|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
|
![]()
If I were ready to make an investment on lens, I'd probably go with 400D. But as you also suggest that camerarequires a decent lens to shine. Have a look at Steve's sample shot of thebrick buildingwith Tokina 12-24
![]() Even if half the life expectancy of 50.000might apply to SR,whichaccounts foralmost 4-5 years for me, it sounds allrightconsidering the thousands of blurr free low light and low ISO shots I may enjoy before a replacement:-) Still, your 'moving part'scenario is worth considering:? Thanks again for your kind remarks. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
|
![]()
bahadir wrote:
Quote:
......................musket |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
|
![]()
Ah, revisiting the sample shots again I find them taken with 28-70 Canon Lens. :?(But again not the kit lens!!)
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_...i_samples.html Anyway, they look gorgeous so, don't you find? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
|
![]()
Yes very good photo's, I downloaded one to have a look, IMG_1570_CR2
10.7megabyte jpg file :? very large file in high definition. Quality always seems great when files are this size :-).....what do you think of a prime lens and a body combination? prime lenses are usual cheaper than the zoom lenses. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
|
![]()
musket wrote:
Quote:
As for prime lenses, Iunderstand that they often provide betterimage quality and faster glass,which is very appealing. I shouldbe needing a couple of primes then... Well, Iwouldn'tmind changing them often but I have to check out first if they'll be available at a reasonable price around here! Thanks for the idea:idea: |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
|
![]()
The pentax has much better color resolution bahadir.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
|
![]()
hercules wrote:
Quote:
Thank you Hercules! I surely need such strongsecondopinions nowadays! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
|
![]()
hercules wrote:
Quote:
Thanks foryour confirmation, anyway ![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,076
|
![]()
I'm trying to decide on Nikon, Canon or Pentax. I've been trying to decide since the summer of '06. Right now I'm leaning towards the Pentax K100D or K10D, but have not decided for sure, yet.
I like the Pentax features, in camera shake reduction, K10D's sealing, dust reduction system, ruggedness, etc. I like the D80, just wish it had some of these Pentax features. I also like the Canon 30D, but wish it had some of the Pentax features, although that metal body and 5 fps are impressive. BTW, I think the Pentax colour saturation is better in your pix than the Nikon. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|