Trying to decide on a starter Nikon DSLR

[2WheelPhoto]

Thanks. Good point. This gives me reason to reconsider the D7000. I was reading today an article about how great the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 was for poor light, I guess any fast lens would be, right? And how that would be a great combination. Can you use an FX lens on a D7000?

 

[PJL]

Thanks. Good point. This gives me reason to reconsider the D7000. I was reading today an article about how great the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 was for poor light, I guess any fast lens would be, right?

Yep

Can you use an FX lens on a D7000?

Yep

But notice I said "D700" and not "D7000" -- the D7000 actually has about the same high ISO performance as the D5100 (you can compare the two directly on dpreview). The D700 is different because its full-frame; less megapixels overall combined with larger surface area means some nice fat light-sensitive pixels. Dxomark (see below) puts the usable ISO of the D700 at 2303, compared to the 1180 +/- of the D7000 or D5100.

What's interesting is that the D5100 actually scored better than the D7000 (albeit very slightly) on an objective ISO test. Both outscore the D90, however.

DxOMark - Sensor rankings

 

[behirab]

This is just the kind of information that is helpful to me. I'm afraid the D700 is way too expensive for me, however. That's interesting about the D5100 faring a little better than the D7000. But the D7000 seems to have better layout of buttons and dials which would make it appealing to me, not having many options buried in menus. I'm still trying to decide about the lens. Alas that fast 85mm, as great as it sounds, is also too expensive... Thomas Hogan doesn't dis the basic 18-55 and 55-200 except that they don't have an override for the automatic focus, I think it was. He says the 18-105 is better, and the 16-85 even better than that. So I just may go for the D7000 with one of those more basic lenses to start and save up for as fast a lens as I can. Thomas Hogan listed a couple of lenses for low light: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (eventually doable), Nikon 50 f/1.8 (inexpensive and very doable) and Nikon 70-200 f2.8 (way too much $$). Any other ones I should consider?

 

[Patrice]

. Any other ones I should consider?

Not for me to say what you should or should not do, but here are some other options from Nikon.

20 f2.8 AF-D
24 f2.8 AF-D
28 f2.8 AF-D
35 f2.8 AF-D
85 f1.8 AF-D
105 DC f2.8 AF-D
135 DC f2.0 AF-D
80-200 f2.8 AF-D

All fixed max aperture, all f2.8 or faster, all auto focus on D7000, all in the same price range or lower than the 16-35 you're looking at ([less than $1400] there is no current 16-85 Nikkor that I know of) and all are current.


EDIT: Big Big sorry, just looked at nikon imaging site and there is a current 16-85 in dx format. Now to cut myself a piece of humble pie.

 

[PJL]

If you can swing the D7000, buy it and never second-guess your choice. It's a much better body than the D5100, regardless of slight ISO differences.As for glass, it's really up to you. Primes usually represent better value for low f-stops with good sharpness and low distortion, while zooms have more versatility. Completely depends what you feel comfortable spending and what you're main intent is.

 

[Kerbouchard]

I would go with the D90, the 18-105, an SB600, and a 50mm 1.8. That would cover about 80% of normal shooting conditions for most photographers. From there, a tripod, and either an 80-200 2.8 or the 70-300 VR would just about round out the kit. Once you've mastered that, you won't have to ask what your next upgrade should be. You will know where you need more performance and what other options you want available.

Oh, and stay away from Ken Rockwell until get a bit further along in your photography journey. He has some good stuff to say, but he also fully admits that the website is for his and his cats' entertainment only, that he reviews stufff without using it, and that he flat out makes stuff up for entertainment. I believe that is all on his about me page. Not exactly a good resource for somebody starting out.

 

[behirab]

If you can swing the D7000, buy it and never second-guess your choice. It's a much better body than the D5100, regardless of slight ISO differences.

What is better about the D7000 body over the D5100? I know the D7000 is sealed against moisture. Anything else?

 

[Kerbouchard]

What is better about the D7000 body over the D5100? I know the D7000 is sealed against moisture. Anything else?

