Hot Topic, which is more important.....

HCK

HCK

Messages
784
Edit My Images
Yes
Camera Body or the Lens ? Or they both equally important ?

Just had a discussion with a colleague, I would lean more towards the lens but interested to find out other people's opinions :-)
 
lens generally but bodies provide features that can make or break the shot ie the af to track focus ect

that said a brilliant lens and an awful cam wont compare to an awesome lens and awesome cam
 
Are you talking about film or digital.

If film then the lens is very impotent. If it's digital then the lens is still very important but the sensor also plays more of a roll.
 
Body I say. Ok, the d40 is not a bad camera, but a d700 is far superior. Would a £2/3k lens on the d40 make better images that a £200 lens on a d700 - doubt it!
 
cambsno said:
Body I say. Ok, the d40 is not a bad camera, but a d700 is far superior. Would a £2/3k lens on the d40 make better images that a £200 lens on a d700 - doubt it!
Click to expand...

yes, a £ 2k lens on a D40 would probably show a D700 with a crummy lens up!

Lens everytime unless there is a specific feature on a body you really need.
 
When talking extremes lens will win every time. Top glass on pretty much any body will be better than crud glass on a top body.

However when you move away from the extremes it has to depend on use.

You can have the best lenses in the world but if the body cannot AF quick enough they are next to useless for action (And to a degree wildlife) compared to their cheaper counterparts. You can have a 5D with a canon 50mm f1.4 and produce better results in low light than a 40D with a 35mm F1.4

It is all down to intended use. There is no one size fits all in this debate
 
I think the general conscensus here will be the lens.

That said I think it depends on circumstance, budget and of course existing kit.

I recently upgraded formthe 400d to the 40d. The design allows me to change settings faster enabling me to get shots that I might otherwise have missed (I like wildlife which very rudely tends to not wait around pose). It also feels much better in my hand and seems to balance the lenses better which again means I can hold it for longer, and I think get less blur from handshake etc (I have no statistical data to back this up!).

Added to that the extra FPS and better high ISO handling for what I want the camera upgrade was the better choice for me.

I'm not sure there is much difference in the general pic quality from the 400d to 40d, however the design of the latter 'enables' me to take better pictures, something a lens upgrade would not.

Of course if you gave me £1k+ I'd get a nice 400mm f5.6....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top