And lo On Wed, 05 May 2010 09:41:03 +0100, scott <sco### [at] scottcom> did  
spake thusly:

>> Heh. And perhaps you remember me remarking at the time that you can  
>> apparently buy a £200 Nikon D40 (?) and attach a £7,000 telephoto lense  
>> to it - as if you'd want to. ;-)

That and the poor quality of your mum's camera.

> A friend of mine borrowed a 7K (or similar) telephoto lens to put on his  
> old Canon 300D body when he went to watch an air show.  The photos are  
> absolutely stunning, and I don't think if he had used a more expensive  
> body the photos would have been *much* better (but on the other hand,  
> without the big lens they would have been rubbish).
>
> If you want to take action photos of things from far away under dodgy  
> light, then even the cheapest dSLR body will be fine, just get the  
> biggest lens you can afford.

Toot "This is where DSLRs rule as they're both bigger and have  
interchangable lenses. In this case the maxim is simple - the bigger the  
better. A bigger lens means more light getting to the sensor, means a  
faster shutter speed and less blur, and a lower ISO and more detail and  
less noise." ;-)

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message