Nikon 5200 or 5300 vs Canon T3i, T5i, or SL1

[StratLou]

Hello All,

My first time posting here at the Forum and it's not even for me. Time is running out and could really use anyone's help if a moment is available. My daughter's 17th birthday approaches on the 22nd and (thinks) she has made it easy for us present-wise by hinting to a Canon T3i. She has been using a Nikon Coolpix (can't remember the model number, but it's about 3 or 4 years old and cost about $350 new) and has soured on Nikon because this camera has been nothing but trouble over the years (needed screen replaced, sensor repair, etc). Additionally, it had a very slow shutter response time, poor/slow autofocus, sport mode that imposed vertical streaks in the final image, the list goes on.
Anyway, she's preparing to enter college in another year to work towards a degree in fashion and she is ready for an upgrade. Needs include:
1) fast shutter response
2) quick response autofocus
3) manual overrides for manual creativity
4) possibly built-in flash? (would she be restricted to certain flashes requiring additional purchase?)
5) whatever else a young budding photographer would benefit from if frustrated with the limitations of a CoolPix without interchangeable lenses
6) maybe a 55-200 lens also (Nikon seems to have a nice one DX VR with DSLR purchase currently for $150), or Canon EF (on sale now)
7) works well in low light conditions without flash
She does not know (nor do I as I still shoot slide film on my Canon AT-1!) much about digital camera specs, but knows what she'd like in a camera (as we all should). So, I would like to ask, first, anyone's opinions on Nikon vs Canon and, secondly, any thoughts about the models. Probably can only afford maybe a 5200 or 5300 Nikon or T3(i) or T5(i) or SL1 Canon. Sorry am I bit behind the learning curve so any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thank you so much in advance.

Lou

 

[Derrel]

Nikon just started some NICE instant discount prices on selected good lenses. Nikon makes the best low-cost 50mm f/1.8 autofocus lens, the new AF-S G series 50mm lens which is $196 now with the current instant price reduction (current owner of this new 50mm G). Canon has an utterly rubbish 50mm f/1.8 EF-II lens with loud, noisy,sketchy focusing and ugly background rendering (former owners of this cheap Canon 50mm here...). On a small-body camera, the 50mm lens functions as a short telephoto.

My preference would be the Nikon D5200 or D5300 over any comparably-priced Canon. Nikon has better sensor technology in small-frame cameras than Canon does, and I think, better light and flash metering than Canon.

The 55-200 VR lens is a handy, small lens. Go to DxO Mark.com and check out how Nikon leads in image quality. If she wants a "prime lens", the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 is an AF-S (AF, silent wave) motor, in a MODERN, aspherical-element design....the Canon 50/1.8 is...a junk design, no offense, but it's rubbish. In the 18-55 and 55-200 mm category, I do not think there's a lot of difference between Canon or Nikon. ALL of the small-body cameras have built-in flash. ALL of the small-body d-slr cameras have VERY fast shutter lag times after focus has been established. ANY d-slr is going to be better than an aging CoolPix. ANY of the ones listed, 5200 or 5300, T3i or T5i or SL1 are good enough to shoot and get decent pictures with.

JUNE is one of the PEAK camera sales periods of the year: graduation/Father's Day/vacation/weddings/reunions.

I do think an auxillary flash unit would be very helpful. Nikon makes great flash units, but the new thing is low-cost MIC Yongnuo brand flashes, with low-cost remote "triggers".

 

[PropilotBW]

Choose one at a good price, ask for gift receipt.

You can't to wrong with any of the options listed. I wouldn't let the poor nikon experience influence the decision. The 5200 or 5300 are very very nice models with more than enough advanced settings. Definitely cover what you listed as necessary. I shoot a 5100 and really enjoy using it.

I can't speak for the the canon T5i series, but if that's what she's hinting at, maybe shopping around for different models isn't really in her best interest. Just find the best price. (T3i is a little older technology...you could find it at a good price, or buy the newest technology that will allow her to use it for many years ahead).

 

[Vince.1551]

I highly recommend a D5300 with a 18-105mm.

