Help me buy a camera please

[ulrichsd]

Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum.

I am leaning towards getting a Nikon D3100, with the 18-55mm kit lens, the 70-300mm, and a 35mm f1.8 prime for low light (I'd expect I'd use this lens the most). Which runs about $1200. (I like that the camera is small and light for vacationing, backpacking, etc. and I like having the extra range to 300mm for wildlife and future soccer games)

My only other consideration is getting the D90 body with the 18-200 lens, totaling about $1400-1500. But its starting to be more than I want to spend and I'd have less reach and no prime. (I do like that I can use older AF lenses as well if I were to add more later)

So I'm just wondering which you would recommend for a beginner?

Right now I just a use a point and shoot pocket Olympus and a Kodak 10x superzoom.

My wife and I are having a baby in April, so we'd like a camera to take some quality photos of our new girl. I also am into traveling and backpacking, so I'd do a fair amount of outdoor photography, some wildlife photography, and general vacation photos.

I don't expect to use a lot of the bells and whistles, just the basics like manual focus (in Costa Rica, my current camera wants to focus on the branch in front of the monkey, not the monkey itself, so I have a lot of out of focus pictures!).

My wife would like me to get a camera that she use, even based on our experiences I'm the one who take 95% of our photos.

And I'm sorry Cannon fans, I have some friends who use Nikon so it'd be nice to be able to swap lenses.

 

[quiddity]

forgot options:

d300s
d7000
i am a tool

 

[ulrichsd]

forgot options:

d300s
d7000
i am a tool

Should have mentioned my price range (ideally $1000-1200) and the camera body alone on both of those cameras blow my budget.

 

[Ginu]

I have a D90 with the 18-200 AFS VR first gen and a 50mm 1.8AF which I picked up last week which I'm enjoying.

Personally I would suggest sticking with fewer lens but with greater coverage unless you are looking for a designated lens for a particular job. For the average user the 18-200 lens is plenty although I do suggest a prime 35 or 50mm 1.8 or lower for low light indoor shooting (this can be added later on).
A professional photographer or the enthusiast with lots of $ will tell you to screw zoom lenses like the 18-200 and stick with fast primes or fast zoom lens, however from experience I can tell you its nice not to have to worry about bringing at least two lenses to be covered.

Review of the 18-200 from Ken Rockwell and D90
18-55 is a great lens kit although it lacks light but great all around lens.
70-300 kind of bulky with very use although it can come in handy at times.
35 or 50mm 1.8 or lower is small and relatively inexpensive. Best lens by far for the price

If you will stick to photography as a hobby and like toys I would suggest the D90 over the D3100 although the D7000 is nifty but quite a bit more expensive. After shooting the D90 for two years, I would really like to go to a full frame D700 or at least a D300s or a D7000, but the budget wont allow this right now...

 

[ulrichsd]

I have a D90 with the 18-200 AFS VR first gen and a 50mm 1.8AF which I picked up last week which I'm enjoying.

Personally I would suggest sticking with fewer lens but with greater coverage unless you are looking for a designated lens for a particular job. For the average user the 18-200 lens is plenty although I do suggest a prime 35 or 50mm 1.8 or lower for low light indoor shooting (this can be added later on).
A professional photographer or the enthusiast with lots of $ will tell you to screw zoom lenses like the 18-200 and stick with fast primes or fast zoom lens, however from experience I can tell you its nice not to have to worry about bringing at least two lenses to be covered.


Review of the 18-200 from Ken Rockwell and D90
18-55 is a great lens kit although it lacks light but great all around lens.
70-300 kind of bulky with very use although it can come in handy at times.
35 or 50mm 1.8 or lower is small and relatively inexpensive. Best lens by far for the price

If you will stick to photography as a hobby and like toys I would suggest the D90 over the D3100 although the D7000 is nifty but quite a bit more expensive. After shooting the D90 for two years, I would really like to go to a full frame D700 or at least a D300s or a D7000, but the budget wont allow this right now...

