Dead SLR, where to go from here

[andredossantos]

I would check DXO marks. I think Sony is doing some very interesting things. FF glass will cost you. Do your really heed that much IQ?

At least for me, and maybe the OP is the same, FF isn't about the IQ. Maybe I'm stubborn but I like having the traditional focal lengths in prime lenses. A fast, small 50mm for instance was something which I missed when I used a crop DSLR and no zoom or wide angle lens was able to duplicate that for me. Like I said, maybe I'm stubborn and set in my ways and I totally understand how someone else might not be bothered by this stuff but thats how I feel and I didn't really want, or need to adapt.

Also, the viewfinders on crop bodies are horrendous. I have more pecadillos but I won't bore you guys anymore. Anyway, IQ is the last thing I worry about. At this point any digital camera has plenty of it.

 

[Frank Petronio]

If you can handle the Canon interface then it sounds like a 5D is in your future, but I can tell you that a Nikon D300 is a rock solid body with great metering, auto-focus, and user interface. I'll grant you that the 5D has a larger viewfinder and great image quality, but the D300 DX finder is quite nice and the image quality is more than fine.

But if you want to really think outside the box, why do you have to have a "pro" DSLR at all?

Why not go cheap? Does any of this really matter if you make good photos? I've shot tons with a Panasonic G1 or prosumer Canikons and while I like the build quality of the nicer bodies, so what? I mean the image quality from a $450 2006 Nikon D200 is awesome when you put it in perspective.

To me, spending $500 on a cheap DSLR and then using your money to breath easier and/or shoot something amazing is better than dropping $3000 on a single body and L lens. Hell spend another $500 on a second cheap used DSLR and have a back-up -- which is more "professional" in a practical sense than just having one body.

 

[gavinlg]

Soooo different to my D700 but I think I could learn to live with the way the menu system works ... the D700 is very complex in this area IMO. Definitely not the build quality of the Nikon though but that's probably more perception than reality.

Actually I'm working with a guy at the moment who shoots a 7d with the 35L, and my impressions after having a play with it were very positive. The AF in particular is a lot nicer than my 5d, but that crop sensor kills it a bit for me. I found the build to be quite nice. I much prefer it to the d300 I had for a while...

You're right though that the d700/nikon menus are very complex. By comparison the Canon menus are quite simple and well set out. I can literally get to (and change) all the commonly needed parameters in my 5d's menu with my eyes closed.

 

[gavinlg]

But if you want to really think outside the box, why do you have to have a "pro" DSLR at all?

Why not go cheap? Does any of this really matter if you make good photos? I've shot tons with a Panasonic G1 or prosumer Canikons and while I like the build quality of the nicer bodies, so what?

I've been using a d3000 or 5000 or something for some of my work via my current client - I gotta say they're real pieces of crap IMO. I wouldn't want to use one personally. On sunday I managed to break one of the dx000's - did an SD card swap and somehow broke the mechanism in the card slot. Yeeckkhh

 

[Frank Petronio]

Well you know I am dainty with my gear ;-p

 

[pvdhaar]

However, the field of digital cameras have gotten really interesting these past few years and it has me contemplating ditching the Canon SLR completely.

Any ideas? heck, I've tossed around the idea of switching to nikon as well. 😛

Why switch? Unless there's a Nikon lens/camera that you absolutely need and can't get an equivalent for in Canon-land, there's no compelling reason to do so. And that's advice from a long time Nikon user..