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

[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.

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.

A brand-new 70-300mm f/4.5~5.6 AF-S VR-G would be the strongest telephoto option for under $1,699 for this type of camera, and the warranty is long on new Nikkors. About $325 Used from KEH.com http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NA079990884470?r=FE

As to the fixed 35 or 50 as opposed to the 18-55mm zoom. NO. No way. She'll NEED the shorter 18mm to 34mm zoom range alllllll the time. The 18-55 has become *the* standard zoom from all the camera makers for a definite reason: 35mm is far too long for use indoors, and outdoors, when any kind of a wider-view shot is needed.

Between the two primes, the 35mm f/1.8 DX at $199, and the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G at $196 under the new rebate plan, the 50mm lens is by far the better quality lens, and is full-frame compatible, and has better pure image quality, and it serves as a short, but very fast-aperture lens for gathering a lot of light under poor lighting conditions. It is the kind of lens to buy, and use for 15,20 years, whereas the 35mm f/1.8 DX (the DX model, not the brand-new 35 1.8 for full-frame) is a very average lens, designed years ago as an econo-lens. I think the 50/1.8 G is worth the money.

 

[TCampbell]

The Canon T3i and T5i have the same sensor, but the T5i has a slightly improved focus system (all 9 AF points are "cross type" whereas on the T3i on the center point is "cross type" and the outer 8 points are single-axis points. The T5i has a touch-screen ... the T3i does not. Some people really like the touch screen. The T5i will be the nicest of the lot (unless she wants small size -- for some people that's a big deal.).

The SL1 is a bit different. The point of the SL1 was to create a DSLR with the same size sensor, but reduce the body size. Performance will be similar to the T3i and T5i but the size difference is noticeable (I believe they claim it is the smallest and lightest APS-C size DSLR on the market.)

On the Nikon side, the D5300 will be the more recent. On the Canon side the T5i is the more recent.

Like Nikon, Canon is also offering instant rebates. Both companies do this somewhat regularly... so regularly, actually, that you can pretty much count on catching a rebate program (and usually it's an instant rebate but just occasionally it's a mail-in rebate.)

Surprisingly, I would have expected Canon to offer the largest rebate on the T5i (because that's the most expensive of the three), but it turns out they are offering the biggest rebate on the SL1 (of the cameras you listed... some other cameras have bigger rebates.) An SL1 is $600 for camera & kit lens (after instant rebate). Any authorized dealer will honor the rebate pricing.

I should add in... while the manufacturer will sell you a camera as a "body only" vs. a "body with lens kit" (you must have at least 1 lens to use a camera... the "body only" option is really for those who want a completely different lens than they can get from a kit option or who already have lenses from previous compatible cameras)... you can find stores that will sell bundles. The general guidance is to avoid those "bundles".

The bundles throw in all kinds of garbage quality extras in order to make it seem like a better deal than it really is. They might, for example, tell you that you're getting three lenses in the bundle. in reality you find out they only included 1 true camera lens, plus 2 screw-on adapters that thread onto the front of the lens to adapt the focal length -- but the quality of these things are horrible. They might throw in a tripod, but the tripod is usually extremely poor quality. Usually if you had the opportunity to inspect each of the items in the "bundle" you would pass on them.

The camera from Canon and Nikon will, when purchased with a "kit" lens (usually that will be an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom... which is mild wide-angle to mild-telephoto but nothing huge) and everything you need to start shooting (battery & battery charger, etc.) EXCEPT for the memory card (you will need to get one of those, but they tend to be inexpensive.) It will not include any kind of case or bag.

As for lenses... two things spring to mind. While most people consider wanting a telephoto zoom, I find a low focal ratio lens to be a bit more useful for anyone who likes to shoot in low light. A low focal ratio means that the diameter of the lens divides into the focal length of the lens fewer times... in other words, the lens physically has a very wide aperture opening and that means it lets in a lot of light when the shutter is open. Translation: you get to shoot in lower light.

The other very popular option are the consumer grade entry-level zooms... usually 55-200mm or 55-250mm. Canon's "STM" version (STM = Stepper Motor) version of the 55-250mm. It's about $50 more than the non-STM version of the same lens, but much nicer. The lens is optically a bit better than it's predecessor, but it has internal focus (lens does not rotate as it focuses which is actually a big deal if you thread on a polarizing filter because the amount of polarizing depends on how you rotate the filter) and of course the STM motors are faster and quieter than the standard motors.

Nikon and Canon flashes are going to look very similar and there are 3rd party companies who make compatible flashes but I wouldn't buy a flash on day 1. Both Canon and Nikon have semi-automatic flash systems ... Nikon calls their system "iTTL" and Canon calls their system "E-TTL" (now "E-TTL II" but they usually leave the "II" off.)

Throw in a copy of the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson.

 

[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.

A brand-new 70-300mm f/4.5~5.6 AF-S VR-G would be the strongest telephoto option for under $1,699 for this type of camera, and the warranty is long on new Nikkors. About $325 Used from KEH.com http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NA079990884470?r=FE

As to the fixed 35 or 50 as opposed to the 18-55mm zoom. NO. No way. She'll NEED the shorter 18mm to 34mm zoom range alllllll the time. The 18-55 has become *the* standard zoom from all the camera makers for a definite reason: 35mm is far too long for use indoors, and outdoors, when any kind of a wider-view shot is needed.

Between the two primes, the 35mm f/1.8 DX at $199, and the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G at $196 under the new rebate plan, the 50mm lens is by far the better quality lens, and is full-frame compatible, and has better pure image quality, and it serves as a short, but very fast-aperture lens for gathering a lot of light under poor lighting conditions. It is the kind of lens to buy, and use for 15,20 years, whereas the 35mm f/1.8 DX (the DX model, not the brand-new 35 1.8 for full-frame) is a very average lens, designed years ago as an econo-lens. I think the 50/1.8 G is worth the money.

The 70-300 is $389 new with dslr purchase so probably would do that vs used. It would be new and the warranty with it (do the used lenses from KEH usually have the same warranty or soemthing prorated?).

She will be shooting in low light often and that's one reason why I thought of the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G. Also, the superior image quality. Another reason is that I have read in more than one article that the 18-55 did not present a great image quality. Is there more than one 18-55 that might be a better choice than the kit zoom? Yet she does like to shoot flowers, etc fairly close up. Still not sure, as such, where to go with this one. Also, regarding the 35mm, I saw a video somewhere that mentioned it would yield the better blurred background image vs 50mm for a more realistic image result. Does that make sense?

 

[Derrel]

ALL manufacturers have standardized on a "slow" 18-55mm f/3.5~5.6 variable aperture lens to keep size, weight, and cost down. There are NO high-speed 18-55mm kit zooms designed to shoot well in dim light. Late last year Sigma began delivering an 18-35mm f/1.8 constant aperture zoom lens, which is a REMARKABLE, and UNIQUE ultra-high-speed zoom designed specifically for dimmer light AND giving the needed 18-35mm range that is so commonly needed indoors with a crop-frame body.

35mm/1.8 vs 50mm/1.8, with the 35mm giving more background blurring? I can think of a way to manufacture a very specific, rather 'rigged', unrealistic scenario where I could set an artificial requirement of say, needing to get a half-body shot of a person from VERY close-up, with a backdrop very far away, where the 35mm would show a bit more background blurring than a 50mm used from commensurately farther back...but in general, NO, the 50mm will typically show more background blurring AND with a better character to it. The 35/1.8 DX is kind of a crappy lens in terms of its drawing style and its bokeh, and it has a lot of purple fringing, and is, in my opinion, one of **the weakest** prime lenses Nikon has released in 30 years. It is however, the darling of the, "I just bought my first-ever prime lens,and it is awesome! So I made a video of it!" set on YouTube. It's a crappy 35mm lens design. The 50 1.8 G is a solid design, BETTER than its predecessors; the 35 1.8 DX is WORSE THAN basically any 35mm Nikkor Nikon has ever made...

I have no idea where you are getting information from, but the 18-55 kit zooms are all basically "acceptable"> if you want to buy her a better lens, spend more money and get the 16-85mm DX, or spring for a $999 17-55mm f/2.8 DX Nikkor, or look into a Sigma or Tamron in the 16-50mm f/2.8 or 17-50mm f/2.8 for another $300-$350 more than the $109 kit 18-55mm lens.

 

[Raj_55555]

I am a little rushed and didn't read most of the responses, so sorry if someone else suggested this already. If I was to choose between D5200 vs D5300, I would go with D5200 and save the money for a better lens. 70-300 VR is a very very good lens. A combo of D5200 (body only), 70-300VR and 50mm 1.8G would be an awesome gift.

Keep in mind the crop factor of 1.5 times, meaning the lenses would give 1.5 times more reach which can be a desirable feature. Of course if she's into landscapes, you may need to consider different lenses.

 

[StratLou]

ALL manufacturers have standardized on a "slow" 18-55mm f/3.5~5.6 variable aperture lens to keep size, weight, and cost down. There are NO high-speed 18-55mm kit zooms designed to shoot well in dim light. Late last year Sigma began delivering an 18-35mm f/1.8 constant aperture zoom lens, which is a REMARKABLE, and UNIQUE ultra-high-speed zoom designed specifically for dimmer light AND giving the needed 18-35mm range that is so commonly needed indoors with a crop-frame body.

35mm/1.8 vs 50mm/1.8, with the 35mm giving more background blurring? I can think of a way to manufacture a very specific, rather 'rigged', unrealistic scenario where I could set an artificial requirement of say, needing to get a half-body shot of a person from VERY close-up, with a backdrop very far away, where the 35mm would show a bit more background blurring than a 50mm used from commensurately farther back...but in general, NO, the 50mm will typically show more background blurring AND with a better character to it. The 35/1.8 DX is kind of a crappy lens in terms of its drawing style and its bokeh, and it has a lot of purple fringing, and is, in my opinion, one of **the weakest** prime lenses Nikon has released in 30 years. It is however, the darling of the, "I just bought my first-ever prime lens,and it is awesome! So I made a video of it!" set on YouTube. It's a crappy 35mm lens design. The 50 1.8 G is a solid design, BETTER than its predecessors; the 35 1.8 DX is WORSE THAN basically any 35mm Nikkor Nikon has ever made...

I have no idea where you are getting information from, but the 18-55 kit zooms are all basically "acceptable"> if you want to buy her a better lens, spend more money and get the 16-85mm DX, or spring for a $999 17-55mm f/2.8 DX Nikkor, or look into a Sigma or Tamron in the 16-50mm f/2.8 or 17-50mm f/2.8 for another $300-$350 more than the $109 kit 18-55mm lens.

As we've progressed in this thread, I am realizing more and more that I will probably wind up taking her in to the camera shop and letting her decide on much of it as, due to all the info, I have become better educated but still can't know exactly what she'll be interested in most for features, lens, etc. It's been so very helpful, though, to have all this info as now I can advise her a little when we get there, at least.
Here is where I saw the info about the 35mm lens blurring and also about the 18-55mm. Was just watching a few videos on Youtube and found i. The link is here and the info is between 3:38 and 4:22. Curious to see what you think:

The upgraded lenses you mention would be nice, but may not be in the budget this time around.

 

[robbins.photo]

Nothing wrong with starting with just the kit lens and figuring out where to go from there - when I first got started I purchased a D5100, an 18-55 kit lens and added a 70-300 mm VR AF-S G. Both lenses were great, eventually after shooting for a while I realized I needed better low light abilities and wound up getting the 50 mm AF-S G 1.8 and a 70-200 mm F/2.8. After I purchased these lenses I really wasn't getting much use out of the other two and wound up selling both of them rather than have them just sitting in my bag.

But not everyone is going to need a 70-200 mm F/2.8, some folks might actually be better served by the 70-300 mm VR, etc - so no harm in starting with a basic kit and then using it to determine what your needs are and what you'd really like to have for lenses after that.