Thanks a lot for the info. I've checked out Ken's site before and it seems pretty informative. I expect to enjoy photography as a hobby, but don't expect spend thousands of dollars on lenses or anything. Just based on technology, I assume that I'll probably be upgrading whatever body I get in about 5 years, but of course add build on the lenses.

 

[Ginu]

I have a D90 with the 18-200 AFS VR first gen and a 50mm 1.8AF which I picked up last week which I'm enjoying.

Personally I would suggest sticking with fewer lens but with greater coverage unless you are looking for a designated lens for a particular job. For the average user the 18-200 lens is plenty although I do suggest a prime 35 or 50mm 1.8 or lower for low light indoor shooting (this can be added later on).
A professional photographer or the enthusiast with lots of $ will tell you to screw zoom lenses like the 18-200 and stick with fast primes or fast zoom lens, however from experience I can tell you its nice not to have to worry about bringing at least two lenses to be covered.
Review of the 18-200 from Ken Rockwell and D90
18-55 is a great lens kit although it lacks light but great all around lens.
70-300 kind of bulky with very use although it can come in handy at times.
35 or 50mm 1.8 or lower is small and relatively inexpensive. Best lens by far for the price

If you will stick to photography as a hobby and like toys I would suggest the D90 over the D3100 although the D7000 is nifty but quite a bit more expensive. After shooting the D90 for two years, I would really like to go to a full frame D700 or at least a D300s or a D7000, but the budget wont allow this right now...

Thanks a lot for the info. I've checked out Ken's site before and it seems pretty informative. I expect to enjoy photography as a hobby, but don't expect spend thousands of dollars on lenses or anything. Just based on technology, I assume that I'll probably be upgrading whatever body I get in about 5 years, but of course add build on the lenses.

Good lenses always keep their value and in some cases they even go up in price with time, but that's rare. If you are looking to update the body every 5years or so, keep in mind the D90 is a couple of years old.
Also forgot to mention, if your wife can shoot with a DSLR and understands how to use a DSRL then the model doesn't really matter. I thought my 11yo daughter to shoot with the D90 and she gets some decent shots.

 

[bluetibby1]

I have a D90 and I love it. I can't really say much about the 18-200 but I do have the 18-55 and the 55-200 which I rarely use. I usually use my 50mm 1.8. Just speaking from personal experience.

 

[Ginu]

I have a D90 and I love it. I can't really say much about the 18-200 but I do have the 18-55 and the 55-200 which I rarely use. I usually use my 50mm 1.8. Just speaking from personal experience.

I agree about the 50mm 1.8, great lens and it stays on the body most of the time unless I'm downhill biking, hiking or traveling and even then the 50mm is in my pocket.

 

[jdag]

I have a D90 and my son used to have a D3000 (upgraded to a D90). I haven't used a D3100. That being said, I would urge you to go with the D90 for a number of reasons (and I am sure I will miss a bunch). In no particular order:

1) Somewhat larger with a more robust feel (to me).
2) Top mounted LCD.
3) Built-in focusing motor (more autofocus lens options down the road).
4) Built-in off-camera flash control (this is huge to me).
5) More control buttons (not quite as much menu surfing).
6) Faster auto-focus (at least the D90 vs the D3000 I used).
7) Dual control dials (for aperture, shutter, and other settings).

With the prices being "reasonably close", especially if you look at the D90 refubs on the Nikon store site, I would not personally consider the D3100 over the D90.

As for lenses, a million and 1 options there. The D90 18-105 kit lens is really pretty flexible for walking around. And the 35mm 1.8 is fantastic for those baby shots in dim light (especially with an off-camera flash somewhere in the room).

Ultimately, I'd go D90, 35mm f/1.8, SB600 flash. Assuming refurb on the D90, you'd be right around $1,100-$1,200.

