My first DSLR

[enzodm]

that's my source for the prices: Foto e Videocamere Fotocamere Reflex

Do you know any cheaper store?

online, many. Here, for example: Newpixel24 . Or SanMarinoPhoto by G.B .

 

[giulio1993]

If we want to recap:

Nikon D3100 --> a very good entry level camera

Canon 500D --> a very good entry level camera, slighttly better than D3100 (a megapixel more, display automatic switching off, best lenses and raw format)

Canon 550D --> better than 500d and d3100 even though if you're not interested in full HD movies spending a lot more instead of buying 500D doesn't make a lot of sense.

I found the D3100 and 500D with the same price

Is that right?

P.S. Is better to buy the 18-55 mm kit, and eventually other lenses later, right?
P.S.P.S. Do All Nikon and Canon kits come with auto focusing lenses with motor inside?

Thanks!

 

[sanpan]

Nikon D3100 also has Raw format, Good lenses, display auto switch off. I am planning to buy one and have researched it a lot.
I don't think 1 MP will be much of a difference in picture quality.
Both Nikon and Canon have lenses with focusing motors.

 

[giulio1993]

Nikon D3100 also has Raw format, Good lenses, display auto switch off.

I meant that when your eye gets close to the viewfinder canon's display switchs off... nikon doesn't, you have to press the info button

 

[enzodm]

If we want to recap:

Nikon D3100 --> a very good entry level camera

Canon 500D --> a very good entry level camera, slighttly better than D3100 (a megapixel more, display automatic switching off, best lenses and raw format)

Canon 550D --> better than 500d and d3100 even though if you're not interested in full HD movies spending a lot more instead of buying 500D doesn't make a lot of sense.

I found the D3100 and 500D with the same price

Is that right?

P.S. Is better to buy the 18-55 mm kit, and eventually other lenses later, right?
P.S.P.S. Do All Nikon and Canon kits come with auto focusing lenses with motor inside?

Thanks!

unfortunately is not so easy. Nikon and Canon lenses are equivalent, difficult to tell that Canon kit lenses are slightly better than Nikon (you can tell stabilized versions are better that non stabilized for both). And I'm not sure 500D is better than d3100, it depends on points of view.
Buy kit lens (possibly stabilized) or something longer but more expensive (18-105 or 18-135, things like that). 1-2MP do not make much difference. RAW is RAW, do not worry about it. And also switch off is not so prioritary.
It seems like Canon free software provided with camera is slightly better than Nikon, but I do not have direct experience. If you are a student, you can buy Lightroom for 80€.
Nikon has lenses with and without internal AF motor, because pro bodies have internal motor and entry level no. Canon has never motor on body.
HDR needs 3 shots with different exposure, so bracketing helps. If the scene is static, you can just manually change exposure 3 times and shoot.

Really, is just matter of taste or chance. I'm glad to have Canon now because I developed some taste for old manual lenses (for which Canon is much better), but If I had to buy my first camera just now, I would be embarassed. Do you have friends with dSLR around? another good way of choice is to buy what they have, to borrow lenses.

 

[giulio1993]

If we want to recap:

Nikon D3100 --> a very good entry level camera

Canon 500D --> a very good entry level camera, slighttly better than D3100 (a megapixel more, display automatic switching off, best lenses and raw format)

Canon 550D --> better than 500d and d3100 even though if you're not interested in full HD movies spending a lot more instead of buying 500D doesn't make a lot of sense.

I found the D3100 and 500D with the same price

Is that right?

P.S. Is better to buy the 18-55 mm kit, and eventually other lenses later, right?
P.S.P.S. Do All Nikon and Canon kits come with auto focusing lenses with motor inside?