 

[Derrel]

He seems enamored of the 35mm f/1.8 DX Nikkor. YES, it's a fast-aperture, f/1.8 prime lens. I have no idea what this man is talking about that the D5200 and 18-55 is crap, and the D5300 is remarkably better...

As to the 18-140mm "kit zoom" the D5300 appeared with, yes, that was an approach Nikon took at first, to offer a brand-new camera ONLY WITH a new high-priced lens...it's called boosting profits. It helped Nikon dealers sell higher-priced kits, equipped with a better lens. As far as the 18-55mm kit zoom being bad...hey...they all have limitations. The 18-55mm kit zooms from Nikon and Canon are the 4-cylinder, no-carpet, vinyl seats, no radio lenses...

The idea of blurred backgrounds...it's a lot like being able to ride a bicycle with no hands on the handlebars. In some circles, that carries a lot of weight.

Again.....the 18-55 kit zooms are,indeed, pedestrian, yet competent as far as they go. They keep the price LOW, which seems to be what most people buy based on. Nikon makes two, $199 primes, a 35/1.8 DX, and a 50mm 1/8 AF-S G which is not a DX lens, but a really GOOD 50mm...Canon makes a $h!+ 50/1.8 that sells for like $109 and is dreadful...Canon has a touch screen which is nifty...Nikon has a better sensor and better flash metering and great dynamic range and good color. The Canon has a sensor designed in 2008, and first used in 2009, and has been used in all Canon small body cams for the last 5 models since 2009....the D5300 has a BRAND-NEW, state of the art, class-leading 24 megapixel Nikon-made sensor (not Sony,not Toshiba,not Aptina) and a new image processor, Expeed 4. Take your pick at the store. Either camera will be fine for a beginning shooter. That's all I have to say. Go to the store. Let her pick one. She'll probably prefer the Canon since it has a touch screen behind its outdated,recycled sensor and it looks cute. That's how Canon has stayed in the sales lead for so long. Cosmetics and the touch screen interface is cute.

 

[StratLou]

He seems enamored of the 35mm f/1.8 DX Nikkor. YES, it's a fast-aperture, f/1.8 prime lens. I have no idea what this man is talking about that the D5200 and 18-55 is crap, and the D5300 is remarkably better...

As to the 18-140mm "kit zoom" the D5300 appeared with, yes, that was an approach Nikon took at first, to offer a brand-new camera ONLY WITH a new high-priced lens...it's called boosting profits. It helped Nikon dealers sell higher-priced kits, equipped with a better lens. As far as the 18-55mm kit zoom being bad...hey...they all have limitations. The 18-55mm kit zooms from Nikon and Canon are the 4-cylinder, no-carpet, vinyl seats, no radio lenses...

The idea of blurred backgrounds...it's a lot like being able to ride a bicycle with no hands on the handlebars. In some circles, that carries a lot of weight.

Again.....the 18-55 kit zooms are,indeed, pedestrian, yet competent as far as they go. They keep the price LOW, which seems to be what most people buy based on. Nikon makes two, $199 primes, a 35/1.8 DX, and a 50mm 1/8 AF-S G which is not a DX lens, but a really GOOD 50mm...Canon makes a $h!+ 50/1.8 that sells for like $109 and is dreadful...Canon has a touch screen which is nifty...Nikon has a better sensor and better flash metering and great dynamic range and good color. The Canon has a sensor designed in 2008, and first used in 2009, and has been used in all Canon small body cams for the last 5 models since 2009....the D5300 has a BRAND-NEW, state of the art, class-leading 24 megapixel Nikon-made sensor (not Sony,not Toshiba,not Aptina) and a new image processor, Expeed 4. Take your pick at the store. Either camera will be fine for a beginning shooter. That's all I have to say. Go to the store. Let her pick one. She'll probably prefer the Canon since it has a touch screen behind its outdated,recycled sensor and it looks cute. That's how Canon has stayed in the sales lead for so long. Cosmetics and the touch screen interface is cute.