You can always pick up an 18-55 or 18-105 used for $100 and $225 respectively.

 

[cnutco]

You will be happier with the D90. I love mine. I also plan to give it to my Daughter when she finishes high shcool.

 

[ulrichsd]

Thanks everyone for the advice. Went to the store and tried both out and still can't make up my mind.

I like to smaller size and weight of the D3100 and that it is newer technology, but I liked the viewfinder of the D90 plus the ability to adjust manual settings more easily.

The price between the two is so close, its really not a deciding factor.

I expect that the 35mm prime will be on the camera most of the time for the baby photos (the reason we're getting the camera). And then add a telephoto before going on whatever the next trip might be.

 

[kassad]

I very much recomend getting a fast prime. Great for low light indoor baby shots.

Ask yourself if your going to use the video function much.

I recomend thinking in terms of buying the lens you want with the camera being a secondary choice.
The economics of camera bodies reminds me of computers a decade ago. Almost as soon as you buy one the new generation of bodies comes out and you'll want to upgrade.
Lens on the other hand tend to stay usable for a much longer period of time. How many photogs are using bodies from 5-10 years ago? How many are still using lens that old?

Bottom line I would say buy the cheaper body and spend more of your budget on lens and accessories. (tripods, bags, flashes, etc)

--K

 

[ulrichsd]

I very much recomend getting a fast prime. Great for low light indoor baby shots.

Ask yourself if your going to use the video function much.

Bottom line I would say buy the cheaper body and spend more of your budget on lens and accessories. (tripods, bags, flashes, etc)

--K

Thanks, we have a camcorder so the video on the SLR will get used rarely. I do already have a tripod, but doubt that will get used much either, sounds like the VR feature on the Nikons works pretty well.

I think it will end up being the D3100 just because of its size and weight. I think it will be the best camera for my needs, even though my ego wants me to get the D90 since it is a step up from a "beginner" SLR.

Since I don't have any existing lenses, picking up AF-S lenses is not a problem (more than enough selection for a beginner)

Here's what I think it will end up being:
D3100 (lighter weight so more likely to use it)
18-55mm (easy to carry, flexible, light)
35mm 1.8 (indoor use)
70-300mm (bring when necessary, outdoor shots, sports)
SB400 flash

 

[KmH]

Actually, the VR on the Nikon lenses should usually be turned off.

The most common mistake amateur photographers make is not using a tripod.

The D90 and the D3100 are both entry-level cameras.

The SB-400 is not much more useful than the built-in pop-up flash. The SB-600 is much more useful.

 

[Ginu]

Thanks, we have a camcorder so the video on the SLR will get used rarely. I do already have a tripod, but doubt that will get used much either, sounds like the VR feature on the Nikons works pretty well.

I think it will end up being the D3100 just because of its size and weight. I think it will be the best camera for my needs, even though my ego wants me to get the D90 since it is a step up from a "beginner" SLR.

Since I don't have any existing lenses, picking up AF-S lenses is not a problem (more than enough selection for a beginner)

Here's what I think it will end up being:
D3100 (lighter weight so more likely to use it) - dont judge a camera based on weight
18-55mm (easy to carry, flexible, light) - great kit lens (requires adequate light)
35mm 1.8 (indoor use) - great choice, prime lens are worth it and quite affordable (consider getting used lenses also to save some $)
70-300mm (bring when necessary, outdoor shots, sports) - decent lens but not for sports and consider shooting on a tripod at all times for better performance specially at the 200-300 end of the lens
SB400 flash - skip this flash all together and go for the SB600

Play with a D90 and a D3100 b4 you purchase. Having movie capabilities on the camera is always a plus. From the sound of things you dislike bigger and heavier apparatus so bringing the camcorder along sounds a little contradictory, however my iPhone does a better job on the movie aspect ... People always tend to forget they have a mini camcorder in their pocket at all times with all the new cool gadget mobile phones.