Nate, their is some dust sealing and metal in the body, but essentially
Nikon has positioned the D7000 as an upgrade to the D90, not the D300.
There are rumors all over the place about a D400, which will have a
similar sensor and resolution to the D7000, but built more like their
pro cameras.
--- In artshow_photo@yahoogroups.com
<javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('artshow_photo@yahoogroups.com')>
, Gene Lugo <gene51@...> wrote:
>
> Perry,
> I have had 35mm cameras forever (since 1967) - Nikon rangefinders,
> Leica rangefinders, NIkon FTns, all sorts of lenses, Horseman
> tehcnical view camera, Hassleblad, Sinar F Pro 4x5 etc - all kinds of
> stuff. But digital just makes things easier.
> When I made the transition to digital in 2000, I paid nearly $700 for
> a Sony advanced point and shoot - the F515. Zeiss 5x zoom and 2.6 mp.
> It was fun, but anything larger than 11x14 lacked image quality, and
> for all intents and purposes the max iso was 100 - everything else was
> too noisy. I later upgraged that to their 717, similar setup but 5 mp.
> Better but still not what I was looking for.
> In 2005 I bought a film scanner and started to scan my negatives and
> slides, but the technology was not quite there yet - it was slow, and
> I started to see the weaknesses in the process. Anything faster than
> Velvia was too grainy, even though you could still process away the
> noise in Photoshop, you had some hard limits on image size.
> In 2007 I bought a brand new D200 and a 18-200mm lens for $2200. Best
> decision I ever made. Since then I have acquired an 80-200 AF-ED (used
> - $575), and some used Sigma glass - 150 macro ($500), 10-20 ($375),
> 18-50 F2.8 ($350), and a 50-500 ($600). I added a used D300 body that
> I purchased for $900. As you can see, with some careful purchasing you
> can get what you need and still stay within budget.These sigma lenses
> are all their EX series, intended to have better construction and to
> be a little more robust than their cheap stuff - and I can attest to
> their sharpness and image quality. Not the ideal, but certainly
> workable.
> Although the D7000 is a nice body, it is considered a prosumer camera
> as opposed to a entry-level pro body. Weather and dust sealing,
> internal magnesium frame and other features make them better suited
> for hard use. The same is true of their lenses - any of Nikon's full
> frame lenses will have better construction than the consumer level
> products. With a pro lens you can deal with a light drizzle without
> having to fear a short-circuit in your camera or lens. you can always
> buy a waterproof housing if you anticipate dunking the camera.
> If you care to visit my website - www.gyphotoworks.com you can see
> some of the results I get with this gear.
<javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('artshow_photo@yahoogroups.com')>
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
http://artshowphoto.com/support.htm
PLEASE READ....PLEASE TRIM POSTS!!! Keep quoted material short.
Repeat or create accurate subject lines.
If you want to advertise services related to art shows or photography, either in a forum post or on the resource web site, please contact the forum owner for permission.
Resource web site at
http://ArtShowPhoto.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment