Same or Different?

[MarkBarbieri]

Looking back on your last camera purchase, would you do the same if you could go back in time? Obviously, this is a better question for people that have owned their camera for a year or more.

Would you have bought something cheaper, better, simpler, more flexible, lighter, smaller? I'd like to know how often people look back and wish they'd bought something better or, conversely, how often people wish they had bought something cheaper.

I've had my current camera (Canon 1DM2) for almost four years now. I'm pretty happy with the decision. If modern mid-range cameras had been available then, it would have been a tougher decision, but I think it was the right camera for me given what was available at the time.

Before that, I bought a Canon 10D as a replacement for my D60 (which was stolen). I wanted to replace it pretty quickly, but I probably would have been better waiting a few months and buy thing the 1DM2 as soon as it came out.

[Code]

My technical knowledge has advanced a LONG way in a year. If I could go back in time 1 year to when I joined the DSLR game, I would tell my past self to skip the entry level DSLR and go straight for the prosumer model.

Now if only the skill of my photographic eye had advanced as far as my tech knowledge :confused3

[dburg30]

I'm very happy with my 40d and grip. I dont think, at this point I would change a thing. Plus got it for a pretty good price also.. Which makes it even better :cool1:

[SC Mouse Fan]

I bought the Nikon D40 almost a year ago. If had it do over again, I would probably get the D80. The in camera focus motor thing bothers me with the D40. I have a 50MM lense and have to focus it myself which is hard for me to do faster enough. It is also hard when it is dark. I was worried about the size more when I got the camera but I would change now if I could. I just don't want to spend the money right now.

[YesDear]

I am totally happy with my past three camera purchases. Only wish was I had more $ to do even more.

I have just recently gone real bad on an expensive lens and am not dissapointed. WOW! I have always known that glass does matter but this is amazing!

[Steve's Girl]

I bought my D80 almost 2 yrs ago when it first came out. I've been very happy with my decision. At the time, a few people told me it would be too much camera for me. But I have really enjoyed growing into that camera. It was the right camera for me at the time and has served me well over the last two years. I am just now starting to think about upgrading in the next year or so.

[Pea-n-Me]

My technical knowledge has advanced a LONG way in a year. If I could go back in time 1 year to when I joined the DSLR game, I would tell my past self to skip the entry level DSLR and go straight for the prosumer model.

Now if only the skill of my photographic eye had advanced as far as my tech knowledge :confused3
I guess I'm the opposite. Technical is the challenge for me and presumably always will be (to some degree); it's just not my thing. I would most likely stick with an "entry level" camera for that reason: whatever makes it easier for me to get good pictures, as simply as possible. Perhaps someday I'll advance enough to feel comfortable with a prosumer model, but for the forseeable future, I think it would be too much for me.

As to brand, yes, I'd buy another Olympus. I think it's a good value for the money, and I love the fact that it's fairly light and easy to carry. :thumbsup2 I'm working on the technical challenges of using a dSLR in general.

[DVC Jen]

Very happy with my 30D - but I am ready to upgrade it. Waiting to see if Canon does indeed introduce/announce some new camera bodies in a few months.

[handicap18]

I bought my Nikon D50 more than 2 1/2 years ago. At the time the dSLR selection wasn't huge. I was totally going Nikon so I didn't look at the other brands. I was originally leaning towards the D70s and I thought about a used D100. The D200 had recently been released but that was WAY outside my budget.

I am totally happy with my decision. The reviews of the D50 at the time were excellent, especially for its high ISO performance over the D70 and D70s. It was less expensive and just as good. There are only 2 things I wish my camera had that it doesn't that I could have gotten with the D70s and that is the extra command dial and battery grip.

I don't regret my decision at all. I've grown with the D50 and have pushed it to its limit and it hasn't disappointed. Since my photography experience has grown leaps and bounds and I've had the time to figured out what is important and what isn't, I'm now ready to move up. I've taken over 15,000 images with the D50. By the time I get my new camera body I figure I'll be pretty close to 18,000. I plan on keeping the D50 as a backup.

If I were to do it all again I would probably do the same thing unless I could afford the D200, but that wasn't a possibility. So I'd do the D50 again!! :thumbsup2

[ukcatfan]

Considering the choices I had in my price range when I bought, I do not think I would have done anything different. I almost bought a D50 and I am sure I would have liked it, but I am more than happy with my K100D. I am not even eager to upgrade yet. There are things that the K20D has that I would like, but not enough to justify the cost.

