What Makes a Camera "Pro"?

[TylerF]

ok thats understandable but what about what really matters, the image quality? i imagine a d3x would be amazing to shoot with and would be noticably different, but idk, maybe im just not seeing something. i was always told, its not the tools used, but the product achieved

 

[AlexL]

Real pros shoot Hasselblads (and nickname them 'hassy')

depending on the which field of "pro" you are talking about. I don't think journalist or sport / wildlife shooters would use Hasselblads with the 5 figure price and 1fps.

 

[TylerF]

i guess my bigger question is, is the d300s a good camera? or should i spend the extra 1000 and get the d700?

 

[ghpham]

i guess my bigger question is, is the d300s a good camera? or should i spend the extra 1000 and get the d700?

No. Spend the money for better lens.

 

[Live_free]

i guess my bigger question is, is the d300s a good camera? or should i spend the extra 1000 and get the d700?

The FX and better ISO is worth it. IMO and the D700 is only 2399 not 2699 from most sites.

Plus with FX you get actually ocal coverage and I LOVE landscapes and night photography so those two things are awesome.

 

[TylerF]

well if i never really go above ISO 800, i think the d300s will be able to handle what i shoot. and i get special accommodations from nikon from selling their products. not too sure what my cost is yet though

 

[Aayria]

If you think that in the back of your mind you'd be telling yourself at any point "man... the D700 was only 1000 more...." then wait. It's worth it not to have that nagging feeling down the road, IMO.

 

[TylerF]

thats what im afraid of to be honest. or im afraid of a d400 coming out or a d700s. i really like the dual card slots and the fact that dx gives my lenses a bit more range. what im thinking is getting the d300s, a battery grip, and a few nice lenses. i should be set. ugh this is a tough decision for me haha.

 

[Live_free]

thats what im afraid of to be honest. or im afraid of a d400 coming out or a d700s. i really like the dual card slots and the fact that dx gives my lenses a bit more range. what im thinking is getting the d300s, a battery grip, and a few nice lenses. i should be set. ugh this is a tough decision for me haha.

The D700 is the most likely for an update, the D300s won't get one for another year. The D700x is supposed to have the D3x sensor (so horrible ISO) and like 4.5k.

 

[TylerF]

but that would bring the d700 down in price. idk i think the safest way to go is the d300s. if i for some reason dont like it, i can sell it or return it lol. it really depends how much i can get either camera for.

 

[Live_free]

but that would bring the d700 down in price. idk i think the safest way to go is the d300s. if i for some reason dont like it, i can sell it or return it lol. it really depends how much i can get either camera for.

I'm going for the D700 and the 24-70 2.8, but then again I have 4.5 to blow on my kit. Can't WAIT!

 

[TylerF]

I have about 3000 lol. I might make another thread for advice when I find out my prices tomorrow. I wanted to get an imac with cs5 on it as well as a new camera. But they are 2 different funds lol. So yeah 3000

 

[iolair]

The lens has a bigger impact on image quality than the body... and the photographer has a bigger impact still.

As stated above, it's worth getting a more expensive body if you have to take crisp photos in low-light - the ISO performance makes a big difference.

 

[ghache]

the 300s is more than capable of produicing excellent image quality but if i was to upgrade from my d90, i would probably save for a d700. i had one for a couple hours with a 70-200 vrii and a 24-70 and it was orgasmic.

 

[usayit]

"Pro" camera is any camera that allows a professional to get the job done.

The term "Professional" to identify products is an oxymoronic marketing term. The only other marketing term even more idiotic is "Prosumer". Kinda like the "Certified Preowned vehicle".