They aren't even in the same league. The D7000 has a built in commander mode to control off camera flashes. It has a built in focus motor to control older Nikon lenses. It has dual control wheels to give you faster access to changing shutter speed and aperture. It has more external controls so you don't have to go into menus to change things. It has a much better view finder. It has a better focusing system. It can make micro adjustments to lenses to account for manufacturing tolerances. The list goes on and on.

It's like night and day. If you can swing the D7000, I would definitely recommend it over the D5000/5100. If you can't, I would still go with the D90 before I went with the D5000 for most of the same reasons.

 

[behirab]

I would go with the D90, the 18-105, an SB600, and a 50mm 1.8. That would cover about 80% of normal shooting conditions for most photographers. From there, a tripod, and either an 80-200 2.8 or the 70-300 VR would just about round out the kit. Once you've mastered that, you won't have to ask what your next upgrade should be. You will know where you need more performance and what other options you want available.

Oh, and stay away from Ken Rockwell until get a bit further along in your photography journey. He has some good stuff to say, but he also fully admits that the website is for his and his cats' entertainment only, that he reviews stufff without using it, and that he flat out makes stuff up for entertainment. I believe that is all on his about me page. Not exactly a good resource for somebody starting out.

Wow. I hadn't even thought about a flash, but that opens up possibilities. Good to have room in my budget for it....eventually! So this takes me back to the D90 with the 18-105 lens or the D5100 with the 18-55 lens which are the same price ($900 on the Nikon website, but better deals available elsewhere I'm sure), with the D5100 having an edge in the ISO, but the D90 being more advanced in other ways and is actually cost-wise a better deal. So many people love their D90s, I know it must be a great camera. Who is the best online seller of camera equipment, most reliable, follows through with customer service, etc?

There are about 6 50mm Nikon lenses. Does the D90 take only DX lenses, or FX too like the D7000? The AF 50mm f/1.8 D (What does the D stand for?) is only $135. This seems to be a very popular lens for Nikon to make so many of them.

You say the camera, lenses and flash listed above would take care of 80% of normal shooting conditions, what would take care of the remaining 20%?

I ask questions here on this forum because there is a lot information and so many opinions that it's difficult to sort out the quality. What resources, websites, books do you recommend for learning more? I found David Pogue's book on digital photography helpful in understanding my Nikon compact P500. My previous SLR was a 35mm film camera, so I've had to learn a lot to get up to speed on digital. And I haven't even explored processing.

Thanks to all of you who have contributed to this thread!

 

[ariel_]

I like my D90 because it has the dual control dials to change aperture and shutter without having to look at my menus. This was one of the main reasons why I upgraded from a D50 to D90. The D90 will take FX lenses and will FX camera's take DX lenses, but I'm not sure what the impact will be, I'm assuming the crop factor. The people here in the forum will be able to tell you more. You've asked a lot of good questions about different bodies and features, why not try renting a few camera bodies with a 50mm lens and try it out?

Remember camera bodies come and go, but lenses last forever. I suggest you go with the D90 and save your money for glass. IMHO

 

[Kerbouchard]

I would go with the D90, the 18-105, an SB600, and a 50mm 1.8. That would cover about 80% of normal shooting conditions for most photographers. From there, a tripod, and either an 80-200 2.8 or the 70-300 VR would just about round out the kit. Once you've mastered that, you won't have to ask what your next upgrade should be. You will know where you need more performance and what other options you want available.

Oh, and stay away from Ken Rockwell until get a bit further along in your photography journey. He has some good stuff to say, but he also fully admits that the website is for his and his cats' entertainment only, that he reviews stufff without using it, and that he flat out makes stuff up for entertainment. I believe that is all on his about me page. Not exactly a good resource for somebody starting out.

Wow. I hadn't even thought about a flash, but that opens up possibilities. Good to have room in my budget for it....eventually! So this takes me back to the D90 with the 18-105 lens or the D5100 with the 18-55 lens which are the same price ($900 on the Nikon website, but better deals available elsewhere I'm sure), with the D5100 having an edge in the ISO, but the D90 being more advanced in other ways and is actually cost-wise a better deal. So many people love their D90s, I know it must be a great camera. Who is the best online seller of camera equipment, most reliable, follows through with customer service, etc?