[DueyDooDah]

It's hard for me to say because I did not buy my Canon 30D. It was a gift. But, I can't think of a reason to upgrade the camera. It does more than I need (for now). The only thing I would have changed if I'd have bought it was NOT to get the kit camera, but spend a bit more for a more suitable mid-range lens (but the 18-55mm IS was not available and my DW would have shot me if I had gotten the 17-55mm).

For the near (and far) future, I'll stick with my 30D and foucus (pun intended) on better lenses.

[Gdad]

On camera bodies yes- If I could go back in time I would still want the D300. Lenses are quite another matter- I just took a bath buying both a Tokina 11-16mm f2/8 and Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 new- and then selling a few months later when the D700 came out. If I had known Nikon was going to release an FX camera for $2K less than the D3 in just a few months I would have definately planned differently in the lens dept. :rolleyes1

Kind of funny I have been in a seminar all day and one of the topics was not letting Sunk Costs (http://economics.about.com/od/economicsglossary/g/sunkcosts.htm) influence decisions.

[alan]

Like some others, I think I'd now be going for a 40D rather than a 350D

regards,
/alan

[wenrob]

I've had my Nikon D40 just over a year. I'm just now learning how to use it outside of auto-programs so I don't think I would have been ready for anything 'better.' Still not really. Right now I'm thinking about lenses. I can't afford any at the moment but I'm thinking about them.

[JR6ooo4]

I think the Canon XT pretty much matches my efforts. I have read some books, thousands of hours on dpreview and here, practiced and practiced, and get a few great shots.

Mikeeee

[DisneySuiteFreak]

On camera bodies yes- If I could go back in time I would still want the D300. Lenses are quite another matter- I just took a bath buying both a Tokina 11-16mm f2/8 and Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 new- and then selling a few months later when the D700 came out. If I had known Nikon was going to release an FX camera for $2K less than the D3 in just a few months I would have definately planned differently in the lens dept. :rolleyes1

Hi Gdad, why did you sell the new lenses? Were they not as good as you expected or is it because you plan on getting the D700?

[DisneySuiteFreak]

I bought the Nikon D80 w/18-135 kit lens in Oct '07. I am glad I bought it. It's a great entry level camera. Of course a few weeks after I bought the D80, the D300 came out, but it would have been way out of my justifiable price range since I was new to DSLR photography.
I've since bought the Sigma 10-20mm, the 50mm1.8, 85mm1.8, the 70-300VR, and recently the 18-200VR. If I could have gotten the 18-200VR instead of the kit lens, I would have. It wasn't available at the time (most places were sold out). I still kept my kit lens, but I really like the VR in the 18-200. I didn't understand what the need for the VR was in shorter length lenses, but I get it now. It allows me to stop the lens down a lot further than the kit lens and still come out with sharp photos in low light handheld. I like it.
The only lens I would rethink buying is the Sigma 10-20 because it's heavy and I rarely use it because of that. Also, my kit lens and the new vr lens starts at 18mm. I found that I tend to shoot at the widest around that area anyway so losing the 10mm on the wide end doesn't really hurt me at all.

[senecabeach]

Hi Gdad, why did you sell the new lenses? Were they not as good as you expected or is it because you plan on getting the D700?

I'd be interested in knowing too, since I'm real close to "biting the bullet" and purchasing that Nikon 17-55 Zoom WA for my D80. :confused:


I bought the Nikon D80 w/18-135 kit lens in Oct '07. I am glad I bought it. It's a great entry level camera. Of course a few weeks after I bought the D80, the D300 came out, but it would have been way out of my justifiable price range since I was new to DSLR photography.
I've since bought the Sigma 10-20mm, the 50mm1.8, 85mm1.8, the 70-300VR, and recently the 18-200VR. If I could have gotten the 18-200VR instead of the kit lens, I would have. It wasn't available at the time (most places were sold out). I still kept my kit lens, but I really like the VR in the 18-200. I didn't understand what the need for the VR was in shorter length lenses, but I get it now. It allows me to stop the lens down a lot further than the kit lens and still come out with sharp photos in low light handheld. I like it.

OMG....ITA with absolutely everything you said, DisneySuiteFreak. I have the 70-300VR, NOT the 18-200, and have wondered if it would be redundant to get the 18-200 replacing the 18-135.
Right now, Im on a wide angle kick and Nikon has the lens Gdad sold, a constant f2.8, which I like...nearly ready to order it.
So....need some help from Jeff as to why he sold the lens.

