I have canon lenses so I'm geting a DSLR that works with them.
Please comment briefly on how likely you are to buy a new DSLR in the coming months, and how your investment in lenses will or will not affect that purchase.
- Log in or register to post comments
My 1st DSLR is on order now. My existing battery of lenses was a consideration as it allows me to aquire just the body initially; eventially I will replace all lenses with APS specific glass (ie: my 28-70 f2.8 will be replaced with a 16-50 f2.8)
If I had some lame brand of camera or lenses I might be willing to change. But I have a Nikon D-70 and some lenses and will soon upgrade to a D-200 body. Though some people are fans of Canon I think both companies make good gear and it would be foolish to leave the Nikon "family" at this point.
I'm planning on buying 2 Nikon D200s in the coming months for my startup business, along with 2 or 3 good Nikon lenses. I've been a Nikon user all my life and have no plans to switch now, even though the situation would allow me to do that!
Ihave recently purchased the Canon 5D and have the Canon 300D as a backup. The lenses are interchangable and the package appears to excellant. My main problem is weight which is important for someone in their eighties. Youngsters should have no such problem.
I made the jump to digital in '02 with a Nikon D1x. Frankly, I've found digital to be a big, very expensive disappointment, but a competitive necessity. Aside from swapping all my lenses to the Nikon DX line, I'm now on the third Nikon body in 4 years just trying to stay keep up with the technology power curve, and to overcome all the limitations of the earlier body. Unfortunately, the camera mfr's have made it so these cameras are virtually "upgrade-proof", that is, it's not possible to just upgrade the sensors. Let's recall that when new film formulas were introduced, it wasn't necessary to buy new camera bodies in order to use them. I can only hope at some point soon this technology rat race levels off, because, like many photographers, I've getting fed up with all this. My old film library looks better every time I look at some of those shots, plus I realize how much fun it was to just shoot the composition and move on to the next one, rather than worrying about all the post-processing to come.
I'm not necessarily shopping for a D-SLR. I have a nice compliment of lenses. Those lenses have been in my closet for the last 6 yrs. I now have a fine digital camera with an acceptable zoom. Since digicams came along there's been a gulf between the pro (job security) mentality that the only real camera is an SLR and everyone else. There are 10+Mp cams out now that still do not have a full size chip. Why? In my old film camera I could use the exact same film as the pro studio down the street. Today I can't get the same chip unless I buy a brick-sized D-SLR. This is the old school approach to taking pictures that is dying a slow and painful death. There's no reason for that. Lens technology has progressed immensely in the last few years and you can get excellent results from a built-in full range zoom digicam except you are limited to JPG and less then decent shadow detail. These are not considerations of the D-SLR realm. Will Nikon be the first to shift this method of production? I don't see any magazine confronting the manufacturers with this issue. Can you? You are a pro-sumer magazine and I would hope to someday see this addressed.
I have a Pentax ZX-M and a 24mm manual focus lense left, after giving all my other Pentax gear to my son-in-law. I do a lot of low-light, theater production shooting, so the noise level at high ISO along with Image Stabilization over-ride any existing lens inventory questions.