I tasted the Sony D-SLR alfa 100 and I am having a hard time packing it up and sending it back.
True, the smaller camera I would use in its stead (the new, far less expensive Sony H5) is lovely. And it takes quality photos. I mean, can you really tell that this…
…was taken by the H5 rather than the Alfa 100? Of course you can’t.
But I can.
But Nina, the world can’t tell. You’ll save money. The H5 is light. The H5 will take on a conversion telephoto lens giving you fantastic capabilities. You’re just clinging to the Alfa 100 because it buys you status. You like the idea of looking pseudo professional, with ten pounds of camera dangling from your neck. When oh when will you use it over and beyond next weekend in France? Give it up! The H5 is the way to go!
All the above has been said to me, to my face, in the past 12 hours. It makes sense. Absolutely.
Nina, do you know what the national savings rate is for France? (high) In Japan? (higher) In the US? (in negative numbers) Are you going to contribute to this national malady of spending more than you have?
If I were living in France, I’d be saving too, to purchase that house in the south where family and friends would come each summer for a protracted six week vacation and I would play and frolic to my heart’s content in the hours that I am not working and I would spend Euro cents for quality local wines!
The cameras, their packaging, receipts, printouts, etc are strewn all over the dining table. I am paralyzed. I feel I am about to capriciously fling an ax of doom on one of two players, not unlike what I have witnessed on Project Runway.
One must go. I love them all. tick tock tick tock…
Keep the SLR, by all means! Or shop around for a lighter one. I'm not familiar with the Sony, but the new Nikon D80 looks promising. Of course, if you really want a great camera, plop down a good 2k and get a Canon 5D. It has a full frame sensor, so you don't have to worry about the conversion factor (i.e., a 28-105 zoom on most digital SLRs works like a 35-150 because the sensor is slightly smaller than a 35mm film frame). Then you can spend another 2.5k for Canon's amazing 50mm lense that has a 1.0 aperature! Holy cow! Do you know what you could do with that lense?!?
ReplyDeleteI know, I know: "Holy cow -- do you know you'd be spending several years' salary of most of Earth's inhabitants for that equipment!?!"
I'm just sayin...if you're going to go SLR, go big.
Seriously, though, I'd go with a good SLR because of the flexibility. Besides, you're sporty. :) The weight won't matter!
You are a talented photographer and deserve to have the best equipment you can afford. This might mean that you have TWO cameras (don't most pros have at least that many?). A tiny one that you have with you all the time, and another that you have available for special situations.
ReplyDeleteI know people with more than two cameras, and none of them is a professional photographer.
ReplyDeleteCertainly, you could keep both! Why not? -- if money is the only answer here, then you are the only one who can determine whether or not that reason is persuasive or even relevant.
Life is short, do what you want! (This advice does not apply in all circumstances. This one, though, I think it fits.)
There's a consensus here. You should keep both cameras, right?
ReplyDeletegls: your post makes me feel great! I'm thinking I got a lightweight bargain! The Sony is the twin to Nikon's D80 and it weighs less, though it's heavy enough to make me feel good about the muscle tone I'm likely to get from toting it around.
ReplyDeletesixty-five, joan and tonya: yeah! I needed these voices of support! What serious amateur photographer has only one camera, huh?
Still, I wish Visa would lighten up already and get rid of those hefty monthly fees. I'm practically throwing business their way. Cut me some slack here!