[YEKCIM]

I made my initial foray into DSLR-World in January 2007. Mrs Y is a freelance pro and she strongly "influenced" my decision to buy Nikon, as she had recently bought a D200. When I took the plunge, I bought two D50 bodies (as opposed to one D80) and four lenses: 18-135, 70-300vr, 50/1.8, and Sigma 10-20. I have not regretted any of those choices, although the Sigma is used sparingly and requires a different technique that I have not yet mastered very well. Since that time, Mrs Y and I have added a Sigma 150/2.8 macro to our "shared" equipment. It is an awesome lens and exactly what I was looking for in a dual purpose macro and fast medium tele lens.

I sold one of the D50 bodies several months back and bought a D80 with grip. Having used both the D50 and D80 extensively, I see pros and cons with them both and will probably replace them both with a single D300 when/if the funds become available.

In short, given the funds available at the time, I really have no regrets about any of the equipment I have purchased.

~Ed

[Code]

Hi Gdad, why did you sell the new lenses? Were they not as good as you expected or is it because you plan on getting the D700?

I'd be interested in knowing too, since I'm real close to "biting the bullet" and purchasing that Nikon 17-55 Zoom WA for my D80. :confused:

I'm guessing he bought (or is planning to) a D700, and those lenses are made for the DX (APS-C) size sensor. They will still work on the D700, but only at 5mp.

[Gdad]

I'm guessing he bought (or is planning to) a D700, and those lenses are made for the DX (APS-C) size sensor. They will still work on the D700, but only at 5mp.

Right- IQ was great but they will not work on a full frame camera.

[DisneySuiteFreak]

I'm guessing he bought (or is planning to) a D700, and those lenses are made for the DX (APS-C) size sensor. They will still work on the D700, but only at 5mp.

Right- IQ was great but they will not work on a full frame camera.

Does Nikon make a 17-55 2.8 that will work on the full frame cameras? I'm shocked that as expensive as that lens is that it won't work on the D700. That sucks...:sad2:

[DisneySuiteFreak]

OMG....ITA with absolutely everything you said, DisneySuiteFreak. I have the 70-300VR, NOT the 18-200, and have wondered if it would be redundant to get the 18-200 replacing the 18-135.

So far I am really liking this lens. I can handhold a lot more in low light. I'll post some photos later in another thread. I've been meaning to and just get busy with life...

[Gdad]

Does Nikon make a 17-55 2.8 that will work on the full frame cameras? I'm shocked that as expensive as that lens is that it won't work on the D700. That sucks...:sad2:

Their two new FX lenses are the 12-24 and the 24-70- both are quite a bit more expensive than the 17-55.

[MarkBarbieri]

Does Nikon make a 17-55 2.8 that will work on the full frame cameras? I'm shocked that as expensive as that lens is that it won't work on the D700. That sucks...:sad2:

Working on FF cameras isn't a function of cost; it's a function of design. Because a DX camera has a smaller sensor, you can use a lens that has a smaller image circle. That decreases both size and weight. A 17-55 f/2.8 lens FX lens would be much larger and even more expensive.

[Quicklabs]

I bought the D80 a few months ago when my Olympus died suddenly before a once-in-a lifetime agility event. So I had to get something I could learn quickly and the D300 seemed too intimidating at the time. Had I not been in such a hurry, I'm sure that I would have gotten the D300.
I'm happy with my lenses. I was thinking about the Tokina 11-16, but I think maybe the 18-200 will still do the trick on the wide angles. I do want a Macro, though and I have the Sigma 150 2.8 on my list.
I also think that if I had a re-do, I'd have gotten the 50 mm 1.4 instead of the 1.8.

[jann1033]

better. i bought a rebel xt, wish i had bought the 30d at the time although now with the 40d probably like the speed better wouldn't want to upgrade from a 30d.

lens wise, i like my tokina fisheye ie it's a great lens, sharp etc but wish i had bought a low light zoom ( ie 17-40) or a better macro with the money since i would use either more. i wish i had just skipped the phoenix macro as it's just to soft and annoys me even though it's 1/3 the price of the canon ..it's one of those lenses reviewed as "good for the money " i now have convinced myself to just avoid cause my eye doesn't see the money just the softness every time i use it ;) should have saved myself the $60 i spent on the kit lens that never leaves my stay at home in the closet bag.

[jann1033]

Very happy with my 30D - but I am ready to upgrade it. Waiting to see if Canon does indeed introduce/announce some new camera bodies in a few months.
what features are you hoping for jen?

