offers.
I could bet the farm that 99,9% of the users on the major photography forums suggest to invest in glass first and camera body second especially for a starting photographer and I am almost certain that everyone in this forum would agree. There is a good reason for this.
1. A camera is only as good as the lens that is attached to it. A Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G AF-S DX will has a great focal point range that he will use for travel, weddings, and general photography and it will take superb shots no matter what camera body it is attached too. Same goes for a canon 24-70 f/2.8L.
2. By investing in glass first he will have a greater focal range and produce higher quality pictures. There is no point in spending his budget on a camera body if he is stuck with only a kit lens.
3. Camera bodies are revised just about every two years, and they do depreciate rather quickly. Anything that is revised so often will lose its value...its just how technology is. Would you rather have quality glass that can be used with your next camera body which will be better than previous or be stuck with sub par glass because you spend your budget on the latest camera body previously. The canon 5d was released two years ago and it dramatically changed the photography world and now has dropped significantly. Yet a 4 year old 24-70L has maintained 80 to 95% of its value today and is still considered the best general lens that can be used for the next generations. Same thing goes for the Nikon glass as well.
4. Nice glass on a sub par body will allow you take and produce better iq than a nice body with sub par glass.
I could go on about the importance of glass first. It is very easy to determine what types of glass would be appropriate for the OP. A lens in the 24-70 focal range for general and 70-200 for the closeups and perhaps something in the 17mm for wide angle. There is no doubt that the new Nikon line is great but there is no point in spending most of your budget on it if you can only take 20% of the pictures you want to shoot because the other 80% of the shoots you want to take require different glass.
1. True. Lenses are lenses that'll function the same, but then again, what if you have those lenses that you want to use but really can't due to the weather? How about in sports-like photography? What good is a lens if the camera doesn't have good working AF tracking system that you must have shooting moving objects? What if your camera's AF is poor in low light situation? What if your camera has bad high ISO processing that you can't really make use of it? I'm not saying he'll need all those functions but if he's got money to spend, he should go for the one that supports all.
2. Quite true only if you're talking about days of films. The time has changed and digital cameras use different types of sensor+image processing combinations. Even if your glass is damn good, it's not good at all if the camera's image processing isn't good. I've seen samples shots of D300 and it really looks better than other Nikons' which is not a suprise considering how Nikon's image processing has been bettter. Not only that, it now offers detailed picture controls in which a user can change the look of the picture dramatically.
As for a starter, he'll be fine with a kit lens for a while. Once he learns more about other lenses and the difference they make, he can grab more in time. It's not like he'll be stuck with a kit lens forever. Lenses are something one can add on top of the others whereas a camera don't come and go that easy. Hell, I was stuck with Canon 5D with only one prime lens for a while because I drained all of my money into buying 5D. Did I regret it? No, because 5D is such a amazing camera and I could buy one more lens from time to time. Plus, as for a FF starter, I needed that time to realize what I need and want. Again, buying news lenses are far easier and safer than changing cameras.
3. As said in No.2. In addition, D300 is a really mature camera. By that I mean that we won't be seeing big changes that'll put D300 into dust.
Also, as you mentioned 5D, why do you think people even sold their lenses so that they could afford $4000 5D? Why do you think some people even sold every lenses so that they could be happy with 5D+ 50mm f/1.8 combination? How did 5D manage to change photography world when it was just a camera? Following what you're saying, it shouldn't work that way, right?
4. Wrong because we're talking about digital cameras. As said before, image processing has more impact on image quality. Compare images taken with D40 with a lower quality glass to D70 with a higher quality glass. D40 wins due to having a lot better image processing algorithm than that of D70. Think about 35mm film cameras and Medium format cameras. Medium format cameras produce better images not because they have better lenses than those of 35mm, but because they used bigger films.
Just think about why some people loved Sigma cameras and love Kodak and Fuji cameras.
Again, I recommand D300 because it's the kind of camera that most of the people can just keep whatever comes along within near future (Only if FF doesn't become mainstream).
Really... It's weather-proof, offers 3D tracking 51 AF points, detailed picture control system, low high ISO noise levels, high fps and 100% view finder frame coverage along with many others. It sure is a keeper for a long time.
Facebook
Twitter