Racin17 Loc: Western Pa

Whoa whoa whoa....no p....p for me. Dirt is good if seasoned right.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Hey, those kids always looked quite healthy, if not a little plump!
I don't think they missed too many meals!! :lol: :lol:
SS

Racin17 Loc: Western Pa

No youre right. ...I also have to admit I cant use paint either.....

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Jim...You should be more than happy with a point and shoot (which can be quite nice) and doing a little p/p in Photo Gallery.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

This is silly. Really silly, and not to be taken seriously. If you don't understand the rationale for better camera gear, then the answer is pointless.

Hando Rei Loc: Long Island New York

MT Shooter right on the money . If your level of photography is satisfied with a lesser camera ...go for it . People makes choices based on their needs .

Revet Loc: Fairview Park, Ohio

When I started this hobby, I bought the Nikon D3100. I have used it for 3 years now and I have taken the advice of other Hogs and fellow Nikonites. I purchased better glass and fully learned that D3100 first even though I wanted to upgrade to a better body a couple months after I started. It has turned out to be good advise and I have gotten more reliable good photos instead of just the occasional lucky one.

Over the last year, however, there have been numerous occasions where I wish I had more features than the D3100 offers. Now I feel I am ready to move up to the D7100 (I actually purchased it yesterday but will not open the box until Christmas!!!!). No matter what camera or glass you have, I think it is good advise to learn how to get good pictures with the equipment you have before purchasing the higher end stuff thinking that would make you a better photographer (which it will if you are ready for it!!)

wfmiller Loc: Morgantown, PA

We tell our 6 grown kids that our goal is to run out of money in retirement and then move in with them broke!!

I take my granddaughter with me sometimes when we want to shoot some sunsets. She uses my $300 camera because that is all that I have taught her on so far. She takes some great shots but nothing compared to my body and lens combo's. She will be moving up to one of my SLR's soon and then it will be really fun comparing shots!!

Day.Old.Pizza Loc: Maple Grove, MN

Good to have you here on the Hog, Jim. Looking forward to seeing some pictures from you.

We have some Bianco families up in Calumet. Probably is a common Italian name.

Enjoy this site. There is a wealth of information and helpful people here.
Personally, I bought a little more camera than I needed, because I knew I'd have it a long time and it gave me room to grow. You certainly do not need expensive gear to preserve your memories. Just have fun and ask questions as you have them?

Warning: watch out for GAS. You might get it on this site.

Bobbee

Get a box of crayons and construction paper, eliminate the software tooo. GO NAKED!!!

Harry Thomas Loc: Doylestown, Pennsylvania

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Harry Thomas Loc: Doylestown, Pennsylvania

:lol:

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

MOST inexpensive cameras do not have the same capabilities as their more expensive brothers. Nikon's D3300 and D5300, while nice entry level cameras, are just that... entry level cameras. They do NOT have the bracketing, shutter speed (high end or low end) internal focus motor for older lenses, commander mode for off camera strobe, more powerful battery for more shots or extended shooting in timed exposures etc. If you want a line by line comparison between the Nikon D7100, Nikon D810 and the Nikon D5300 go into specs and compare the 3 side by side in the compare utility. http://www.nikonusa.com
And the D7100 compares to the D810 about like the D5300 does to the D7100 (remember that both D7100 and D5200 are crop sensor and the D810 is full frame) Then compare the D810 to the D4. There is a reason for each upgrade costing more. AND I am sure Canon and others are similar. And the Nikon D3300 does not come close to being compared to the Hasselblad H5D-200MS which is a mere $41,000 for body plus additional $ for any lenses.
But, it is 50mp and a medium format and yes, those photographers post process too.

waegwan Loc: Mae Won Li

I agree, at least this has been my experience. I mentioned it in another post. I'm currently using a Canon 50D because that is what I can afford and I choose it over my previous camera, a Rebel XSi, because the 50D feels better in my hand, has better grip and a smoother shutter and the manual settings are much faster and smoother than the Rebel. I shoot mostly manual. I suppose if a person is only shooting full auto most any camera will do but when shooting manual the smooth controls make all the difference in enjoying the project.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Why buy an expensive computer if you are not going to use the grammar checker or use grammar: "Why buy an expensive camera if you are going to process them anyway...". process them? It says you are going to process the camera. We (I) know what you meant but if you are going to post a sarcastic inflammatory question at least do it correctly. Also there is a missing "$" and some other issues with your writing.

I'm bringing all that up only because I find it a really obnoxious question. And if a joke, not really funny. Of course much of the writing on here and the Web is poor in general. And I can think of a couple regular posters on here that could make it really funny with their witty replies.

To answer it, I'll buy the camera that has the features I need and process or not process my files as much or little as I like.

What actually bothers me with your question is the side or implied discussion of jpg vs raw and photoshop / lightroom vs not sure what nothing would be.

If you had simply asked "Why buy an overpriced camera with excessive features that you will never use, Gold trim, or custom covering colors or for only its brand name." I would have had no problem with it. But that is too objective, right?