5 Reasons I Shouldn't Buy a Nikon D700
1.) I don't have a spare $2,500 just lying around. Even if I did, that would only get me the camera body, and none of my current lenses work well with full-frame cameras.
2.) Even if I did have money burning a hole in my pocket, that money would be better spent on things like lights, light stands, gels, lens filters, and so on.
3.) I haven't reached the limits of what my current camera can do. I take some decent photos, but I'm still getting a feel for exposure, dynamic range, and so on. The limitation on my photos right now is me, not my D40.
4.) I just got two new lenses for my birthday, neither of which work with the D700. I really should spend more time with what I have before I move on to something new.
5.) A better camera won't make my pictures better. What makes a great photograph is composition, subject, and lighting, not gear.
I've been repeating this list to myself for the last several weeks. It's going to stick one of these days.
Comments
Mike Sakasegawa:
As entry-level DSLRs go, the D40 is great. It's lightweight and pretty easy to use. I might wish for a few more dedicated control knobs so I could avoid the menus a bit more, but as I've gotten more familiar with the settings, I can navigate the menus relatively quickly. Image quality is quite good, especially considering the price. Unfortunately, Nikon stopped making it a while ago.
Zalmoxis:
Ha! That is so true. I keep trying to get my boss to approve some money for lighting to pair with our office's Canon Rebel XT, but I also need to be working more on getting a feel for exposure and composition.
How do you like the D40 in general, though? I use a D80 at my last job (I'm not a photographer, but will do it in the absence of funds to hire a pro) and loved it. I seemed to get real good color with it.