~ Starting Over - Need Advice~

[OhioGuy]

For over a decade I shot with a Nikon D40. I had about three lenses and all the basic stuff in my bag. I sold it all for a simple point and shoot because I thought I was done with serious photography but guess what? I was wrong. It's a passion that will never go away, just like people have a passion for playing music or something. So, I'm ready to get back into the game (as a hobby) but really dig down deep and learn more about photography and the new technology that is out there. Lots of things have changed from my old D40, I'm sure.

So, I have a clean slate here. I guess that's the good part. The bad part is it's going to cost money to build up my toys again. As I stated, this is a hobby for me but if I can make extra money on the side with little projects, great. I won't quit my day job though!

I want to stay with Nikon. I trust that brand, my D40 was great and I like the feel of that equipment. Beyond that I'm open for suggestions.

What's a good camera to get back into it that won't break the bank book, but will allow me to grow and enjoy for another decade or two? A good all-around camera because I enjoy shooting just about everything.

We will start with this. Please ask me any questions for more details.

Thanks!

 

[acparsons]

D300 is a great camera, around $400 . Buy some old AI lenses and focus manually. The D300 meters with Ai lenses. You can check out my signature for samples of the D300. Many are with the 50mm F1.4($100 used), Sigma 70-300($100 used).

 

[Raj_55555]

Considering you had some experience in photography, you would prefer a enthusiast level camera. As you've not given a budget, I'm not posting about full frames. I would suggest 3 cameras, and you decide based on you price and usage comfort.

1. Nikon D7100 -> Best camera in the market for enthusiasts if you ask me, provided you're serious about learning photography. It's costlier than the next two, but has the best of both worlds.


2. Nikon D5300 -> Also a very new camera, with image quality as good as the Nikon D7100, but aimed towards the starters.

Pros: Great image quality, no low-pass AA filter (read better sharpness), super high resolution 24MP, much better processor aka faster fps shooting,built in sensor cleaner & great ISO performance, GPS & Wifi inbuilt

Cons: No AF-S or AF-C modes, only AF-A which selects between them automatically.
Plastic body, not recommended for people who travel to rugged terrains or are carefree with their equipment.
Not weather sealed.
Not as many direct buttons & controls as it's aimed towards beginners. You'll need to dive into menu a lot.
Lower shutter count possible, i.e. the shutter dies quicker. Not really a concern for most people.
No inbuilt focus motor, can't autofocus with older lenses.
It offers no metering with manual-focus lenses

3. Nikon D7000 -> An all time great camera. It's price is now almost half of what it used to be, and the best bang for buck for an enthusiast.

Pros:
Professional handling and many more direct buttons for various features with Dual dials.
Magnesium alloy body: saves you most of the time if you accidentally drop it.
Weather Sealed: You can go on shooting in rain & snow if you've a weather sealed lens
Shutter speed as fast as 1/8000th of a sec, great for shooting in very bright light.
Inbuilt focus motor, can autofocus with older lenses. Saves a lot of money that way if budget is a concern.


Cons:
Very old model (2010), so performance not up to date with the newer models.
16MP sensor, less than the other two. But it's enough for most people.
Slower processor, only 5fps shooting. Not a deal breaker for me.

If I was to choose between these three I would get D7000 as value for money. But if you need it for the next decade or two, shell some more money and get the D7100. You can even use any lenses that you may have with the D40 of yours.



As for the lens:

for portraits: A prime 85mm 1.8G or 50mm 1.8G are great. You can use 50mm 1.8D as well if budget is an issue. It was a decent lens.
for zoom: Tamron 70-300 VC or Nikkor 70-300 VR. I prefer the Tamron.
For super Zoom: Wait for the tamron 150-600mm to be released for the nikon mount.

Good luck

 

[goodguy]

The obvious choice I would recommend is one of these 2 cameras

If very limited on budget get the Nikon D5200, simply excellent camera for all occasions, excellent dynamic range, excellent low light performance.
If you have a bit more then go for the Nikon D7100 which is Nikon's current top of the line crop sensor camera, roughly same DR and low light performance as the D5200 but with more options for the serious photographer.

As for lenses get it with its kit lens preferably the Nikon 18-105mm VR or Nikon 18-140mm VR and to that add the Nikon 50mm 1.8G

 

[robbins.photo]

I would agree with GG, if your not wanting to spend the sort of money a d7100 will run you the d5200 is an excellent choice at about half the price. It's a fantastic all around camera that's hard to beat on a budget.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

 

[sonicbuffalo]

I agree.....if you can swing it, get the 24 mp D7100. Great up to date camera. I recently sold my D5100 (another good camera) to buy the 7100. I love the 7100.

 

[The_Traveler]

What is 'breaking the bank'?
Ho much can you spend before divorce, living in your car or starvation are possible consequences?

 

[astroNikon]

^^^ as Lew asked
Knowing what an actual "real" budget is is better than spewing a ton of info about models that the OP may not be able to, nor want to, afford.

 

[Mike_E]

I am going to suggest going to a full frame here. You could start looking at the D700 and depending on your tolerance for sticker shock keep going up until you get there.

