0

I am writing an article for a case study, explaining which one is more important in Photography, either the camera body or the lenses, and in which, one has to invest more? This is a technical question.

Maybe we will be looking at the advantages of its element.

Could you please help me?

  • It is like asking which is more important, the pen or the paper. Neither can work without the other. – Rook Apr 1 '14 at 14:41
  • Hi Morpho! You've got some great questions, but — please search first. – mattdm Apr 1 '14 at 14:43
  • Maybe I have skipped this article, while I was doing my research. :) Thank you for sharing, Matt! – Morpho Apr 1 '14 at 14:47
  • @Idigas, I know that both elements can't work if one is missing, but I am focusing on the specifications of each one. – Morpho Apr 1 '14 at 14:51
4

Neither. One isn't more important than the other. You get the weaknesses of both. The body is responsible for capturing the light that the lens focuses. If the lens isn't sharp enough resolution of the body doesn't matter. Similarly, if the resolution of the body is low, then sharpness of the lens doesn't matter beyond a certain point. Lens speed impacts low light performance, but so does the sensor size and the ISO capabilities of the camera body.

One could argue the lens is more important in defining the shot since it defines the focal length and depth of field, but the body is responsible for instructing the lens how to focus (if using AF) and making the exposure determinations as well as being capable of capturing the image.

There are situations where it makes more sense to invest in one than the other, but that is highly situational.

In general though, you want the camera body that meets your needs with the best quality lens you can put on it. If the lens would have to be really bad though, it might be worth a body that doesn't quite measure up to what you'd like to be able to have a decent lens instead. You are more likely to be able to put a cap on the needs of your body than your lens though.

  • Couldn't agree more -- they're a system. – D. Lambert Apr 1 '14 at 14:47
3

In the same conditions, if you don't need any specific feature of the high end body, a cheap body with a good lens will produce better pictures than an high-end body with a cheap lens.

But:

If you have a challenging subject like sports or birds-in-flight you need the better auto focus and higher burst rate of high-end bodies - the best lens in the world won't help much if the camera can't focus it fast enough.

Same goes for dark conditions, higher end bodies have better low light performance and no lens will help if all the sensor can detect is darkness.

And finally, there are other factors, for example, in a lot of cases (especially portraits in somewhat controller environment) you can get a better overall picture with good lighting equipment and a point-and-shoot than with the best camera and lens in the world in dull light.

  • Thank you, Nir! However, if you have an excellent camera, good lighting equipment and good light is best than having a point and shoot camera. :) – Morpho Apr 1 '14 at 14:39

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.