mbriant
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2001
- Posts
- 9,538
- Likes
- 55
Quote:
Sports mostly. Anything with lots of movement and/or where you'd like to take a series of rapid, motordrive photos to catch the fast action. Pets and kids also come to mind. That's why I moved up from my original D-100 to the D2H. I've been able to get hockey photos with the D2H that I wouldn't have been able to get with a slower focussing camera. But you're absolutely right .... most shots can be taken with any camera .... feature rich or poor. In the end, the camera is much less important than the lenses and the photographer's ability.
My new D-40 just arrived minutes ago via post office. I've only had a few minutes to play with it, but so far I love it. It's even more compact than my D-100 was, and it has a much more solid feel to it than I recall the earlier Nikon consumer DSLRs I'd briefly looked at in the past having. Perhaps I'm just more used to them now.
I've installed an older AF-S 24-85 Nikon lens I never use, which doesn't offer as much zoom range as I'd like, but I'm certain I can make do. My first 35 mm film camera, a Minolta SRT-101, had only the standard 50mm lens on it, and I used that camera for years. Having an 18-200 mm would be more convenient of course, but as others have said, you can easily make do with what you have in the majority of situations.
| What you said before has me curious now. I was wondering what situations require very fast AF for you. Most of my pictures are not of action, so I'm curious to learn what types of shots are considered fast pace. |
Sports mostly. Anything with lots of movement and/or where you'd like to take a series of rapid, motordrive photos to catch the fast action. Pets and kids also come to mind. That's why I moved up from my original D-100 to the D2H. I've been able to get hockey photos with the D2H that I wouldn't have been able to get with a slower focussing camera. But you're absolutely right .... most shots can be taken with any camera .... feature rich or poor. In the end, the camera is much less important than the lenses and the photographer's ability.
My new D-40 just arrived minutes ago via post office. I've only had a few minutes to play with it, but so far I love it. It's even more compact than my D-100 was, and it has a much more solid feel to it than I recall the earlier Nikon consumer DSLRs I'd briefly looked at in the past having. Perhaps I'm just more used to them now.
I've installed an older AF-S 24-85 Nikon lens I never use, which doesn't offer as much zoom range as I'd like, but I'm certain I can make do. My first 35 mm film camera, a Minolta SRT-101, had only the standard 50mm lens on it, and I used that camera for years. Having an 18-200 mm would be more convenient of course, but as others have said, you can easily make do with what you have in the majority of situations.
