What camera would you chose

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JR1

Jealousy is a funny thing

---

Very funny ..... but you do not know that I actually handled a D3 awhile back ... it was being passed along the row of the audience and I passed it from my neighbour to my wife [ who normally uses an FZ3 and thinks my MFT G3 is "HEAVY" ]. That brief moment confirmed my belief that ANY DSLR is not for me. I had an APS made redundant by the arrival of the G3 and disposed of .... Though I did realise, in a moment of honesty, that in my GH2 I do have effectively a DSLR but it is a small one :) So it is choice rather than jealousy or inability and a desire for a working tool which suits me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JR1

So would YOU suggest the 1D Mk4 instead

---

With my existing lenses, and for your applications? Yes. But partially because I'm already invested in Canon glass. Suggesting a 1D mkIV or a D3/D3x is essentially the same recommendation across two different camera systems. Again, regardless of how much you have to spend, I would not buy the latest and greatest. Remember, the 1D mkIV is roughly 3 years old, and they're built to last far longer than that. It's 16MP, goes to ISO102400 (H3 setting), drives at 10 frames per second, and sells for about $3,000 used. The 1DX is 18MP, goes to ISO204800, drives at 12 frames per second, and sells for about $6,600 new. Even if you're flush, are the differences worth twice the cost? If you go Canon, I recommend a 1D mkIV with 70-200mm f2.8L II IS USM and a 1.4x teleconverter.

Believe me, you will be set. :D

There are three objective reasons I'd stick with a 1D mkIV. The D3 is 12Mp at 9FPS, and the D3x is 24MP at 5FPS. The Canon 1D mkIV has a little more resolution than the D3x, and a faster drive speed than the D3 (to be fair, 9FPS vs 10FPS is splitting hairs :rolleyes:). In addition, it's an APS-H sensor (1.3x crop), so it will give you a little more reach than the full-frame Nikons, though note that the Nikons should have a slight edge in low light.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JR1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arith

Hassleblad for true colour and weddings, Cost a lot though. They are trying hard to sell and you might get a a decent camera with lens and viewer and back for only £2000000 NO! not that much, £20 almost by a factor of 1000.

---

Actually I am serious

---

Medium format is a poor choice for action. Any non-studio work, really. They tend to have small buffers, poor high-ISO performance, slow drive speeds, and long shutter lag. Also, I don't care how wealthy you are, they make no sense for a hobbyist.

Thanks for the reply.

There's not really a super large investment in either of the two camps: but I think that having TWO x D7000 bodies and the extra reach to 500mm weights the choice towards Nikon.

Added to those facts, that your 'dream' is biased toward Nikon: I agree with Andrew (and you) I think that you should follow that dream.

I wouldn't be surprised that you WILL INDEED pull better shots with a D4 than the gear you have at the moment. I have seen exceptional results flourish with athletes and musicians when they get that piece of gear that they have always dreamt about. (and also Photographers) - of course the Philosophical debate would be to argue they would have improved anyway . . . but I think there is a definite advantage to "looking the part".

I'd get the D4, if I were you.

I too looked at your site before I posted any response - you have some very good photos.

The EF20 to 35 is a very useful lens even a better lens if it is in good condition - it is pity you're so far away!

Good luck with your choice.

WW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn NK

Don't overlook a factory refurbished camera. I was shooting a school Christmas concert last night (just personal images), and the school's photographer, whom I know well, was using his Canon 1D Mark 4.

He feels this format is a good compromise between the 1.6 crop bodies and the FF 1DX (for example). The 1D 4 has a 1.3 crop factor. It has an excellent AF system.

The beauty about a refurb is that it's completely re-built by Canon, but the price is much lower than new. Of course this would also apply to the Nikon bodies.

Glenn

---

Actually you have made a point here that I think many many more people should consider.

50% of what I own is pre owned as I buy the majority of my gear from London Camera Exchange.

I have never had a days problems with my pre owned equipment and would advise anyone to go this rout with a good supplier.