Point n Shoot to First DSLR

[sashbar]

What about the Image quality difference between D3100 and D5100?

I also like D5100 but I have a one question why not to go for D3100? ... I like to shoot pure photos and HDRs.

D5100 has in-built HDR. D3100 does not have it as far as I remember.

this is the choice of

built-in HDR, slightly better high ISO performance, dynamic range, ISO boost, true resolution, color depth and better screen of D5100 VS 55-105 additional zoom range of 18-105.

I never had D3100 or 18-105, but from what I have read, I can guess that D5100+18-55 IQ will be slightly better in this range than D3100 + 18-105.
How much is the difference I do not know. I can only tell that 18-55 is very good, and IQ with D5100+ 18-55 is ridiculously good for the money.

 

[apvm]

Off topic but I am amazed with my D3100 performance after I switched to a Tamron 17-50 2.8 from the kit 18-55

 

[spmakwana]

D7000 is awesome DSLR but it is way out of my budget and I can't afford it.

Definitely the d3100 with better glass then since it seems you're not going to be pumping money into new lenses anytime soon

I meant, I will not spend any money on lens for about minimum 1 year, Then I can buy some lens after saving some money.
So now what you suggest? still D3100? or D5100?

 

[spmakwana]

Off topic but I am amazed with my D3100 performance after I switched to a Tamron 17-50 2.8 from the kit 18-55

Can you tell in detail? You means 18-55mm lens is not good or what?
I don't think Tamron 17-50mm can be batter from Nikon 18-55mm

 

[DGMPhotography]

Can you tell in detail? You means 18-55mm lens is not good or what?
I don't think Tamron 17-50mm can be batter from Nikon 18-55mm

Well the f/stop can go lower with the Tamron so you get better low light sensitivity, and can get a shallower depth of field. But if you're willing to spend money on a lens in a year, I would definitely recommend getting the Nikon D5100. It's the better camera, and a year should just about be enough time to learn how to use it anyway.

 

[apvm]

Off topic but I am amazed with my D3100 performance after I switched to a Tamron 17-50 2.8 from the kit 18-55

Can you tell in detail? You means 18-55mm lens is not good or what?
I don't think Tamron 17-50mm can be batter from Nikon 18-55mm

Don't get me wrong, the Nikon Kit 18-55 is a very good lens for the money but both the Tamron and Sigma 17-50 are better lens since lenses are not made the same.

I came from a Point and shoot as well, the Fuji S2950, I bought my used D3100 with 18-55 kit earlier this year and is very happy, switched to the Tamron 17-50 and is even happier, (I wanted the Sigma 17-50 but budget does not allow).

Your option 1 is your best bet especially if have a limited budget. Invest in better lens is long term while the D5100 is only slightly better than the D3100 in terms of PQ. If you have to get a better body, save up for the D7000 instead.

IMO, DSLR bodies are like computers' cpu, there is always something better around the corner while Lens is a different story.

 

[CaptainNapalm]

D7000 is awesome DSLR but it is way out of my budget and I can't afford it.

Definitely the d3100 with better glass then since it seems you're not going to be pumping money into new lenses anytime soon

I meant, I will not spend any money on lens for about minimum 1 year, Then I can buy some lens after saving some money.
So now what you suggest? still D3100? or D5100?

yup. d3100 with the more versatile 18-105 lens.