I won't bore you with what's already been written about having a lens behave the way it's supposed to -wide angles actually being a wide angle, the relationship between depth of field and lens compression and so forth- but if you have resigned yourself to this path then the gains outweigh the costs.

Good luck and good shooting
mike

 

[yioties]

I would get a D5100 with a 18-105 and a 50mm 1.8g. That would probably cost you $700. The body new and the lenses used.

 

[TJC]

To add perspective to how the world of Nikon has changed, In the day of the D40 ,the D80 was the top consumer camera, the D200 the prosumer model and the D2Xs shared top of the line honors with the D2Hs. While all these cameras are excellent it could be argued effectively, that their image quality doesn't hold up to today's bottom of the Nikon line consumer cameras. The world of digital has advanced that much. ( ironically, the image of a 20 year old F100 still holds up, go figure!)

Things have changed and the product cycle has gotten much more competitive. Nikon has been bringing out models on a yearly basis that represent minor tweaks over the models they replace. This is good news because the replaced models are excellent cameras in there own right. Really, as good as the brand spanking new D3300 and D5300 are, they are minor tweaks over the D3200 and D5200 they replace. While a bit longer in the product cycle, the D7100 isn't a generational leap better than the D7000 it replaces. Other than the 24MP the 7100 offers over the 7000's 16mp, for most photographers the changes represent minor tweaks. As for the big jump in MP, a marketing war between Nikon Canon etc. who want us to buy in that quality resides in the MP count( OMG they increased the MP count i gotta have the latest greatest). Real life - unless you are printing wall sized murals, the MP count on these cameras doesn't matter.

You also get to choose between cameras that use internal menus to control many of the shooting options formally covered by external dials and buttons or cameras that still offer those dials and and buttons. Most cameras offer a combination. There is no wrong answer here, only what you prefer.

IMO, the D7000, which is what i currently shoot with, offers you the most bang for the budget buck. Only those who need to be first in line to buy the latest Iphone would call it obsolete. It has plenty of fire power, no bad habits, can handle both FX and DX lenses as well as almost every lens made by Nikon since the 1980s. It is weather sealed. It is to prosumer digital what the F100 was to prosumer film. And at it's current price is a deal!!!!

 

[KmH]

There are indeed a couple of major differences between the D7000 and the D7100.

In addition to the increase in MP, the D7100 image sensor does not have an anti-aliasing (AA) filter in front of it.
Anti-aliasing filters soften image sharpness.
So images made with the D7100 will have more resolution (more MP) and more sharpness than images made with the D7000 which has an AA filter.

Big difference #2 is the Muliti-CAM 3500DX AF module in the D7100 compared to the Multi-CAM 4800 AF module in the D7000.

I retired and sold all my DSLR camera gear, and like the OP after a time using a P&S was less than satisfying.

The route I chose was to buy a used Nikon D50 (older than the D40) and a used Nikon AF 24-85 mm f/2.8-4D lens. I have added a used Nikon AF 80-200 mm f/2.8D push/pull to zoom.

 

[Derrel]

I think post #3 has some good suggestions in it.

 

[MOREGONE]

"learn more about photography and the new technology that is out there"

I'm going to throw something out there, have you thought about mirrorless? Mirrorless cameras are quickly becoming the next Big thing and have some pro's (as well as cons). Unfortunately I'd have to say Nikon is not the strongest contender in this arena but they do have the Nikon 1 line which is getting better.

Mirrorless can be very small and provide great image quality. The Micro 4/3rds systems is pretty mature now with a wide variety of lenses. There are also some good APS-C mirrorless options.

Just some food for thought. As you mentioned to want to explore and learn about the new technologies.

 

[OhioGuy]

Thanks for all the input so far. I know I didn't mention a budget and that's because I simply don't know what I have to spend yet to get quality gear. The suggestions mentioned are a great and I will start researching the contents of these replies more, now that I have some things to go on.

Mirrorless cameras? Interesting. From what I read so far this is something I'm going to have to see in action, or compare image quality with DSLR type cameras. I am a little nervous anytime a camera states it can also take movies. Kinda like buying a cell phone to take photos. A phone is a phone, a camera is a camera, a camcorder is a camcorder. Please don't mix them. I've never been a fan of that, personally. Manufacturers do this for convenience for the typical human being that is a casual user of technology. I get that. I'm a serious, soon-to-be photographer. I tend to think buying a camera that can take pictures, shoot video and make coffee might be lacking in the stuff that makes photography special to me, but all the newer cameras seem to incorporate that. (WHY???) I could be wrong. But, that's my own fault because I did say I wanted to learn more about the new technology out there. Hence, I will look into it more.

You would think manufacturers would spend more time making a true camera a better camera, not building in video.

My new goal as a photographer:

QUALITY images. My D40, with the lens configurations that I owned, simply never got it done. I would always envy the photographers who could produce razor sharp images. I have the eye for photography. Now, I just need the gear to record what I want to display to the world. I want to take portraits where they are so crisp and clear you can see every little hair on a woman's face. Images that really pop. I know the difference. I've never experienced that in any photo I've ever taken. Didn't matter if I used a tripod with mirror stop and a remote shutter release. My D40 and consumer grade (kit) lenses always lacked that quality. But, I still enjoyed the art of photography, always hoping one day I could produce images like the pros did.