Nikon Kit

[pimane]

Hi,

I'm going DSLR and thought buying the Nikon D5100.
After reading some posts and reviews I noticed that the kit lens, AF-S 18-55 VR, isn't so bad.
I thought of adding the AF-S 55-200 VR DX to the pack, since it's quite cheap (155€) and complements the 18-55.
But after some further reading and thinking I came across some questions:
1. Is the option, the 2 lens, a good choice, mainly the 55-200 lens?
2. I can get the body with a 18-105 VR DX lens cheaper than with the 2 lens. Is this a better option? (I don't need to change the lens every time I want to take a portrait picture or a long range one... but I read this lens isn't very good...)
3. I want the camera, essentially to take picture to my kids (at the beach, at home, school parties - some with low light) and eventually some landscape and sports pictures (my daughter play volleyball and soccer). Nothing pro, just home use.. Initially I thought of buying the D3100 but the difference between the two cameras is just 80€..
4. I also thought buying the Canon 550D but I went to a store and the ergonomic felt better on the nikon... I have small hands .
Should I go for the D5100 with the 2 lens kit or the 18-105 lens, or the D3100 and go for a better lens like the 18-200?

Thanks in advance,
Pedro

 

[xj0hnx]

I'd imagine the 18-105mm is as good as the 18-55/55-200. With the 18-105mm you're sacrificing some range for the convenience of a single lens, so if that's worth it to you than it might be a better choice, IMO I'd go with the 18-55/55-200.

 

[Solarflare]

Cant tell you what you are supposed to do:

Nikkor AF-S DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR - Review / Test Report
Nikkor AF-S DX 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR - Review / Test Report
Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR II - Review / Test Report

Basically, the more range a zoom has, the more sacrifices you make in picture quality. Which should of course not be much of a surprise. Then again the sacrifice is probably more tolerable than these tests make it sound.

 

[pimane]

For close ups is the AF-S 35mm a good lens? The AF 50mm is almost half the price but I doesn't have autofocus and since I'm a beginner I'd better stick to the AF-S lens...

 

[xj0hnx]

For close ups is the AF-S 35mm a good lens? The AF 50mm is almost half the price but I doesn't have autofocus and since I'm a beginner I'd better stick to the AF-S lens...

You'd be surprised how fast you can get passed auto focus if you're forced to practice.

 

[Designer]

For close ups is the AF-S 35mm a good lens? The AF 50mm is almost half the price but I doesn't have autofocus and since I'm a beginner I'd better stick to the AF-S lens...

The kit that you are considering is nearly the same kit that I bought, with the exception that mine is the D5000. It came with both lenses, a small bag, and a cheap tripod. I think both lenses are acceptable for the average hobbyist, and I think you will enjoy your kit.

As to the 35mm for closeups, it is considered a "normal" focal length on this camera, that is approximately what you would see with your own eyes. For portraiture however, a somewhat longer lens usually yields a better photo due to less edge distortion. Most portraiture is done using lenses from 85mm to 105mm focal length. Therefore, the longer zoom (55-200mm) is the one to use.

Later, if you wish to jump into the hobby with both feet, you can purchase "faster" lenses, of nearly any configuration you want.

 

[pimane]

Is there any macro lens with VR?! The 105 has VR but it's very expensive... I need VR cause my hands seem like an earthquake... I shake a lot..

 

[Solarflare]

Nikon calls Macro "micro".

There is also a 85mm Macro VR lens: Micro Nikkor AF-S DX 85mm f/3.5 G ED VR - Review / Test Report

 

[pimane]

have to wait for Christmas for this one ...
on close ups does VR make a difference? on a 35mm or 50mm lens. it's mostly for portraits (my kids) indoor so probably won't be able to increase the shutter speed so it won't notice the "hand shake..".

 

[pimane]

just another "big" question, if anyone can help me.... what's the main differences between the D5100 and the Canon 600D?
Movie quality and image quality?! I saw a review and the menus on the Canon are more friendly, but the sensor on the nikon is slightly bigger...
and .. is it worth thinking on the D3200? is it much better than the D5100? the price difference is 100€...

