Is D5000 good enough

[shb-jcb]

Is D5000 good enough to take stock pics? Or do I have to invest in a semi pro/full format camera for that? I read a blog/interview from 2005 of a guy who was making $4000 a month from stock pics and he recommended a semi-pro/pro camera.How much does a seconds semi pro like d300s cost and where to get these in Sydney.Paxtons and the type dont keep seconds and most fellas who do are online chaps.Meaning that you cant actually feel the camera in your hand and play around before buying.PLease advise.Thanks guys.
Cheers

[Murtasma]

Wow easy there buddy one thing at a time. Don't expect to be pulling in 4 grand a month doing stock photography, that's extremely rare. I think an entry level DSLR is more the adequate to start learning about photography.

Doing stock photography is a lot more then setting up a light and pressing the shutter button. If you don't understand what separates a pro body from an entry level DSLR, any features the pro have will likely be totally wasted except for reduced noise (which isn't an issue when shooting stock because you usually light with strobes and shoot at ISO 100).

You can start doing stock photography with an entry level DSLR no problem As long as you have the right images, good contrast, correct focus, good composition, a market for the image the list goes on.

A pro DSLR won't change any of those requirements. Master those first before your start wasting money on a 3,000 dollar body and 2,000 lens.

[Raoul Isidro]

JB HiFi, Dick Smith and Harvey Norman will let you handle and fondle the actual high end cameras in their bigger flagship stores.
The sensor of the D5000 is very capable of capturing great images.
But great images are created not by the cameras, but by the ones that are behind the viewfinder.

[aprillove20]

I agree that the sensor of the D5000 is very capable of capturing great images.