Thanks!

unfortunately is not so easy. Nikon and Canon lenses are equivalent, difficult to tell that Canon kit lenses are slightly better than Nikon (you can tell stabilized versions are better that non stabilized for both). And I'm not sure 500D is better than d3100, it depends on points of view.
Buy kit lens (possibly stabilized) or something longer but more expensive (18-105 or 18-135, things like that). 1-2MP do not make much difference. RAW is RAW, do not worry about it. And also switch off is not so prioritary.
It seems like Canon free software provided with camera is slightly better than Nikon, but I do not have direct experience. If you are a student, you can buy Lightroom for 80€.
Nikon has lenses with and without internal AF motor, because pro bodies have internal motor and entry level no. Canon has never motor on body.
HDR needs 3 shots with different exposure, so bracketing helps. If the scene is static, you can just manually change exposure 3 times and shoot.

Really, is just matter of taste or chance. I'm glad to have Canon now because I developed some taste for old manual lenses (for which Canon is much better), but If I had to buy my first camera just now, I would be embarassed. Do you have friends with dSLR around? another good way of choice is to buy what they have, to borrow lenses.

unfortunately not...
anyway I decided to get a nikon d3100, the the price difference seems to be too high comparing it to the quality difference and I may not be able to apreciate it.

Many thanks to all the people that helped me

 

[enzodm]

unfortunately not...
anyway I decided to get a nikon d3100, the the price difference seems to be too high comparing it to the quality difference and I may not be able to apreciate it.

Many thanks to all the people that helped me

good choice. As the VR version of kit lens comes for few euros more, go with it if you can, better for low light.
Nikon DX 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 VR Lens Review: 4. Conclusion & samples: Digital Photography Review

 

[cdino88]

Hi!
I've read several topic about what should be the first camera and I figured out that both Nikon D3100 and Canon 550D would be a good choise, though 550D it's maybe a bit better if you don't mind about videos and more expensive.

I'd like to ask you some questions:

1- Are the type of objective of nikon and canon the same? What would happen if I ever decise to switch from Nikon to Canon or to another camera body? Will I still be able to use my objective?

I just recently switched from Canon to Nikon. As long as you don't invest too much into your glass for one company then you shouldn't be afraid to make the switch.

2- What about the sensor cleaning system?

An automatic sensor cleaning system is useful to very useful. Just means the user doesn't have to clean it themself, or pay someone to do so, which could possibly cause irreversible damage.

3- In some review I read that D3100 is very user-friendly, is It still adjustable and completly manual (if desidered)? Could that affect my learning process?

Any dSLR that you buy nowadays will have multiple setting on which you can operate your camera. All of them will have a manual setting, and many have an aperture and shutter priority setting which either chooses the aperture of shutter speed for you. Teach yourself from the very beginning to shoot in manual mode, I did and it is nice being able to understand on why a photo is not achieving desired results.

4- If I decide to get the nikon, should I get that with the VR objective or the normal one?

It depends, if you have shaky hands then the vibration reduction (nikon) or image stabilization (canon) can assist in up to 4 stops of shake reduction. If you have a tripod or monopod VR or IS is usually not needed. VR and IS jack up the price of a lens considerably.

5- Provided a 600$ budget what do you think you'd do? (Please, consider also other DSLR, Canon could be a bit expensive for me)

For $629 each, you can either go with the Nikon D3100 or D5000, both with kit lenses.

For $650 you can get the Canon T1i, or for $500 you can get the Canon Xs, both with kit lenses.

In the long run Nikon will end up costing you more money. Why? Because the price of their lenses is usually significantly more than Canon's same class of lens. Nikon is an optics company, they provide more knowledge and quality of glass.

Either way you go, you really can't go wrong. Both are completely well established companies, both are at the top of the list.

Thank you very much for your attention

.

 

[giulio1993]

when i tried the d3100 and other cameras I found the manual focus very impreciseand inaccurate... my 35mm prime lens focuses much more smoothly and precisely. Why?

