Since starting to post on this blog again, thanks to a week of R&R and looking for something to do, I've rekindled my on-again, off-again love affair with photography. I seem to rev up into a white heat of passion to make good photographs (evidenced by calling them that instead of pics or snapshots) and the feeling predominates my every conscious thought for days or weeks on end, nearly driving me out of my mind, until the pressure valve blows and I get back to normal.
And every time I rekindle that love affair, I tell myself, "Pete, this time you're going to take it easy, aren't you? You're going to just have fun. You're going to relax and enjoy what you're doing and NOT tell yourself you HAVE to accomplish something with this? Right?" Yes, I tell myself, I'll be good. But that old work ethic thing (my father's fault, I'm sure) creeps in and ruins everything.
Well not this time!
I'm getting to that age where I'm no longer concerned with such issues as being the best at everything I put a hand to. Maybe I'd like to just enjoy the thing for the thing itself. It's part of being past that mid-life crisis I mentioned earlier. There's no rule that says every thing you do has to have a purpose. In Zen they teach you to sit and do nothing for the nothing is something in itself. So my thoughts have turned back to photography and this time I'm just going to shoot for myself and just have fun with it.
But of course, I need a new camera!
And it's the deciding which one to chose that's causing me some grief. I have two point & shoot digicams but I think it's time to move up to a DSLR. I've been shooting Nikon for 27 years and during that time managed to also own Canon, Olympus and Minolta equipment. I've always liked Nikon and now I'm used to it. I think I read somewhere that Nikon equipment is retro-compatible to 1959, although DX (digital) lenses won't work on film cameras (the bayonet may work but the film coverage will cause vignetting at all f-stops) and I'm sure there are other proprietary quirks. But it doesn't matter.
It's really between Canon and Nikon and I think both are about equal. What one doesn't do, the other one will, and the former will do it next year anyway. But because I know it and like it, I'll go with the Nikon system.
The lens is the most important part of the package and the beauty of an SLR is you can have multiple lenses. However, I've discovered a newish Nikon zoom lens that has an incredible range, 18-200mm! A whopping 11.5x zoom range which eliminates all the other lenses (except maybe an ultrawide and/or super-tele, both of which are for specialists). It means you don't have to take time to change lenses so the picture won't get away, and it also means you'll get less dust inside with lens switches, too.
So what's the problem? In a word - weight.
The camera/lens combo with this lens comes in at 1150gm or a bit over 2.5lbs. Compared to a 6oz P&S that fits into your pocket and goes anywhere, that's huge. The big problem with SLRs is lugging them around. It's OK if you're out on a shooting day but on a day to day basis, extra weight will keeps the camera at home. It would be a shame to spend all that money and then be too lazy to lug it around. If I just went with the kit lens, which weighs less than half, I'd also end up with a much smaller zoom range, 18-55mm, and that might mean a longer zoom in the future and I'd be back up to carrying those 2.5lbs, but this time need a bag to carry the second lens.
It sounds like the 18-200mm would be the way to go if I eventually buy a longer zoom anyway. There is a price, though, for getting it now - $800, which is about $650 more than getting the kit lens on the body of my choice.
As for the body, I've narrowed it to either the D40 or the D80. Some articles I've read on the net this past week say the D40 is just a P&S with interchangeable lenses. Others extol the fact that, compared to other Nikon bodies, you're getting more than your money's worth. The D80 is an advanced amateur-type camera, more features than needed by a novice but with enough sophistication to be a nice backup for a pro.
The question I'm asking myself is how much sophistication do I need? The D40 and the kit 18-55mm lens are a very lightweight pair. But I've already got a P&S. Walking around with the same relative focal length on an SLR makes little sense. It's that very sophistication that separates the SLR from a point and shoot.
So, it's either the D40 or the D80 with either an 18-55mm or 18-200mm lens. That puts the price range between $540 and $1850.
I guess it all depends on how I intend to use the thing. I've paid a lot for photography items in the past. But I started this post by saying that THIS time I just wanted to have some fun. I think I'd have a lot more fun by only spending $600. But then, think of all I could do with the more expensive version ... :)
4 comments:
It's great you're thinking of getting back into Photography (your work deserves capitalization!). You always spoke of the craft with a larger passion than your other obsessions (remember the beer making phase?). ;-)
One of my uncles has the D40 and loves it. He got the larger glass and it is quite heavy. It takes great "Photos" but I found it to be unwieldy and know in my case it would be left behind more often than naught (I'm leaning toward the G9 or the P5100 mainly for the hot-shoe).
I'd investigate the new D60 (a revamped D40x). See: "http://tinyurl.com/2vlkod"
Or, if you're willing to wait, the D80 is due for a refit soon (this fall, I'd think).
mb
Michael - I didn't know my obsessions were so obvious! Never did get that beer to taste right! Fun trying, though. :) I think it's good to become obsessed about something every once in awhile. If it weren't for those times I think I'd have given up a long time ago. Maybe obsession is really a necessity for me?
As for the camera body choice, I'm still mulling it over. The D60 doesn't read (specs wise) like it has much over the D40 and why Nikon brought out the D40x is a mystery to me. It seems it's just the D40 with more mega-pixels. I'll check your link, though, to see if I've missed something. And, I was not aware the D80 may be due for an overhaul. When it comes right down to it, the D80 is not all that much better than the D40, anyway. I'm thinking I can do 90% of what I'm planning with the D40 and the other 10% might take something more sophisto, like the D200, or D300 even! (somebody hold my credit cards, please!!)
Thanks for stopping by!
I think you also have to examine how you like to shoot and what subjects you tend to choose. You are not a wildlife nor a sports photog. Your eye loves the landscape and the street shot. So you want something really fast and light and you don't want to be fiddling with extra lenses, etc.
I totally agree. The interesting thing is that photography comes and goes as a passion with me, I think, because I don't have the tools to do the unusual, and after so many ordinary-looking shots, the flame flickers out yet again. Why buy something expensive to do the ordinary? I have to figure out what's needed to keep that flame going. Thanks for the support. :)
Post a Comment