 

[Blairg]

I am new also I just purchased a Nikon D5100 from bestbuy (a package deal)I love let me go back the first one I bought was the Nikon D3100 and it was very easy to operate it has a help dial.I just wanted the movable screen and a little better camera.

 

[Ernicus]

Hi,

I'm going DSLR and thought buying the Nikon D5100.
After reading some posts and reviews I noticed that the kit lens, AF-S 18-55 VR, isn't so bad.
I thought of adding the AF-S 55-200 VR DX to the pack, since it's quite cheap (155€) and complements the 18-55.
But after some further reading and thinking I came across some questions:
1. Is the option, the 2 lens, a good choice, mainly the 55-200 lens?
2. I can get the body with a 18-105 VR DX lens cheaper than with the 2 lens. Is this a better option? (I don't need to change the lens every time I want to take a portrait picture or a long range one... but I read this lens isn't very good...)
3. I want the camera, essentially to take picture to my kids (at the beach, at home, school parties - some with low light) and eventually some landscape and sports pictures (my daughter play volleyball and soccer). Nothing pro, just home use.. Initially I thought of buying the D3100 but the difference between the two cameras is just 80€..
4. I also thought buying the Canon 550D but I went to a store and the ergonomic felt better on the nikon... I have small hands .
Should I go for the D5100 with the 2 lens kit or the 18-105 lens, or the D3100 and go for a better lens like the 18-200?

Thanks in advance,
Pedro

If money isn't an issue, then I'd say get both. If you're trying to save on wasted spending. I'd stick with the kit lens. Main reason is because you need to learn how to use the camera. While doing that, you'll learn what you want and don't want out of a lens, then you can make an educated purchase. The included lens will work for you just fine, it's a very decent beginner lens. I have the kit lens still on my D3100. I now know after a few months of having it, what I need in future lenses. Had I bought some at purchase time, I know for a fact I would have made two wasteful purchases.

I can say one thing though, you mentioned using it for kids/sports. If sitting in bleachers, and even on sidelines at times, if you are hoping to zoom in...forget about it, especially from the bleachers. It only gets 3x zoom, which won't get you close ups if that is what you are wanting.

My recommendation, being a new owner for a while now...stick with kit, use it, learn it, see how much you will actually use it; then decide what lens will be best for your application of your camera in your photography.

 

[pimane]

Hi, found quite a bargain on the net... the D5100 + 18-55 + 55-200 only 589€... (quite cheap for europe...)
but there's only BIG problem... no VR lens, just DX lens.. the 18-55 wouldn't be a problem but I'm afraid that with my shaky hands I wouldn't be able to use the 55-200 without VR.
so it would actually be money thrown away.. since the D5100 + 18-55 VR kit costs 550€..
anyone has a 18-55 and 55-200 without VR? how do they perform? I read a post about the 55-200 lens that says it's quite good (for it's value) but without the VR it can be difficult to use without a tripod. as for the 18-55 the VR isn't so important but it's better with it.

regards,
Pedro

 

[jrizal]

Can you only get the kit alone? On second thought, people used to shoot manually (no AF, VR, etc.) and photos came out fine. Also, the Canon 75-300mm without IS is still a cheap and popular lens oft bundled. So it may not be a waste of money at all.

BTW, the 18-200mm may be convenient but it is heavy (not really a problem) and costs more than my D3100 with 18-55mm kit lens and 55-200mm zoom.

 

[pimane]

the weight it's a problem, since the machine is also for my wife to use.. she's used to our old Nikon F60 with a 28-80mm lens, which is quite light.
the problem with the 55-200 without VR is that in "full" zoom any kind of movement will probably blur the image... with VR that doesn't happen..
the D5100 + 18-55 + 55-200 no VR is 586€, with 18-55 no VR + 55-200 VR is 749€, with both lens VR is 799€..
but I can get the D5100 + 18-55 VR for 570€ and the 55-200VR for 155€.. it's cheaper and I don't need to buy both lens now..
but for more 16€ I can get the kit with both non VR lens.... it's a difficult decision..

also a new "baby" just came to town.... the D3200 with 18-55 VR lens cost only 10€ more than the D5100... is it worth the change? I definitely won't use the 24Mpx.