What matters more? Lens or body?
- Thread starter kimazuru
- Start date
- Status
Lens of course. IMO.
I still use a lot of my 28-70L and 70-200L which I bought many years ago with my very first DSLR, a canon D30, since then I had changed the bodies few times but these lens are still usable and the optics quality never changed.
I still use a lot of my 28-70L and 70-200L which I bought many years ago with my very first DSLR, a canon D30, since then I had changed the bodies few times but these lens are still usable and the optics quality never changed.
what matters more is what you want to do with the photos...i would'nt want to spend on L lenses if i just wanna take snap shots or for keep sake only.:think:
to be different, LIGHTING is the most important.
ISO25,600 & f/1.2 is nothing w/out light.
Agreed, that why I started my investment with a better flash system first... :bsmilie:
Anson is right.
In the past flash was almost indispensible for event photography (due to film speed, and not ONLY event photography). Now many amateurs seem to be whacking ISO and f-stop and forgetting the importance of colour rendition and good depth of field.
Last edited:
Fully agree! But what you need to use and not what that has got better resale value. If it's something you plan to sell, then probably you should think harder now whether you really need it or not.
Invest in Body, Lens and your skill, everything will be paid for once you can start offering your services for money.
wow if you put lighting(ambient + flash) into the equation,then TOP,INFRONT,BEHIND of the camera body all important haahha.
How bout the tripod BELOW? ;p
Actually i think all important ba, is which area you need compensation in due to insufficient skill or the pursuit of a particular genre of photography.
cheers,
kilkenny
How bout the tripod BELOW? ;p
Actually i think all important ba, is which area you need compensation in due to insufficient skill or the pursuit of a particular genre of photography.
cheers,
kilkenny
Actually the better investment is probably a good photography class/workshop. Grasping fundamentals on lighting and exposure will likely do much more than constantly upgrading equipment. Gaining in-depth understanding on those matters would then make it easier to assess what are the real limits of one's equipment, and purchase decisions can happen from that point.
lets say you own a old cam body... like the 300D then which will you invest in?
i keep contemplating between getting a xxD cam or getting a 24-105 on my 300D..
somehow i felt that the body can't pack the punch that i want in my images esp at low light shots.. even with my 50mm prime fitted.. :embrass:
i keep contemplating between getting a xxD cam or getting a 24-105 on my 300D..
somehow i felt that the body can't pack the punch that i want in my images esp at low light shots.. even with my 50mm prime fitted.. :embrass:
For me LENS is more important than body.
Here is my polls that we had discuss before...
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=448578
Here is my polls that we had discuss before...
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=448578
Are you talking about the 50 1.8? At large apertures, the colours aren't "great".
I don't quite understand your comments.
Isn't flash the worst enemy of atmospheric lighting and therefore color rendition?
As for depth of field, that really depends on what you're shooting. For simple portraits, large apertures and therefore shallow depth of field can be extremely effective.
Of course, there are situations when proper and masterly use of flash can be a stroke of genius too.
In short, it really depends on situation. :bsmilie:
IMHO, cheaper body and lens for beginer, later on when skills hv improved, then buy better lens or body, all depend on individual needs and wants. i really can't say which one must come first. people wif lots of cash will hv diff perspective.......
:thumbsup:
true la, depending on how deep your pockets ah u will not have wants anymore, all will be needs hahahah
- Status
Similar threads
