|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 39
|
![]()
I am trying to decide which 'level' of new camera to buy (e.g. Canon 400D vs. 30D, Kodak 100D vs. 10D), which should make it easier to narrow the field!
Is it generally better to get a less expensive body and spend more on the lenses, or a more expensive body with less expensive lenses? I think, for example, that I could get a Canon 400D with 17-85IS lens for a 'similar' price to a 30D with a more economical 18-55mm lens. What is the best way to allocate cash between lens(es!) and camera body? I'm not looking for actual recomendations today - just trying to narrow down the field! Thanks. |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
|
![]()
In almost all cases, you are better off spending money on lenses - they are a better long term investment. If you buy the RIGHT lens for your needs (not just a more expensive lens but the right lens for what you need) the lens will outlive several camera bodies. Lenses also hold their value better, so even if your needs change you can often sell a quality lens for 70-80% what you paid for it down the road.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|