DSLR

[Martin Naef]

Hi Gert

Gert van Santen wrote:
> Happens to me too. In the analogue days 
> I shot 200-300 pictures a year. Now it 
> can be 300-500 per day (on special 
> occasions, of course).

True. Although the number of pictures doesn't really say that much IMHO. 
With digital, I tend to shoot variations of the same thing, 
experimenting with different parameters. You wouldn't do this with film 
to the same extent simply because of the cost involved. Like today, I 
shot *40* pictures of Pascal - with the aim of getting *one* passport 
photo. (Sounds easy, but isn't. You need the proper background, neutral 
face, looking towards the camera, both ears visible, etc. Try to explain 
that to a toddler...)

> So, if someone would ask me what I would 
> (want to) buy if I had to start all over 
> again, I would answer:
> 
> A small camera bag with:
> 1 cheap consumer DSLR body Nikon or 
> Canon (400-700 euros)

I'd still go one step up, mostly because of the improved ergonomics.

> 1 low light lense (e.g. 28 mm f1.8 or 50 
> f1.4) (200-350 euros)

Yup - 50mm F1.8 here.

> 1 zoom lens wide-tele (eg 18-200 mm) 

Nope. Too much compromise in image quality IMHO, although I can't deny 
that it's a very usable range. The widest range zoom I have is 28-135, 
that's a factor of 5.

I think it's a better idea to first consider what you're planning to 
shoot mostly, then choose a decent quality lens accordingly. On the 
rest, you can compromise (like I use a cheap-ish 70-300mm because I 
don't really need tele all that often). In my case, that meant getting a 
very nice 12-24mm wide-angle for architecture, the 50mm F1.8 for 
portrait work and the 28-135 IS as the "universal" lens that I use most.

Bye
Martin

-- 
http://www.navisto.ch
http://www.myspace.com/navisto