Re: The Lens is Not More Important Than the Camera
Ian.Dobinson wrote: Lars Johnsson wrote: Ian.Dobinson wrote:
I still hold with the Glass before body mantra.
Yes its nice to get a more upto date body but if you still have to put a junk lens with the optics of a bear glass on then it aint going to see the benifit. Yes you will have a more responsive , faster FPS better AF and larger files which may have great higher ISO. But the images will still look like Crap.
Its still better to build a good glass set and THEN get the newer body.
Take any of the older (Even very old) digital bodies and they are well capable of great images. .
You could of course say exactly the same with the cameras instead of the glass
Put a junk camera and good glass together and it will still look like crap
yes but how many of the recent r not so recent cameras (canon at least) have been truely junk cameras? I\'ve seen many great images from the D30 D60 1D 1Ds 10D and 300D. I had a XT which when I go back thru my old images still would hold up (upgrades for useablity not withstanding)
\"Or take any of the older (even very old) lenses and they are well capable of great images \"
Yes agreed but that also supposes it was good glass to start with. the argument to upgrade glass does not say upgrade to NEW glass
I\'m in no way against body upgrades (hell I\'ve been thru enough already) just fill any holes in the glass bag first.
Yes you can take nice images with any of those bodies. But the same goes for the glass. I have seen very good photos with about every lens Canon have. From the ones with the lowest price, to the most expensive ones
Aug 13, 2010 at 10:23 AM
Previous versions of Lars Johnsson's message #8748372 « The Lens is Not More Important Than the Camera »
