Re: Good alternatives to the Canon 40D and 70-300 lens

The One wrote:

> You do realise that post production i.e RAW conversion will effect the
> photo quality more than actual camera quality. Are you going to invest
in
> a professional RAW converter too, to benifit your photography?

Don't see any good reason to do so when I'm just a dedicated amateur. I
can
do RAW on my Canon S3 but I haven't found a need to do so yet. The 40D
comes with a RAW converter, but I'm not sure about the 450D.

> You do realise that the camera won't make any difference to how you take
> photos.

As I've only used a compact and an S3, there will be a (fairly shallow)
learning curve. But ultimately, yes, I'll be going for the same type of
shot to start with. But I think the extra flexibility of the DSLR
(whichever one I go for) will help me expand my repertoire.

> I'd go for the 40d, from my personal experience Canon RAWs process
better
> than Nikon RAWs.

Thanks for your advice.

-- 
Garry Knight
garryknight@[EMAIL PROTECTED]