She'll enjoy the camera as it can wifi the images straight to her mobile and she could post straight to Facebook or whatever social media she is using. Optically it is the best too.

 

[StratLou]

I highly recommend a D5300 with a 18-105mm.

She'll enjoy the camera as it can wifi the images straight to her mobile and she could post straight to Facebook or whatever social media she is using. Optically it is the best too.

Thanks for the response. The package I saw mentioned the 5300 which comes with the 18-55 and we would get the 55-200 dx vr additional. Would that seem a reasonable combo for her, should we do the 70-300 VRII (it's about 2x-plus the cost of the 55-200)?

 

[StratLou]

Nikon just started some NICE instant discount prices on selected good lenses. Nikon makes the best low-cost 50mm f/1.8 autofocus lens, the new AF-S G series 50mm lens which is $196 now with the current instant price reduction (current owner of this new 50mm G). Canon has an utterly rubbish 50mm f/1.8 EF-II lens with loud, noisy,sketchy focusing and ugly background rendering (former owners of this cheap Canon 50mm here...). On a small-body camera, the 50mm lens functions as a short telephoto.

My preference would be the Nikon D5200 or D5300 over any comparably-priced Canon. Nikon has better sensor technology in small-frame cameras than Canon does, and I think, better light and flash metering than Canon.

The 55-200 VR lens is a handy, small lens. Go to DxO Mark.com and check out how Nikon leads in image quality. If she wants a "prime lens", the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 is an AF-S (AF, silent wave) motor, in a MODERN, aspherical-element design....the Canon 50/1.8 is...a junk design, no offense, but it's rubbish. In the 18-55 and 55-200 mm category, I do not think there's a lot of difference between Canon or Nikon. ALL of the small-body cameras have built-in flash. ALL of the small-body d-slr cameras have VERY fast shutter lag times after focus has been established. ANY d-slr is going to be better than an aging CoolPix. ANY of the ones listed, 5200 or 5300, T3i or T5i or SL1 are good enough to shoot and get decent pictures with.

JUNE is one of the PEAK camera sales periods of the year: graduation/Father's Day/vacation/weddings/reunions.

I do think an auxillary flash unit would be very helpful. Nikon makes great flash units, but the new thing is low-cost MIC Yongnuo brand flashes, with low-cost remote "triggers".

Thank you for the info. The kit I saw came with the 18-55 VRII Nikkor lens. Would this be ok vs the AF-S you mentioned? Also, just so I understand, will the 5200 or 5300 have, basically, an "instant" shutter response? She likes to shoot motion as well. And also, can you turn of the autofocus feature and focus yourself so the camera will instant shutter respond vs focusing first then firing? Hope I've asked this correctly and it makes sense. Until she gets a flash, will either of these do well in low light without flash (I would shoot 1600 slide film back in the day and sometimes push to 3200 and not need the flash when not desired. Is it possible to do something similar with these cameras and today's digital technology?). Thank you again.

 

[Derrel]

The D5300 + 18-55 standard "kit zoom" would be nice. The 70-300 VRII is a grade higher than the 55-200; it focuses faster, and is LONGER by 50%, and is a high-end consumer type lens. I use one myself quite a bit. I would buy a used 70-300 VR-II from KEH.com, America's largest used camera and lens dealer. I bought my 70-300 VR-II from a pawnshop in 2012, and it has served me well. The 70-300 VR is a full-frame capable lens, whereas the 55-200 is a DX lens, and was designed some years ago, for lower-resolution DX cameras in the 6-MP sensor size; the 70-300 VR is a full-frame lens, designed for higher-end uses. Bought USED, it makes a lot of sense.

 

[robbins.photo]

Really any of the cameras you mentioned, canon or nikon, will do the job just fine. My own preference was for the nikon D5200 - I think of all the cameras on your list it offers the best value for the price. I've never shot the 55-200 mm myself but I did have a 70-300 mm VR for a while, the 70-300 is a really outstanding lens for image quality.

 

[RocketCowboy]

I highly recommend a D5300 with a 18-105mm.