Generally, KEH.com, adorama.com, and B&H are regarded as the big three. With the crisis in Japan, everybody's prices have been rising, so you may have to do a bit of research on who has the best deal for what you want. Stay away from the all in one kits that include a tripod/filter/cleaning kit/back scratcher. The back scratcher works okay, but the rest is usually cheap junk.

There are about 6 50mm Nikon lenses. Does the D90 take only DX lenses, or FX too like the D7000? The AF 50mm f/1.8 D (What does the D stand for?) is only $135. This seems to be a very popular lens for Nikon to make so many of them.

The D means it translates distance info to the camera. All FX lenses and older Nikon lenses will mount on all modern DSLRS. There are a few compatibility issues that you can run into, though. Some older lenses do not transfer exposure info to the camera body so the meter doesn't work, but those lenses are becoming more and more rare. Also, some lenses don't have focus motors inside of them and instead depend on the camera body to have a focus motor. FX vs DX basically refers to how big of an image the lens projects onto the sensor. An FX lens projects a bigger image than a DX lens so an FX lens will work for any sized sensor while with a DX lens, if you put it on an FX camera, part of the sensor may not have any signal to work with. In any case, this isn't a concern for the D7000 or D90 since both will take DX and FX lenses.

You say the camera, lenses and flash listed above would take care of 80% of normal shooting conditions, what would take care of the remaining 20%?

Reflectors, soft boxes, more lighting, macro lenses, telephoto lenses, extreme wide angle lenses, and the list goes on and on. It really just depends on what you want to shoot and how much control you want over how the photo turns out.

I ask questions here on this forum because there is a lot information and so many opinions that it's difficult to sort out the quality. What resources, websites, books do you recommend for learning more? I found David Pogue's book on digital photography helpful in understanding my Nikon compact P500. My previous SLR was a 35mm film camera, so I've had to learn a lot to get up to speed on digital. And I haven't even explored processing.

Thanks to all of you who have contributed to this thread!

My favorite books have been 'Light, Science, and Magic', 'National Geographics, Field Guide to Photography', and pretty much anything by Rick Sammon.

 

[behirab]

Whoa. After pricing the D90 at several online sellers, it appears that Nikon USA has the cheapest price for a brand new camera. This isn't what I expected at all. It's about $900 at the Nikon website, including the 18-105 lens, cables, battery, charger, etc. Not refurbished or slightly used. $899.95. It pays to shop around.

 

[ariel_]

Whoa. After pricing the D90 at several online sellers, it appears that Nikon USA has the cheapest price for a brand new camera. This isn't what I expected at all. It's about $900 at the Nikon website, including the 18-105 lens, cables, battery, charger, etc. Not refurbished or slightly used. $899.95. It pays to shop around.

Really? Which Nikon site did you go to? I went to Digital Cameras | Nikon Digital Camera, Lenses & More and added the D90 to the cart. On the next screen it says "D90 (Body Only) has been successfully added to the cart" and its asking to choose a lens. Might wanna double check.

 

[behirab]

Yes, once you add it to the cart it tells you that it's body only, where on the previous page it simply shows you the camera with a lens. However, once you've got it in your cart it reduces the price by $100. Still not the deal I thought it was. And it then offers you some discounted lenses, but curiously not the 18-105mm lens you might want to start off with. As they say, if it seems to be too good to be true... Further research finds Adorama with lower prices than Nikon USA, B&H and KEH. I wonder if they're going to discontinue the D90 soon, thus the $100 discount?

 

[2WheelPhoto]

If you purchase the D5100 you'll be selling it soon to buy something else. I sold my D5000 and bought a D7000, and typing all the reasons I did so would be outside the scope of this thread so take my word for it. Just the menus/controls are night and day, plus all the other stuff already mentioned.