On choosing a camera, part deux

[thristian]

After a couple of weeks reviewing specs and review sites, I’d pretty much decided I wanted to buy the Nikon D3000, mostly for its superior kit lens and the broader range of cheap lenses. The only problem was that being a very new camera, nobody had actually reviewed it yet, so I sat down to wait for some reviews - just to be sure.

Well, the first

Comments

[tau_iota_mu_c]

No no no, you have it all wrong. Buy the D3000 just in case your photos turn out crap, and then you can blame it on the tool and you can get another opportunity to later try out the D5000 (or the D5000 prime).

Only a poor planner doesn't use an opportunity to blame his work on poor tools rather than craftsmenship.

[thristian]

I've also been hanging around The DPReview Nikon forum, where pretty much every new item of Nikon news from Ken yields an eruption of pro-Ken and anti-Ken posts, some even mentioning the original article.

So far as I can tell, Ken writes a lot of good and useful and interesting stuff, and (as I think I mentioned in my first camera-choice article) it was a great relief to stumble across his site when I was beginning my research. Sites like DPReview give you a lot of details about how cameras compare, but leave you to figure out which features are most important and useful to you. Being fairly new to this level of equipment, I had no idea and was worrying myself sick about how I might choose one camera over another, but then I found Ken Rockwell and his "pretty much all cameras are great, and you won't notice the differences in 90% of pics" philosophy, which was very calming indeed