 Robin Briggs |
Anything better than the D70? Hi. I have a Nikon D70 that I've enjoyed using for about a year. Being the gadget nerd that I am, getting some cash recently, and having a few minor peeves about the D70, I was wondering if I should be looking for a new body. Some things I would like to have different are: better noise reduction, ISO 100, possibly lighter, but not required. And I just don't know if there have been enough improvements since the D70 came out to make it worth it. Thoughts? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Robin, other than the D70s, which has some moderate improvements, your only choice in the land of Nikon would be the new D200 - which is a bit more money ($1700 US). But frankly, the D70 is, by all accounts, quite an excellent camera - perhaps you'd be better off spending that dough on a new lens or flash gear?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robin Briggs |
Thanks Bob. Even as I wrote that question, I was thinking what you said: Get some of the accessories. The thing is, I have no idea where to start. Even though I have been taking pictures a long time, I am stepping up a level now by adding lenses and whatnot. Right now, I have the 18-70mm kit lens. That's it. Any suggestions for what's useful to add? Many thanks.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
"I have a Nikon D70 that I've enjoyed using for about a year." I have an Olympus OM-2n that I have enjoyed using for 26 years. My point is, to paraphrase an old saying: If it ain't broke, don't replace it. Until there is something you need your camera to do that the D70 won't do, there is no need to keep buying new equipment. Ys, I do have a camera that is newer than the OM-2n (a Pentax 645N) but it replaced an even older MF camera.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robin Briggs |
Thanks Kerry. I think Bob and I pretty much came to that conclusion. I am new to the SLR life, so I am not entirely sure what's next on my list. If you could offer some constructive help about what I can do to upgrade what I have (the body and the kit lens), it would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Well, Robin, what gadgetry you want to acquire (I suffer fromt he same ailment, mind you) depends very much on what kinds of pictures you like to take. For example, if you like to do close-up/macro work, perhaps getting a macro lens would make sense. These come in a variety of flavors and costs, and you could even get a macro flash unit (a ring flash or Nikon's new dual-head flash) because when you are inches away from the flower/butterfly/stamp in question the show-mounted flash unit is usually inadequate. On the other hand, if you like shooting landscapes, then a sturdy tripod and a wider angle lens might be more appropriate. On the third hand, if portrature is your passion, perhaps a faster 50 or 85MM prime lens would make sense, as the shallower depth of field afforded by the wider f-stop allows you to get the subject's face is sharp focus and keep the distractions of the background blurred. On the fourth hand, if you like shooting sports, then a longer faster zoom might be appropriate - the 70-200 f2.8 or so. On the fifth hand, you might want a wider-angle zoom (like 12-24MM) for street shooting in the photojournalism style. This too should ba a fast lens so as not to require flash - and wide so you don't always need to put the camera to your eye and ruin the candid-ness of a shot. Sixth, if you're a "birder" - one of those nuts who runs out into the swamps to shoot the tufted hairy crested gracklemonster, then you may want to spring for a really long lens - like 300-500MM as well as a very sturdy tripod. On the seventh hand, if you want to do studio type shooting, then perhaps a lighting setup would make sense - continuous light or flash (cheaper and hotter versus more costly but less oven-like). I ran out of hands - I mean, what am I, an octopus? But I think you get the idea - it's like with computers and software. The right approach in that world is to decide what you want/need to do and then find the software that does it, and THEN find the hardware it runs on. In the world of photography, you need to decide what it is you want to do (or start with; obviously you could end up doing al of the above) and then ascertain what gear makes sense to that end.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robin Briggs |
Bob, Thanks for your thoughtful response. Yeah, you need a lot of hands. Since I do really enjoy portraiture, I actually was thinking of a normal lens, 50mm or whatever, 1/4 or 1/8. I'm not sure of whether 50mm or 85mm is more useful for that. But anyway, you make a good point about all the stuff out there. Thanks again for your help. - Robin
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
It's not the camera or the "do-dad's" what makes the picture. It's the photographer. Frankly, once someone shifts to a digital SLR it's hard to imagine s/he'll ever use all the available features. Kerry said it - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But, that's what camera manufacutrers are counting on. And, too many of us are suckered in . . .
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||