|Originally posted by srussell0018 |
You just said the body alone is $1,200 and the lenses are $800.
There's another lens for $350.
So so far you've said the body is $1,200 by itself, and lenses are $800. I've shown you that the body WITH a lens is $1,200, and a 55-210mm lens is $350. Anything else?
Yes, I might have mis-spoken in one place, but I also said a DSLR with a kit lens (same focal length as that one) is significantly less (Canon started putting on way better kit lenses on the Rebel the last few years). The T5i with a kit 18-55 with IS is 700-800$ and I am sure you could find it for a lot less if you dug around.
Also, showing me one lens is not "variety" lol.
I don't know why you are so adamant about this argument. I didn't criticize you, I didn't criticize anyone else, I just said that when the price in general for mirrorless cameras comes down it will beat out the consumer/entry level DSLR market easily. That hasn't happened yet, you can look at the sales, its not there, and one of the sticking points is price. I don't know why you are so keen to argue on this.
I am not even criticizing the camera, and guess what everyone, professional or otherwise will say that yes, you are going to get better quality off a larger, non-crop sensor in a DSLR, especially in low light. It is literally physics, you can't argue with it, more sensor surface = more light = better quality. Even saying this, its marginal. Mirrorless cameras take excellent photos, but they do have drawbacks compared to an SLR, same as an SLR has drawbacks to a mirrorless. They are slightly different tools, and a good photographer is going to know what tools work best for their work.