Need advice on first DSLR, preferably weather sealed

[rjackh]

I am brand new to cameras. I do a lot of outdoor activities (hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, canoe trips, etc) and I would like something I can take with me. I would like something weather sealed so I don't have to worry about an occasional splash or light drizzle while outdoors. I also want something I can grow into because I have been wanting to get into photography for a few years; I am tired of using my point and shoot or phone. Do yall have any recommendations? I have looked at the Pentax K30 and Nikon D7000 online. Still trying to learn all this terminology and how they rate cameras, but I feel like the Nikon would be a better route since there is more lenses and accessories available. I will probably go with a kit to start off and learn, then get more lenses later on. Any insight would be appreciated, thanks.

Nikon D7000 vs Pentax K-30 - Our Analysis

 

[KmH]

For a light drizzle or occasional splash, weather sealing is not needed.
DSLR cameras that don't have weather sealing have sufficiently tight joints for those conditions.

Image stabilization (IS) in the camera has both advantages and disadvantages over in the lens image stabilization.
Advantages:
Every lens mounted on the camera can be image stabilized.
The IS is only purchased once, per camera.

Disadvantages:
IS cannot be used to stabilize the image in a DSLR camera viewfinder.
IS cannot be used to stabilize the image that is projected to a DSLR phase-detection auto focus system that uses a secondary.
If IS stops working, no lens can then be stabilized.
The image circle a lens projects has to be bigger to account for the image sensor moving around providing the IS.
The required sensor movement (both speed and range) increase with the focal length of the lens being used, making sensor-shift technology less suited for very long telephoto lenses, especially when using slower shutter speeds, because the available motion range of the sensor quickly becomes insufficient to cope with the increasing image displacement.

 

[Aro]

Hey, I'm new to this forum and I have been taking photography in all types of weather with my Canon T3. As long are your not going underwater with it you should be fine. I have taken amazing photos with it. With the Pentax k30 and the Nikon D7000 I would personally chose the Pentax because it's cheaper, and better than the Nikon because it has a larger sensor, and if I'm filming videos a high frame rate.

Thought I feel you can find more tutorials with the name brand cameras, if your down to explore you should be fine. For lenses just start off your standard lense, and once you master that, move on. If you start with to many lenses it can get very complicated for a beginner.

 

[brunerww]

Hi rjackh and welcome to the forum. I agree with Keith and Aro that most cameras will stand up to light rain and a few splashes, but I always worry a little when my non-weathersealed lenses get splashed.

If you're taking your camera out in canoes and fishing boats, there's always the chance that it might get dunked - something a non-sealed camera and lens would be unlikely to survive.

I would get the Pentax - even though Nikon has the wider variety of lenses, the Pentax has the wider variety of weathersealed lenses - and is a lot less expensive.

You can get a brand new K-30 with a Water Resistant 18-55 kit lens for $575. That's $74 less than a refurb'd D7000 body only.

I am a Nikon (non-weather sealed) and Panasonic (splashproof) shooter, but for hardcore water resistance, I recommend the Pentax.

​

Good luck with your decision!

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution

P.S. - the K30 is also a little smaller and lighter than the D7000, which may matter for an outdoor camera: http://camerasize.com/compare/#327,7

 

[goodguy]

I would look more at the Nikon D7100.
Its more modern then the D7000 and as far as I know has a better weather sealing then the D7000.
According to Nikon the weather sealing on the D7100 is same as o the D800 which is Nikon pro camera.
The D7100 is also overall more modern and a step up from the D7000.

 

[sashbar]

Hey, I'm new to this forum and I have been taking photography in all types of weather with my Canon T3. As long are your not going underwater with it you should be fine. I have taken amazing photos with it. With the Pentax k30 and the Nikon D7000 I would personally chose the Pentax because it's cheaper, and better than the Nikon because it has a larger sensor, and if I'm filming videos a high frame rate.

K30 sensor is 0.1 X 0.1 mm larger than D7000 that is one tenth of a millimeter. Why do you think it is important? And mind you Nikon sensor has better dynamic range. That simply means Nikon sensor is better.
Also Nikon battery lasts more than twice as long as Pentax.
Nikon has 39 points AF vs 11points Pentax
Nikon has nearly twice as many cropped lences
Nikon has faster min shutter speed ( even though K30 is not a slouch here either with 1/6000)
Nikon has two memory card slots vs Pentax one.
Pentax main advantages are it's slightly smaller size, weight and internal stab ( that is not nesessary an advantage)

Regarding the IQ thre is no meaningfull difference even though some reviews say that Nikon has slightly better IQ.
Both are excellent. But better AF, better choice of lenses, two card slots and probably a MUCH better battery would make me buy a Nikon.
I do not know the Pentax sensor, but I now very well the D7000 sensor which is excellent, with great dynamic range that gives you a lot of freedom in post production.
If you need a well weather sealed one, then that's a different proposition, it may override other factors. I use to shoot in a drizzle with a not sealed body and never had any problems.
My biker friend has bought a K30 for its weather sealed body, but he is struggling a bit with choosing weather sealed lenses, and he is looking at a different camera now.
As for the price K 30 is £440 and D7000 is £450 here in UK atm.

 

[The_Traveler]

I am brand new to cameras.

Before you get into dSLRs, which come with a significant burden of weight, bulk, expense, learning and editing, you might try photography with a good P&S or a bridge camera. If your experience is good and you want to go further then you can always get into a real dSLR later with its attendant issues, then the P&S can be your car camera to keep with you all the time or take to the store.

If you decide that all you want is to document things and the rest of the hobby is excess, then you'll be fine with the P&S or bridge camera.

Going from nothing to a dSLR, even a low end one, is like making your first car an Audi R8 before you get any driving experience.

 

[sashbar]

I am brand new to cameras.

