Log in

No account? Create an account

June 13th, 2008

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
11:19 am

I wish I took more photos.

Why don't I? A couple of reasons.
- Because my DSLR is fairly large and it's difficult to fit nicely into my daily-carry bag. It fits great if I pop the lens off, but then it takes me a minute or two to take a picture, which is anything but quick when trying to catch something neat that I noticed. It also takes a full 3 seconds from power on to first capture, so even if I leave the lens on the body (and carry my larger bag) I often miss that short-lived moment.
- It's fairly old (first-gen Digital Rebel), and the image quality isn't good when compared to just about anything newer. I can fake it to some extent in photoshop, but when the data ain't in the pixels there's only so much you can do.
- I don't like being "that guy" who always caries an SLR around his neck and frequently stops to shoot things. Sometimes I'm ok with it, but sometimes I'm not. If prosicated and I are just out for a walk I have no problem with it, but walking to the drug store by myself and randomly stopping to shoot photos always rubs me the wrong way. I don't know why.

Is this just a whine to rationalize getting a new camera body? Meh. Not really. I can rationalize that to myself well enough if I really want to. It's more me mulling options.

coraline just got a new Canon Rebel XSi body which is quite nice, and much smaller than my existing one, which would address a lot of my above issues. From the feature-set and physical-handling perspective my selection would be the Canon 40D, but that's a much larger camera body than my current one, exacerbating the portability issue.
So if I'm going to upgrade do I go with the 40D and a decent point-shoot for constant carrying, only whipping out the big-guns when I really need it? Or do I go with the newer and smaller Rebel body and get a sort of compromise arrangement?

All a moot point until after the house is bought obviously, but it's been on my back-burner for over a year now.
mood: calmcalm

(17 bits of drivel | babble incoherently)


[User Picture]
Date:June 13th, 2008 05:02 pm (UTC)
It's all about the glass, not the body.
Canon makes some REALLY GOOD high-end lenses if you can afford it, and the consumer stuff is decent. There's a reason you see so many white lenses (Canon L series) when you see lots of pro photographers lined up at sporting events and whatnot.
For both systems though you're often better off going with Sigma, Tamron, or other third party lenses assuming you're not filthy rich. They're usually better bang-for-buck, and the glass is then the same for either Canon or Nikon with just the mount differing.

I went with Canon because they had a far better offering back when I actually bought mine. My dad and sister actually both went Nikon, dad because his existing lens collection was Nikon so it was a no-brainer, and sister because she liked the control layout better. If I had to choose again today it'd probably be a coin flip honestly from an objective perspective, but my friends all use Canon so I can steal their lenses this way. ;-)
I wish I took more photos. Why don't I? A couple of reasons. -… - another LJ. or: how i learned to stop worrying and love this life-thingy — LiveJournal

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile
> Lord Google

lil gamers

> Go to Top