|
I got interested in the Olympus system and tried out an E-510 for about a week and sent it back. Small and light, but cheap like a toy. Worse, the colors and exposure were very inconsistent. The E-3 has gotten some good reviews, but I'm going to stick with Nikon. I've heard the lens on the DMC-L1 is a steal at $800, but you really need to replace the body to have anything good.
The Canon 5D can produce stellar images and performs great at high ISO. But the body is a joke compared to the prosumer Nikons, AF and the flash system is far inferior. The D300 image quality is very comparable, in fact, comparable to the D3 up to ISO 1600. "Full frame" has its pros and cons. For non-professionals, it can be more cons. The files are cumbersome, and you lose a lot of reach in your lenses, requiring super expensive lenses to re-gain the reach. I don't see "full frame" making smaller sensors obsolete for years, if ever. It's hard to be disappointed with the output of APS-C or 4/3rds sensors these days.
If you like Nikon, now's a great time to embrace them. They're doing better than ever, at least with DSLRs. There's likely to be a D80 replacement announced in the spring. A D90? What type of photography you're planning on doing greatly influences good gear choices.
__________________
Good post? Leave a tip!
O - $1
O - $2
O - $3
|