cheap camera expensive lens?
Sep 2, 2014 22:01:05 #
DonORN
Loc: Louisiana
Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
Sep 2, 2014 22:05:54 #
Why not go for a 2.8 lens? Know the Cannon version is very popular with Press photogs.
Sep 2, 2014 22:07:19 #
DonORN wrote:
Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
That's what I've always heard.
There was a youtube video. I think it may have been digitalrev. They tested the difference between an expensive body with a cheap lens and an cheap body with an expensive lens.
Cheap body/expensive lens won every time.
Sep 2, 2014 22:08:40 #
DonORN wrote:
Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
I think that is a good assumption. Better glass is the one most important consideration of all the available choices. And, as a bonus, if you do ever decide to move into a more expensive camera you'll be set with the good glass you've already got in your bag.
Sep 2, 2014 22:11:55 #
DonORN wrote:
Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
I have this lens and it is outstanding on my D800E and D810. Many of the humming bird images I've posted have been taken with it.
Check out DXO and look at this lens on various bodies. You will find that performance varies by camera.
This will help you decide on how to go much better than opinions.
Sep 2, 2014 22:20:57 #
DonORN wrote:
Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
My opinion is that good glass on a mediocre camera is better than mediocre glass on a good camera.
Sep 2, 2014 22:23:17 #
DonORN wrote:
Lens make the difference on an already great body... Sort of like placing lipstick on pig theory...Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
Still, were I you, I would invest on glass first as later on, that expensive chunk of silicate can be matched with a great body... The lipstick is not lost...
I did that when I knew I was going to jump ship from DX to FX. I purchased my lenses first... (I also did this type stuff when I purchased my first CD player. I already had about 150 CDs BEFORE buying the player. Why? Because a player w/o diversity is boring. Planning ahead is key, always.)
Sep 2, 2014 22:28:14 #
I agree with most of the opinions here, better glass in more important. Except for the suggestion to go with a more expensive 2.8. You're not a press photographer and don't need fast speed. For landscape, f:4 is perfectly okay. What are you thinking, Daryl?
Sep 2, 2014 22:29:31 #
DonORN
Loc: Louisiana
joer wrote:
I have this lens and it is outstanding on my D800E and D810. Many of the humming bird images I've posted have been taken with it.
Check out DXO and look at this lens on various bodies. You will find that performance varies by camera.
This will help you decide on how to go much better than opinions.
Check out DXO and look at this lens on various bodies. You will find that performance varies by camera.
This will help you decide on how to go much better than opinions.
What is DXO
Sep 2, 2014 22:33:16 #
Sep 2, 2014 22:34:15 #
DonORN wrote:
What is DXO
Only one of the most trusted sites for evaluating cameras and lenses.
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses
Sep 2, 2014 22:44:52 #
There is nothing more frustrating than a great camera with a crummy lens. Buy the best glass you can afford, then you have a reason to buy a better camera.
Sep 2, 2014 22:45:41 #
I think the idea of the glass being more important than the camera was more true in the film era than it is now with digital. Film cameras have very little effect on image quality, as long as they hold the film flat and have an accurate shutter. But the quality of the digital sensor does have an effect on image quality.
Sep 2, 2014 23:42:37 #
DonORN wrote:
Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
Don, the lens is NOT more important than the body.
But the body will be replaced with a new model every 12 months and loose it's value the second it leaves the store, whether you've used it or not.
The lens on the other hand may be replaced by a new model every ten years and sometimes they are worth more in 5 years than what you paid for them.
But you'd be hard pressed to see a huge optical difference between a cheap lens and a pro grade lens. ;-)
SS
Sep 3, 2014 01:20:43 #
DonORN wrote:
Ok, I shoot mostly landscapes, some family pics etc...my question is I"m considering upgrading my NIkon D50 to a Nikon D3300. (I don't care about GPS or WiFi). Would I be misguided buying a lower end camera but buying a more expensive (~$1300) F/4 70-200 lens? I keep reading that the glass is more important than the camera. Thanks for the input.
Keep one thing in mind, it is the LENS that actually captures the image! The camera is merely a recording device, some just offer better recording options than others.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.