|
Where to start for a ''newcomer'' to this topic. Phil is one of the most respected (at least by me) photographers on the forum, there's no need to ignore him. He's really a lot of knowlegde and skills. It's just stupid not to listen to him, really.
Well, you might by now not even listen to me anymore, but okay. My skills arent that good (yet), but I know quite a bit about the tech side of cameras.
You want to have a $2000 camera with the best IQ. You do not know what you want as you have no experience. You have a way too small budget for what you want. You do not know how a sharp image, and how detail, come into existence I guess.
What should I say? Phil's right, and, the 8MP Canon 350D blows me away when it comes to noise and detail, even compared to today's cameras. You could get the 350D with 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS and 50mm 1.8 for around $450.
The 350D's from 2004.
Now Im going to tell you something about the 50D. It's from 2008 and has 15 MP. Bundled with the Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-VR it's crazy. The RAWs (do you know what RAW is?) are full of detail you will never believe, because you think it's from 2008 and only 15 MP so...
So what, exactly? Did you know that if you have a 15MP camera, or the 12MP D700 as mentioned, and you want to print it twice as big, you need to have 12^2 megapixels? 144, that's right.
You, as a beginner, wont really have that much benefit from the 36MP D800. Believe me.
You can get a 50D with the mentioned Tamron for about $900 (used), you should also look at that.
I really do not get what you want and at the same time I absolutely understand you. I, too, had the same problem as you when I started. I simply wanted the best of the best, which fits in my budget. After I realised the best of the best is enormously expensive, I just bought the 350D with some lenses instead. That blew me away, and still does.
You might not be interested in a used camera, you should look, then, at the cheapest you can get. Take the 1100D for instance, or the 550D. Bundle them with a good lens and just shoot. I still use the 350D, also ''professionally'' (I earn money with the photos taken).
Good, what I wanted you to say. The 350D with a good lens will be more than enough for you. Go buy one and learn photography. There's no way you should get the best camera because that one doesnt exist, and will never. You will need to spend half the money on a lens they say, and it's true. That means that for the $2000 budget you have, you will be able to get a wide-angle L-lens with 7D (or 60D). That is the best you can get, and not the 5D III (why is it not good enough for its class?!), because you wont have any cent left for a (decent) lens.
Ill just quit now. There's too much to respond in this topic. Oh, and last but not least: Phil is 100% right.
Oh, and about the lens physics: There's Full Frame and Cropped Frame lenses. FF lenses are much more expensive than the CF lenses, plus FF cameras need much and much more expensive glass to really outshine the CF bodies. The Canon 350D with the Tamron 17-50 (or any L lens of course) outshines the 5D III easily when that one's fitted with a not so good lens.
Go read something, study, and whatever to become really smart about cameras. Dont just think you are smarter than we, and accept, for now, that we are.
And where ever it may go to: the 6D will not give you pleasing images. Simply because you have too less money left for a good lens.
Vale.
_________________
Ruben
Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
