I've recently decided I want to become a bit more serious about photography. I've been messing around with digital cameras for about 8 years, but only got my first real DSLR (a Nikon D40) a few years ago. I just picked up the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF, despite the autofocus not being compatible with my D40. I'm beginning to see why people are willing to spend $1000+ on a single lens. I know technique is more important than gear, and I'm reading several books at the moment and practicing lots. However, it drives me crazy to have no auto-focus on my new lens (especially one as sensitive as this). I'm a young software engineer with no family, so I don't feel terribly guilty dropping some cash on my hobby. All that aside... Here's where I'm sitting with my gear:
Nikon DX 18-55mm (kit lens)
Nikon DX 55-200mm VR
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF
A good amount of beginner stuff, but not enough to have me locked into Nikon yet.
I enjoy night photography probably most of all (30 second exposures or more), have fun taking photographs at weddings, also nature and architecture.
I was toying around with the idea of upgrading to the D300 or even the D700 for full frame.
Other options are to sell all my gear and start fresh with Canon or Sony. The Canon EOS 5D Mark II looks nice, but I don't think I really need that many pixels. The Sony a55 is a very tempting camera at that price. It seems like it has everything I'm looking for except full frame. Is full frame everything that it's being hyped to be?
Alright, I think I'll stop there until I get some responses, I think this post could get even more annoying very quickly
Thanks in advance for any suggestions/criticisms.