Need help picking out a camera.

[brittdogg]

Hello- I'm looking into buying my first DSLR. I have been looking, researching and comparing the Nikon D3100, D3200 and D5100. What I am really looking for in whatever camera I get, is good image quality. If possible making it look as pro as possible at a cheaper price. (I know the different lens help also). Can you please tell me which one I should get and why. *I do not take many videos so those features dont really matter* I would like to get "the biggest bang for my buck" thanks

I am a newer photographer.. I took at class at school this year and enjoyed it. I would like to make photography a fun hobby.

 

[Solarflare]

You already picked the cameras I would have suggested to you. However, there are also the entry level Canons (see below).

Get one of these with the 18-105mm kit lens, or body only (and get something like a higher quality zoom or the 35mm prime as walkaround lens)

Not the 18-55mm kit lens, because (a) it has a really bad manual focus (and manual focus is already hard enough with these cameras) (b) in many situations, it just doesnt have the range one would want.

If you want maximum quality for a cheap price, a prime lens (like the AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX, as I use it) is the way to go. Zoom lenses havent been invented before the 1950s and havent been in common useage before the 1970s. People have been photographing long before that point. Just zoom with your feet instead of with the lens. About 30mm on DX (and 45mm on full frame) is the "normal" focal length, which is about as wide as our eyes. Thats why this is the most general focal length.


You might also want later to get (depending upon what you want to do):
- a telezoom (like the AF-S 55-200mm VR DX, which is the cheapest and lightest of all telezooms and the picture quality is also great except maybe the far end; however it is very plastic, so treat it with care or get more expensive and heavy models)
- a wide zoom (like the AF-S 10-24mm DX) if you like landscape or really "close to the action" photographs
- a macro lens if you're into flowers, insects and stuff like that (for example the micro-Nikkor AF-S 85 f/3.5 DX) (*)
- prime lenses for low light / portrait / other bright light/shallow depth of field applications (like the AF-S 35mm f/1.8 DX, the equivalent to the traditional 50mm normal prime lens used for street photography and journalism).
- Also always check out the concurrence for good, cheaper alternatives to Nikon.

(*): do not expect to be able to shoot sports with macro lenses, unless you can disable the macro part, such as on the awesome Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM (a very expensive but also very high quality macro lens). Macro slows down the autofocus very considerably.

Oh, and:
- flash (like the fb600, ca $200)
- tripod (dont get cheap ones for your expensive camera; for example, Manfroto or Gitzo are good companies)
- remote (thats very cheap and can be very handy)
- later filters like polarization, grayfilter, UV etc (but get high quality ones like Hoya Pro1 so you dont get scratches on your lenses from broken filters)


Get the D3100 if you want to spend the least amount of money. Obviously its a tad outdated with the sensor and the monitor. Otherwise its perfectly fine.

Get the D3200 if you really want maximum resolution.

Get the D5100 if you want best low light performance and highest dynamic range, as well as a bit more "professional" interface (but not much, the real upgrade in this respect is the D7000). Personally I also choose it because I absolutely wanted a full featured swirvel monitor.


Both Canon and Nikon have a huge selection of lenses, and are leading in the field of SLRs. If you want cameras without shortcomings, one of these two are the way to go.

Canon vs Nikon: this is an old debate. Canon in general strives for more "beautiful" pictures, and maybe a tad nicer user interface, while Nikon traditionally always tried to be the sharpest, most performant etc.

Either of them can make great pictures. Just get into the shop, hold them both in the hand and try them which you like better. Once you decided which system you prefer, you'll be bound to it, so dont take this decision too lightly.

Also be prepared that Canon vs Nikon is kind of a religious battle between photographers in the forums.

 

[Dao]

Not the 18-55mm kit lens, because (a) it has a really bad manual focus (and manual focus is already hard enough with these cameras) (b) in many situations, it just doesnt have the range one would want.

I am just wondering, what's wrong with that range?

I use the Tamron 17-50mm most of the time and I do not feel like I have issue with that range (as far as FoV goes). For those who use 24-70mm range in full frame/35mm flim have about the same FoV range. This is a quite popular range.

 

[EDL]

Bottom line, good photography equipment ain't cheap. Don't stress out over the body so much because these are really the more "disposable" parts of the equipment (i.e. something you'll probably end up trading up in over time as newer technology comes available and as you learn and grow). Unless you have a very specific need for a higher grade of camera than entry level (like weather sealing) or you have the money to spend, then an entry level will be perfectly fine....the camera WILL have more capability than you for quite some time.

The lenses are where you're going to drop the serious $$$ in the long run and continue to use on your new body later on. Any of the entry level bodies by the major brands will be a fine starting point. What you might want to consider is the type of photography you want to do. Although there aren't major differences across the brands, some of those differences might be important to what you want to do and once you're invested in a brand, have purchased a couple lenses for several grand, it'd be mighty expensive to switch.

For example: Nikon has the low light/high ISO image quality, hands down. If low light shots requiring higher ISO settings are your thing, then Nikon might be the best choice for you in this case.

Canon is by no means a slouch and there are plenty of pros shooting Canon. For me personally, I went with Canon for a specific reason: 1) The MP-E65 macro lens. Nikon has nothing to compare to this lens, but it is very specialized. Up to 5:1 macro shots, but it is macro only, can't be used for anything else unlike the 1:1 macros available from Nikon, Tamron, etc. Great macro can still be done on any other brand, but if you want to go beyond 1:1 then you have to use a bellows and/or reversed lens techniques or other magnifying additional lenses and adapters. The MP-E65 is very convenient in that it's a single lens and no need for reversing another lens on the end with adapters, etc.

That's just two examples that might have a specific reason to go with one or the other. If you are looking for an all-around camera then either will be fine.

Many here will also tell you to go hold each camera body and see how it feels in your hand. Don't waffle on doing this, you'll understand when you do it.

Everything else above and beyond this is all about ergonomics, control layouts, other esoteric features that may or may not mean something for you. Some of those differences ultimately end up being a "Chevy/Dodge/Ford" type debate and probably not something us beginners really need to sweat over. ANY of the entry level cameras from Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc will take good photos provided you do your part.

Also, spend some time learning to post process your photos in Photoshop, or some other editing software. This often makes or breaks a great photo. Changes, corrections, additions, etc can all be done digitally and editing skills are every bit as important as knowing how to operate the camera. Hang around here and you'll get plenty of opportunity to "play" with other's photos for practice.

 

[sovietdoc]

What I am really looking for in whatever camera I get, is good image quality. If possible making it look as pro as possible at a cheaper price.

Now the question is, what makes photos look "pro"...

Judging from the recent photos of the US Olympic team, it isn't the gear.

 

[dawm123]

I think you need to understand clearly what kind of effect, and shoot people or shoot scenes, how focal length lens to go with the compliance according to their needs. If necessary, you can go smalltao.com look you need.