I'll let you know what she winds up going with. Thanks for all the info (from everyone).

 

[StratLou]

Hey guys,

If she were to lean more towards the t5i, which zoom would be most comparable to the Nikon 70-300 VRII?

 

[PropilotBW]

In response to the 35mm versus the 50mm question. I chose the 35mm 1.8 because with the 1.5x crop factor on the D5300, it will not be as ideal for inside-your-house type of shots. The 35mm 1.8 is a little wider angled and has allowed me to take photos of my kids birthday parties, Christmas mornings, thanksgiving group shots, etc without unintentionally cropping out family members. There's only so far you can back up inside of a room to get the shot.
May be something to consider.

 

[StratLou]

Well, many thanks to all for the many comments and advice in the camera decision. Couldn't have done it without you guys. She actually had a desire for the T3i as we walked into my friend's camera store (just to say hello as we were "in the neighborhood" for a birthday lunch). She smiled and asked if we could get a T3i while we were there (she's been hinting for a camera for months). I told her we weren't there to get a T3i....but were there for either a T5i or D5300...happy birthday! She was shocked and after saying "No, that's too much", I told her she should do it right from the beginning so she could get more years of use from the camera and technology (some wise folk mentioned that to me ;-). Fortunately the rebates helped a little and I'll just eat one or two less meals a day for awhile to make it work.

So, she finally decided on the........D5300 with the kit lens (my friend at the store said she'd need that more than a prime lens for right now, as you guys mentioned), and the 70-300 VR (which she could probably own forever). A 32 gb card, a Nikon camera bag (a previous promo leftover that came with a dvd on starting photography with the camera but I think it was for the 3200 or 5200 in that it said she'd need to get a WiFi adapter!), and a Tiffen UV filter for each lens, She's been snapping away, reading the owner's manual (good kid), getting frustrated, having fun, the works. Sounds like a great match. Surprisingly, she didn't have any desire for the touch screen feature of the T5i! She said she'd been used to the functions of her previous Nikon coolpix so it was fine (wonder how she'll feel when she finds out about the in-and-out of the menu she'll need to perform regarding the AF vs the Canon where you just touch the screen on the area you want to focus on). But she did like the bigger heavier body of the Canon more where I thought she'd like smaller and lighter with the Nikon (she appreciated the Nikon's weight a little more when she added the 70-300 to the body. It's not much weight savings but every little bit helps with an anchor around your neck). Also, funny that she felt the Nikon, where you have to push buttons, would be more "professional" than the Canon touch screen and that's probably what pros use. Kids often surprise you with what they'll say, don't they.

She's been struggling in getting the WiFi to work with her iphone since she hasn't gotten to that part of the manual yet. She added the app to her phone and set the camera to connect but it didn't happen. Sometimes there's no easier way than reading the manual.

Anyway, thanks again and will probably ask for some assistance if she (we) hit any roadblocks.

 

[RocketCowboy]

Good deal! It sounds like she'll be encouraged and challenged for at least a little while with the new setup, and inspired to do some great work. Can't wait to see some of the shots she comes up with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[robbins.photo]

Glad to hear she likes the new camera. If the wifi works the same as the adapter for the 5200 does then have her open the wifi settings on her iPhone while the camera is on and close by, if the cameras wifi is enabled the iPhone will see it as an available wireless network. If she connects to that network the iphone will "see" the camera

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

 

[StratLou]

Glad to hear she likes the new camera. If the wifi works the same as the adapter for the 5200 does then have her open the wifi settings on her iPhone while the camera is on and close by, if the cameras wifi is enabled the iPhone will see it as an available wireless network. If she connects to that network the iphone will "see" the camera

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

Perfect. That's exactly what she did....after she read the owner's manual section about it. She doesn't mind reading if it's something she's interested in. To conserve battery life, does she need to disconnect from wifi when done? If she doesn't, will it keep connected and thus drain the battery? Does turning the camera off then on again d/c the wifi connection? Thanks.