barfastic
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 119
- Reaction score
- 2
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Hey guys,
ok, so atm i have a Sony a350, with 5 lenses (50mm prime, tamron 90 macro, tamron 12-24, 18-70 kit lens, and a 70 - 300 zoom), HVL-F42AM flash, and a battery grip. (yeah i went on a spending spree).
Now, Ive been into photography for a while (dating back to my fathers Pentax K1000), and i had a film SLR in highschool, and used it daily for a couple of years. Then i went to college, and left it locked in the closet.
Last year i went a bought the above mentioned camera, and i kept buying gear for it (as you can tell)...
Now though, a year into photography again, i find that my camera does not have a lot of functions i would like it to have. (mirror lock up, high iso performance, high burst capabilities), and more over the lack of lens products provided by sony kinda let me down.
Im not saying it was a bad camera, infact i was quite impressed, but i feel that i am missing on some of the "Good" stuff.
So without further delays, ill ask the questions i came to ask.
1) Should i go with the "simple" solution and go buy the Sony a900/850 ? - Although this seems like the best solution, i would have to get new lenses again, as the ones i have dont work with a full frame camera, and well, im not really impressed with the line up at the current time. its either 10000euro Carl Zeiss lenses, or 50 euro cardboard lenses.
2) In comparing the Canon 5d mark ii, and the nikon d700. the features that stand out and bum me in each are as follows:
98% viewfinder on canon vs 95 on nikon - Canon wins
5fps (8fps with grip) on nikon vs 4 on canon - Nikon wins
51 selectable AF points - vs canons 9 - Nikon wins
Is it worth giving up a possible 8 fps, and 51 focus points for 3% larger viewfinder? (i dont really care about video, i have an hd handycam for that)
Should i bother looking at smaller cameras? d300s or 7d ? i just think it is a shame that for an extra 400-500 i can get a full frame if i buy a aps-c camera and get some better results in lower light conditions
i want this to be an informative discussion. If your gonna do the whole "canon man, nikon are for puftas" or vice versa, id rather you not comment at all. its a serious amount of money, and i want to make sure i get whats best for me, not for my online ego.
Sorry for the huge post, but i feel that by giving a brief history and more details, one of you guys can sort of direct me in what i need.
Regards,
Mike
ok, so atm i have a Sony a350, with 5 lenses (50mm prime, tamron 90 macro, tamron 12-24, 18-70 kit lens, and a 70 - 300 zoom), HVL-F42AM flash, and a battery grip. (yeah i went on a spending spree).
Now, Ive been into photography for a while (dating back to my fathers Pentax K1000), and i had a film SLR in highschool, and used it daily for a couple of years. Then i went to college, and left it locked in the closet.
Last year i went a bought the above mentioned camera, and i kept buying gear for it (as you can tell)...
Now though, a year into photography again, i find that my camera does not have a lot of functions i would like it to have. (mirror lock up, high iso performance, high burst capabilities), and more over the lack of lens products provided by sony kinda let me down.
Im not saying it was a bad camera, infact i was quite impressed, but i feel that i am missing on some of the "Good" stuff.
So without further delays, ill ask the questions i came to ask.
1) Should i go with the "simple" solution and go buy the Sony a900/850 ? - Although this seems like the best solution, i would have to get new lenses again, as the ones i have dont work with a full frame camera, and well, im not really impressed with the line up at the current time. its either 10000euro Carl Zeiss lenses, or 50 euro cardboard lenses.
2) In comparing the Canon 5d mark ii, and the nikon d700. the features that stand out and bum me in each are as follows:
98% viewfinder on canon vs 95 on nikon - Canon wins
5fps (8fps with grip) on nikon vs 4 on canon - Nikon wins
51 selectable AF points - vs canons 9 - Nikon wins
Is it worth giving up a possible 8 fps, and 51 focus points for 3% larger viewfinder? (i dont really care about video, i have an hd handycam for that)
Should i bother looking at smaller cameras? d300s or 7d ? i just think it is a shame that for an extra 400-500 i can get a full frame if i buy a aps-c camera and get some better results in lower light conditions
i want this to be an informative discussion. If your gonna do the whole "canon man, nikon are for puftas" or vice versa, id rather you not comment at all. its a serious amount of money, and i want to make sure i get whats best for me, not for my online ego.
Sorry for the huge post, but i feel that by giving a brief history and more details, one of you guys can sort of direct me in what i need.
Regards,
Mike