Before you get into dSLRs, which come with a significant burden of weight, bulk, expense, learning and editing, you might try photography with a good P&S or a bridge camera. If your experience is good and you want to go further then you can always get into a real dSLR later with its attendant issues, then the P&S can be your car camera to keep with you all the time or take to the store.

If you decide that all you want is to document things and the rest of the hobby is excess, then you'll be fine with the P&S or bridge camera.

Going from nothing to a dSLR, even a low end one, is like making your first car an Audi R8 before you get any driving experience.

This is a very sensible suggestion. But I am looking back at my own experiense when I had several P&S and one pretty good bridge camera. I had it for years and never ventured outside holiday shots and Auto mode. I even had a feeling that taking holiday shots is a waste of time, because there are postcards. (And I was right ) Then I bought a DSLR and it triggered my interest in photography as such. So I have "An Aestetic Threshold" theory which says that some people need to see a certain formal IQ to get excited and involved in this hobby. Now when I am hooked ( although I do not yet know how big a hook it is) I can easily go back to a lesser camera, because there lots of other sides of photography besides a technical image quality. But, with me at least, I needed that "aestetic kick" to trigger my interest.

 

[KmH]

Cheap, temporary, camera and lens weather sealing you can keep in your gear bag - OP/TECH USA Rainsleeve - 18-Inch (2-Pack)

 

[Coasty]

Here is a picture I took with a D7000 in Bocas del Toro, Panama earlier this year during a downpour. As you can see, I’m standing in the middle of the street. There is nothing keeping rain out of the camera other than the weather sealing. Lens is a 70-300 VR with rubber weather sealing as well. 13,000 pictures later the camera is still going strong.

 

[Coasty]

I would look more at the Nikon D7100.
Its more modern then the D7000 and as far as I know has a better weather sealing then the D7000.
According to Nikon the weather sealing on the D7100 is same as o the D800 which is Nikon pro camera.
The D7100 is also overall more modern and a step up from the D7000.

I have compared my D7000 to the D7100 many times and have yet to find an area on the D7000 that is not just as weather sealed as the D7100. In my opinion, the comparison to the D800’s weather sealing is just marketing by Nikon. The D7100 is a great camera, and an improvement on the D7000, but the D7000 is far from being sent to the trash heap of camera history.

 

[rjackh]

I guess I am not technically brand new to cameras. I have had an olympus stylus tough for a few years. It takes decent pictures and is small enough to carry in my tackle bag or pants pocket on adventures. It takes horrid videos, but that is not that important to me. I really like that I don't have to worry about dropping it or dunking it, I have even taken it snorkeling before. I would just prefer to sacrifice size and waterproofness in order to capture much better pictures while outdoors.

Nikon D7000 DSLR Camera with NIKKOR 18-200mm DX VR II Lens 13019
This really has caught my eye. The 18-200 seems to be a great versatile kit lens to start with. What do yall think?

 

[KmH]

Like virtually all superzoom lenses (10x+ zoom range), Nikon's 18-200 mm is a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none lens that had to be designed with a laundry list of inescapable image quality compromises.
Online reviews discuss the image quality issues of each of the superzoom lenses - distortion, soft focus, focal length 'breathing' and more.

If convenience is more important to you than image quality Nikon's 18-200 mm is a viable lens choice. Lots of people buy that lens.

 

[goodguy]

I would look more at the Nikon D7100.
Its more modern then the D7000 and as far as I know has a better weather sealing then the D7000.
According to Nikon the weather sealing on the D7100 is same as o the D800 which is Nikon pro camera.
The D7100 is also overall more modern and a step up from the D7000.

I have compared my D7000 to the D7100 many times and have yet to find an area on the D7000 that is not just as weather sealed as the D7100. In my opinion, the comparison to the D800’s weather sealing is just marketing by Nikon. The D7100 is a great camera, and an improvement on the D7000, but the D7000 is far from being sent to the trash heap of camera history.

In regards to weather sealing, I can go by what Nikon say.
I don't have the means or will to compare the 2 cameras weather sealing capabilities.
If you choose to believe or not believe that is your choice.
I never said the D7000 is incompitant, its a good solid camera.
Buying the D7K or D7100 is a matter of 2 things...............

1.Can I afford the roughly 200$ difference between the 2 cameras
2.Is the difference between the 2 cameras worth the extra 200$

If 200$ will make it or break it and you simply cant afford the 200$ then by all means the D7K is good.
If you have 200$ and is ok with buying older generation, less modern camera which while is still good but isn't as good as the D7100 then get the D7K.

I don't think if you own the D7K then you should upgrade to the D7100 but if you are about to buy a new camera I don't see the logic in getting the D7000.
That's the way I see it and obviously everybody has the right to their opinion, I always go for the best I can get for my money, that's my attitude and philosophy in life.
If I can get a Golf over a Fiesta then I will squeeze my wallet and get a Golf, if I can get a Golf with 1.4L or 1.6L then I will do my best to get the 1.6L

So what I am saying is that to each his own and as a past owner of a D7K I know what a great camera it is and agree its far from being rubbish but I still personally would advise people to get the D7100 over it.

 

[goodguy]

Nikon D7000 DSLR Camera with NIKKOR 18-200mm DX VR II Lens 13019
This really has caught my eye. The 18-200 seems to be a great versatile kit lens to start with. What do yall think?

Nope, wouldn't touch this lens, I rather get the 18-105mm VR + 70-300mm VR used
These lenses will produce better images and you will have extra money left in your pocket.
As said many times in the past the 18-200mm or 18-300mm or other lenses that try to cover a very big focal range are very comfortable to work with but the price of this flexibility is not so impressive pictures.
For me image quality is more important then comfort, if I wanted comfort then I would just use my Canon G15