Quote:
Originally Posted by 89911
Thanks guys. I appreciate the advice, but the images from my $600 Costco Nikon just aren't what I am after. I've got about 3 books that I have read through, went through almost every manual settings, and puchased a AF-s Nikkor 18-200mm lens last year that cost more then the entire camera and its 2 lens. I easily have at least 5000 pics of my kids and family. I think the Nikon is a great camera for the money. The lens I have will work with the D800 but because it is a digial lens, renders the image to less the half the MP capbilities. Kind of silly when you have all that in you hands. These two camera's have nearly identical specs, just was wondering if any had any experience with either. Personally, I have always liked Nikons.
|
The 18-200mm is good for what it is. But it isn't what I'd consider "good glass" (ymmv). Buy a fast 50 (for not a lot of money) and you'll get better results imho - *if* you want to work at 75mm effective.
If you want to go full frame ("FX" in Nikon terminology, eg the D800) then you need really good glass to go along with that. It is a complete waste of money to use that body with a DX lens or even the 18-200 (again imho). You are better off getting a D5100 or D7000 if you have to have a new body.