She'll enjoy the camera as it can wifi the images straight to her mobile and she could post straight to Facebook or whatever social media she is using. Optically it is the best too.

Thanks for the response. The package I saw mentioned the 5300 which comes with the 18-55 and we would get the 55-200 dx vr additional. Would that seem a reasonable combo for her, should we do the 70-300 VRII (it's about 2x-plus the cost of the 55-200)?

Lou, I bought my D5300 just over a month ago from Amazon. I got a kit which included two lenses; the 18-55 that you're looking at, as well as a 55-300 VR. The 55-300 is not as strong as the 70-300 that you've mentioned, but it does a pretty good job. I've been impressed with the kit.

 

[dubiousone]

Ditto what Mr Robbins said. Any of the Canon/Nikon/Pentax DSLR's will do what she needs. Avoid the mirrorless and point and shoots as discovered, the shutter action, focus and exposure is quite inferior to a real DSLR. You press the shutter on a real DSLR and it goes click!

 

[StratLou]

Ditto what Mr Robbins said. Any of the Canon/Nikon/Pentax DSLR's will do what she needs. Avoid the mirrorless and point and shoots as discovered, the shutter action, focus and exposure is quite inferior to a real DSLR. You press the shutter on a real DSLR and it goes click!

Music to my ears! Thanks.

 

[StratLou]

Really any of the cameras you mentioned, canon or nikon, will do the job just fine. My own preference was for the nikon D5200 - I think of all the cameras on your list it offers the best value for the price. I've never shot the 55-200 mm myself but I did have a 70-300 mm VR for a while, the 70-300 is a really outstanding lens for image quality.

After reading the responses and pondering a bit, I think she may be better suited to the 5300 vs 5200 since she will (she's a present day teen) be posting to SM and sending to her phone so the built in WiFi would be easier for her. And the current cost diff doesn't appear to be great, as such. So noted for the 70-300 vs the 55-200. Trading the loss of the focal length between 55 & 70 mm to extend the focal length from 200 to 300 may be a greater benefit for sure. Thank you.

 

[StratLou]

The D5300 + 18-55 standard "kit zoom" would be nice. The 70-300 VRII is a grade higher than the 55-200; it focuses faster, and is LONGER by 50%, and is a high-end consumer type lens. I use one myself quite a bit. I would buy a used 70-300 VR-II from KEH.com, America's largest used camera and lens dealer. I bought my 70-300 VR-II from a pawnshop in 2012, and it has served me well. The 70-300 VR is a full-frame capable lens, whereas the 55-200 is a DX lens, and was designed some years ago, for lower-resolution DX cameras in the 6-MP sensor size; the 70-300 VR is a full-frame lens, designed for higher-end uses. Bought USED, it makes a lot of sense.

The current Nikon pricing package mentions being able to get the 70-300 at a substantial discount if purchased at the time of purchase of a new dslr. Checked KEH and the used price difference appears to be about $40 vs new (if I'm reading it right). I wasn't planning on springing for the 70-300 originally but seems that it would be a better value/deal if purchased with the camera now rather than waiting 'till later. And it would be new. Would you agree or do you have another thought? Thank you again.

 

[StratLou]

Any thoughts on 35 or 50mm fixed as a standard lens vs the 18-55? If the 35 or 50 would be a better choice for image quality, which model specifically that would be around $200? Thanks.

 

[robbins.photo]

Any thoughts on 35 or 50mm fixed as a standard lens vs the 18-55? If the 35 or 50 would be a better choice for image quality, which model specifically that would be around $200? Thanks.

I'm pretty sure you can get either for right around $200 new, I guess it would depend a lot on what you plan to shoot. The 35 would probably do well for landscapes and wider angle shots, for portraits I think the 50 would be a much better choice. I really love primes myself, I don't even have a kit lens at this point, but opinions on that one do vary. The primes are fast and sharp and produce great images, they are also very light weight - but they don't have the versatility of a zoom lens and they will sometimes require you to put a little extra into getting the shot you want as opposed to simply twisting the zoom ring.