 

[enzodm]

when i tried the d3100 and other cameras I found the manual focus very impreciseand inaccurate... my 35mm prime lens focuses much more smoothly and precisely. Why?

because 1) the focus ring has a shorter travel, not meant really to manual focus and 2) the viewfinder is small, dark, and with not much support for manual focus. Try manual focusing with LiveView and its magnification, can be easier (if you are on a tripod). Pro or semi-pro cameras have better viewfinder (with pentaprism instead of pentamirror, and often substitution screens with split image like or so, like old cameras). Pro lenses may have better focus ring.
Actually, I use old manual lenses with some issue related to viewfinder.

 

[giulio1993]

Ok... I'm been annoying but let me write my last doubts:
I definetly exclude the 550d because it's too expensive, i'm undecided between d3100 and 500d.

1)I'm not interested in videos
2)Resolution: a megapixel more though a smaller sensor seem not to make a huge difference
3)RAW 12bit (Nikon) - RAW 14bit(Canon) seem not to make a huge difference, you said both take good pictures.
4)Canon sells cheaper lenses than nikkor, that could make a difference (is that true?)
5)Canon: better display ... not bad, but i don't mind too much
6)Auto switch off display sensor: cool but not so important considered that i'd like to get a eyepiece magnifier (are there any of them for canon?)
7)Bracketing: I do mind it, is it possible to get good results doing it manually with d3100?
8)both fit well in my hands
9)I could get the canon for 610€ (790$) and the nikon for 560 € (720$): a small difference but i don't want to spend 50€ more for nothing

 

[ausemmao]

I had the same choice as you between D3100 and 500/550D - I would have gotten a 50D if I had the spare funds as I'd used a friend's and liked it.Anyway, I ended up getting the D3100 as it was £220 ($320) cheaper than a 550D due to duty free and supply, which was enough to get a nicer lens, and I felt the image quality was better than the 500D's. For your questions:


1)I'm not interested in videos

D3100 is better for video, but since you're not interested, it's irrelevant.

2)Resolution: a megapixel more though a smaller sensor seem not to make a huge difference

1MP difference will make no measurable difference by itself at 12MP - 4% extra in each dimension to crop with isn't anything. What will is how useful each pixel is - sharpness noise etc, and I don't see much difference between them, maybe an edge to the D3100, but that's probably because it's what I have!

3)RAW 12bit (Nikon) - RAW 14bit(Canon) seem not to make a huge difference, you said both take good pictures.

No difference - the extra bit depth won't make much difference - you'll likely downsample to 8 bit anyway while you have the body, and even if you didn't 2 extra bits only means quantisation noise/detail loss is reduced if the sensor can resolve with that granularity (no idea if it can)

4)Canon sells cheaper lenses than nikkor, that could make a difference (is that true?)

From the few lenses I looked at it's true, but then the first body you get is not going to lock you in to either, unless you buy thousands' worth of lenses.

5)Canon: better display ... not bad, but i don't mind too much

This is something that CAN matter - if you're using manual focus in live view (useful if you want to use contrast detect AF and focus anywhere in frame, which you may use. More importantly, useful for low light manual focusing as the optical viewfinders on both are a bit crap in low light), the D3100's rear LCD does not have sufficient resolution to be confident in focus accuracy. The 500D's one can be used, though AFAIK it doesn't have contrast detect AF for anywhere in frame

6)Auto switch off display sensor: cool but not so important considered that i'd like to get a eyepiece magnifier (are there any of them for canon?)
There should be some for Canon.

The display on the D3100 switches off after 10sec, so you won't notice it anyway.

7)Bracketing: I do mind it, is it possible to get good results doing it manually with d3100?

Yes it is possible, and it is easy - after all it's just a shutter/aperture/ISO adjustment away. Convenient is another matter, because you obviously have to choose which to adjust and then actually do it yourself as opposed to have the camera do it for you.

8)both fit well in my hands

This is what I would have said you should make the choice on, but same for me, I liked both too.

9)I could get the canon for 610€ (790$) and the nikon for 560 € (720$): a small difference but i don't want to spend 50€ more for nothing.


TL;DR you will be happy with both! I chose D3100 because it meant I could get an F2.8 lens to replace the kit one with straightaway, but had I not had that I would have tossed a coin