Re: 7D is it wrong to mount a lens on a 7D that costs more than the body...

is it wrong to mount a lens on a 7D that costs more than the body

Um, no!

Well, so much for the 400 2.8, 500 4, 600 4, and 800 5.6...

Wow, good thing you started this thread... I was wondering the same.

I know many people who would ask the opposite question!

Palladium wrote in post #8726191
is it wrong to mount a lens on a 7D that costs more than the body

Battery Charging

show off

Okay, okay, you have it. Now get the #$%$@ battery charged and start shooting.

Palladium,

Are you going to use the 7D to shoot some football or is that still a job for your 1DMKIII?

Curious...that's all!

-Nick

Yes, it's wrong. Send me the lenses.

And send the 7D as well so that I can study the issue further...

Isn't that what most rebel users do?

Lenses are forever...

It is certainly not wrong to have a lens that is more expensive than your camera body!

A humble 10D or 350D with a top-line lens will produce better quality imagery than will a 7D with a low quality lens. Put your money in lenses. Lenses will also retain their value far longer than any camera body.

Several (if not most) of my lenses are worth more than any of my camera bodies (and I suspect at my old age; worth more than my own body).

Is this a thinly disguised opportunity to gloat?

Wilt wrote in post #8726613
Is this a thinly disguised opportunity to gloat?

I'm not sure it's being disguised at all

Good glass is expensive and it'll most likely be more expensive than whatever you put it on. People put $2000 scopes on $1000 rifles. It's just the way it is.