[handicap18]

Does Nikon make a 17-55 2.8 that will work on the full frame cameras? I'm shocked that as expensive as that lens is that it won't work on the D700. That sucks...:sad2:

It will work. The D3 and the D700 will accept DX lenses, but instead of at 12MP it is 5MP.

Nikon does have a 17-35mm f/2.8, but that is also pretty expensive.

There are 2 12-24mm lenses one is DX and one is not.

There are older 20-35mm f/2.8's that can be found used for about $700.

Sigma makes a 20-40mm f/2.8 about the same price as Nikon's 20-35mm.

17mm on a FF body is very wide (see 10-12mm for a crop body). So you can get way easily with a 24-70mm f/2.8. A standard walk-around lens on a film body was 28-70 or in that area (I think I had a 28-90 for one camera and a 35-70 on an older one).

[DisneySuiteFreak]

It will work. The D3 and the D700 will accept DX lenses, but instead of at 12MP it is 5MP.

Thanks for the lens info! I was wondering if you know why the D700 will change it from 12MP to 5MP? :confused3 Is it because the actual usable size of the photo is smaller?

[MarkBarbieri]

Thanks for the lens info! I was wondering if you know why the D700 will change it from 12MP to 5MP? :confused3 Is it because the actual usable size of the photo is smaller?

Yes. A DX lens is smaller and makes a smaller image circle compared with an FX lens. That's because the DX sensors are smaller. A full frame sensor is about 860 sq mm. A DX sensor is about 370 sq mm. The 370 sq mm portion in the middle of the D700 sensor contains about 5MP (12 MP * 370 / 860).

[Groucho]

I'm not surprised at all with the responses here - they've been nearly all DSLR owners and virtually nobody would change what they did. Like I always say, it's tough to find an unhappy DSLR owner!

The only camera I've regretted was my Minolta Z5 5mp 12x zoom PnS... it was very fast and good in many ways, but the noise levels were unacceptable and I was extremely happy to be able to get a DSLR with lens for only $367 after rebate less than a year later (and sell the Minolta for a decent amount, bringing the price down further.) In retrospect, I could have held on to my original Fuji 2800 6x zoom for a little longer before making the DSLR jump.

On my third DSLR, I wouldn't change a thing... I may actually send my K20D in for service in the next couple months; I recently noticed that the AF is slightly off, adjusting it in the custom menu suddenly made my Tamron 28-75mm a much more pleasing lens to use (it's fine with the tweak, but it might be nice to have it properly calibrated while it's under warranty), plus I may have the sensor checked, a few of my extreme-ISO shots with expanded DR from Disney showed odd noise in the bottom; of course, with the DR on, you're looking at something like 12,800 ISO in the shadows, but again, might be nice to have it 100% checked. But really these are minor issues, if all my equipment got destroyed somehow, I would definitely buy the same camera today, no question whatsoever. Heck, the weathersealing alone has come in amazingly handy, I've been surprised how many times I've found myself taking photos in the rain lately. (Some of that is upstate NY weather for you...)

The lens question is a good one. I have one or two used lenses that I regret, but nothing that I really detest. It's nearly confirmed that we'll see a FF Pentax next year but I really don't have FF lust at this point; I love the size and weight of the K20D, and the 50-135mm is a great lens, giving the equivalent of the usual larger and much heavier 70-200mm lenses for FF bodies (and it's far cheaper, if you compare OEM lenses, and right now, I want the weathersealing enough to not seriously consider the Sigma/Tamron.)

I really don't use my Zenitar 16mm fisheye very much any more, but don't regret buying it. My Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm F2.8-F4 will probably be going on eBay soon, it's a very desirable heavy metal MF lens but the focus is just too sensitive for my tastes; fortunately I can probably sell it for more than I paid for it. I don't really use my older "basic" 18-55mm or 50-200mm lenses but they're nice to have around, my wife uses them on the K100D often. The Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 will be going up for sale as soon as I get around to buying the Pentax 16-50mm F2.8 - I wasn't really happy with the Tamron on the K20D but things are much better after adjusting the focus. Regardless, I still want to be able to go wider, and want the weathersealing, too.

Now, my best lens buy lately has to be the Lester A Dine 105mm F2.8 1:1 macro... since I bought it less than a year ago, it's become even more legendary and the costs have gone up about 2.5x what I paid for mine! It's really a stunner, and I couldn't justify paying what it goes for now so I'm glad I got in when I did! It will not be going up for sale in the foreseeable future. :)