What would you do, if you had to start again????

kardo

kardo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
441
Name
Kardo Ayoub
Edit My Images
Yes
If had no SLRs at all and had a budget of £2500 what would you get:
1. Canon 5D Mark 2 and 24-105 f4 L or
2 Nikon D300 17-55 f2.8 + 85mm f1.8

Please give a reason if you can.
 
Canon 5D Mark 2 and 24-105mm f/4 L because of the superior image quality and HD video recording :-)

Ahh but alas, it's just a fantasy for me at the moment... I'm almost completely skint lol!

Joe
 
upgrading is harder to work out

1dm3 (2nd hand) or 5dm2 (new)


:thinking:
 
Well mines a biased opinion as I have a D300 now.

I chose the Nikon route because when I went to a camera shop the Nikon felt more comfortable in my hands and thats why I went for it. If you prefer the Canon then get the Canon, if your prefer the Nikon then get the Nikon.

There really isn’t alot of difference between the two brands, just the tongue in cheek comments that fly around.
 
For me it would be a nikon d300, A sigma 24-70 2.8 and a second hand 70-200 2.8, if i had some cash left over maybe a cheap UWA or tele convertor
 
Neither, I'd use my £500 bargain of a MF Hasselblad and buy a wider lens and a shed load of film. :)
 
AliB said:
Neither, I'd use my £500 bargain of a MF Hasselblad and buy a wider lens and a shed load of film. :)
Click to expand...

I would do something similar. In my case it's my £500 bargain of an RB67.


Steve.
 
5D mk2 + 24-105, then a macro lens after that no question, i'd quite like to try the HD video side of it, especially with nature.
 
kardo said:
If had no SLRs at all and had a budget of £2500 what would you get:
1. Canon 5D Mark 2 and 24-105 f4 L or
2 Nikon D300 17-55 f2.8 + 85mm f1.8

Please give a reason if you can.
Click to expand...

Never held a Canon so cannot judge it so I'd opt for the Nikon D300.
I'd want a camera that felt as robust and chunky as my Pentax K20d.

If Pentax had a larger share of the market, and there was a greater range and availability of new and 2nd hand lenses, I would not change brand (not changing anyway).
 
I'd still get the Olympus E3 + 12-60SWC lens spend the rest on curry and large format camera
 
kardo said:
If had no SLRs at all and had a budget of £2500 what would you get:
1. Canon 5D Mark 2 and 24-105 f4 L or
2 Nikon D300 17-55 f2.8 + 85mm f1.8

Please give a reason if you can.
Click to expand...

It really depends what you're shooting in the main.

Option 3. 2nd hand Nikon D700 and 24-70mm f:2.8 (which might just scrape in at £2500)

Having used FX format I'd be loath to only have recourse to DX again. The low light/high ISO capability and vastly superior Af of the D700 put it ahead of the 5DII for mine. The 24-70 f:2.8 is also a sublime lens.

If you were solely shooting landscapes or studio portraiture then maybe I'd look at a 5DII, but for a more flexible full frame camera I'd plump for the D700.
 
I'd vote for the D700 + 24-70 route too.

Nearly new D700's are about 1400 quid and the Nikkor 24-70 is about a grand. Awesome combo though, will be far superior to the other two options.
 
Nikon D700
Tamron 28-75mm F2.8
Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-F4
Nikon 50mm F1.4D
SB600 Flash

Just within budget and hard to beat for the money :D
 
For me, I'd go Sony.

The A900 trounces the D700 for landscape acuity. I imagine by the same level the D3X does to the D3... the D700 murders the Sony A900 at high ISO though... horses for courses as the cliche goes.

There is no right answer, and no one-size-fits-all-solution.
 
Frenzied Dwarf said:
For me it would be a nikon d300, A sigma 24-70 2.8 and a second hand 70-200 2.8, if i had some cash left over maybe a cheap UWA or tele convertor
Click to expand...

I'd be tempted to get the same setup but as I already have a D300 I'd possibly go full frame with better iso capability and go for the D700 and 24-70mm f2.8. One thing I wouldn't do is change to Canon. I like Nikons and I'm sticking to them.

What is a cheap UWA by the way? I've just googled it and it came up with the Uganda Wildlife Authority and the University of Western Autralia. Neither of which you can get with change out of £2,500.
 
I would steer clear of Canon and buy myself all Nikon.
Sick of their stupid price increases, shortage of stock, faulty brand new gear that I paid thousands for and major cockups on their so called flagship bodies.
 
I would definitely buy the second kit. Not to take anything away from the strentghs of the first kit but the second gives you a much more useful range (to a degree) but way more important much faster lenses which will be killer in low light and also the DOF.. yep.. second kit all the way. The first I wouldn't shake my head at though :)
 
Would have a go at medium format and Zeiss lenses but than again this would cost a packet...
 
I would go D700 and 24-70

but saying that, starting again, it would have to be something lower down, D90/D300 and a few lenses to get going
 
The problem is that £2500 just isn't enough.

Not for a 50D, 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 plus grip, cards batteries etc... Now if the budget were £10k, I think I could be happy ! :lol:

Steve
 
I'd go for the D300 option but as others have said I already have a D300 so it probably a bit biased. Would probably look to switch the 85mm for a 60mm/105mm macro lens.
Best bet is to go and try them both out first.

Paul
 
I don't know about starting again,but I might have held onto some of the stuff I've sold over the years.

Sold a 24-105 for £500 [which is what I bought it for brand new from Jacobs]
Sold my 300/4 Nikkor [which occasionally I regret - remember me, Dave!!!]
Sold a super sharp 70-200 2.8 and 2x TC combination

...but then I also remember why I sold this stuff. Moved from Canon to Nikon because of the 18-200VR [at the time, unique and highly desirable, and I bought one before I had anything to mount it on]; and sold the 300/4 because handheld the 70-300VR beats it for image quality - [no point having all that resolution capacity if your shots are blurred].

Still, right now - a D700, the longest lens I can get for the money and a 14-24. Way out of budget, but that's me..
 
I probably wouldn't do any different TBH.

I would have been happy if I'd also started out with a Nikon or Canon, and progressed to their FF.

The D700 or 5D2 are great cameras, as is the a900 (but for different reasons)
 
I must admit, if I had £2500 to spend on a camera and glass, and no existing system to fit into, I'd be dead tempted to try an epson R-D1x and some leica glass.

not that I don't like my nikon gear, I love it, but I've always liked the rangefinder concept, and I love the look of the R-D1 series.

dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top