Trying to decide on a starter Nikon DSLR

[behirab]

Thanks for your input. I still haven't made up my mind. I'm pricing various combinations of cameras and lenses from various sellers to see what I can get and feel comfortable with. Today I was looking at prime lenses and speed and thinking about bokeh. I need to go to a shop where I can put my hands on them and look through them. I'm not really in a hurry to buy, and the longer I wait the more I can save...and spend. My P500 is out of the shop now so I have a toy I can play with in the meantime which has a ridiculous 36x zoom.

 

[behirab]

Here's what Thom Hogan said about the D5100 and D7000:
In terms of basic image quality, the D5100 and D7000 are the same: they use
the same sensor. But one difference occurs in raw files, where the D7000
keeps all the data and the D5100 throws away highlight data.
Something to keep in mind.

 

[ShaunMK]

If you are looking for "bang for the buck", the Nikon 18-55 vr and 55-200 vr are probably your best values.

I purchased these two refurbished (pristine) lenses on eBay for $90 and $124 respectively. Ecstatic with the performance and capabilities of each. Both are sharp, contrasts lenses. The vibration reduction feature is awesome. The 18-105 is a little soft at higher focal lengths.

Down the road consider a 50mm f1.8 for low light and portraiture. This goes for about $120 new. The f1.4 lens is three to four times as expensive. I own one, like it very much, but would not pay that much more if I had to do it over.

Purchased a D7000 a week ago today. Best camera I've owned in 30 years of being a photo enthusiast. It handles like a dream. It has all the features you would want when you explore the what a camera can do.

 

[behirab]

That sounds great. What camera did you have before the D7000?

 

[ShaunMK]

I started with a Nikon F2 in '76. A Nikon N6006 in the 90's. An N90 shortly after. A D200 - this one was stolen out of my luggage three months ago (never carry a camera in checked luggage - no one covers the loss except you). A loaner D300. Great camera, but the D7000 spoiled me. I was very close to purchasing the D300, but I'm very happy I went with the 7000. It performs better, costs less and has a sensor that is nothing less than amazing. The 5100 has the same sensor, but fewer features than the 7000.

 

[behirab]

Sorry to hear about the loss of your camera. That's a real bummer! Glad you could replace it with a model you like so well.

I thought about the D7000 today when I saw one in use at an event. The owner had only had it a week and he was still getting to know about it. His previous camera was a D90. The D7000 is faster he said. I guess that should be no surprise, but it immediately made me want a D7000. I was trying to see what kind of a lens he had, it wasn't a monster. Did it say 70-200? Maybe 70-300? He didn't seem to want to talk very much, so I didn't ask. Still, as I looked at the not quite in focus photos I got of my dogs herding some sheep with my P500, I was a little envious. Also, I forgot to put the memory card back in it when I got it back from the repair shop, so I could only take a few shots. Humph.

Let's say I spent $1200 on a D7000. It has two slots for memory cards. What size memory cards would you get for it? I have a 4GB in my present camera. I don't take movies, so I wouldn't need a card for that. But let's talk about the D7000 and shooting in RAW, not a capability I have now. And that takes up more memory, so I would want to get plenty of memory, say at least 8GB? in case I want to shoot in RAW, and I need to figure this into the cost. The camera probably won't come with memory cards. Do people shoot everything in RAW to give you the most options or only when you know you're going to take a fabulous picture that you're going to want to blow up to 16x20 or more? ;-). Actually I don't want to do a lot of post processing, I want to learn to take really good pictures. In any case, I don't have Photoshop, only iPhoto, which is probably as fancy as I want to get right now.

So any advice about memory cards? And would a 50mm 1.8 lens allow me to get shots of my dogs with less blur?

 

[behirab]

There is a good comparison between the D5100, D7000, D3100 and D90 on amazon.com in the ratings and comments section by dojoklo. I don't think there is any way to search for dojoklo, but if you search for D5100, not the D5100 kit, you can find it.

 

[PJL]

Let's say I spent $1200 on a D7000. It has two slots for memory cards. What size memory cards would you get for it? I have a 4GB in my present camera. I don't take movies, so I wouldn't need a card for that. But let's talk about the D7000 and shooting in RAW, not a capability I have now. And that takes up more memory, so I would want to get plenty of memory, say at least 8GB? in case I want to shoot in RAW, and I need to figure this into the cost. The camera probably won't come with memory cards.

The camera won't come with a memory card. As far as how much you should get, from a basic search, I'm seeing that people are getting around 115 shots for every 4 GB in RAW in 14 bit on their D7000, so with an 8 GB card, you'll get about 230 14-bit RAW pictures. If you shoot maximum size jpeg, you're probably looking at almost 1,000 on an 8 GB card.

Do people shoot everything in RAW to give you the most options or only when you know you're going to take a fabulous picture that you're going to want to blow up to 16x20 or more? ;-). Actually I don't want to do a lot of post processing, I want to learn to take really good pictures. In any case, I don't have Photoshop, only iPhoto, which is probably as fancy as I want to get right now.

I personally shoot in jpeg most of the time because most of my pictures are of my son that I don't really do any post-processing of, and it's easiest to just transfer a jpeg from the memory card directly to a facebook page or a digital frame or send it to a family member. The greatest benefit of shooting in RAW is the ability to do post-processing without losing data -- every time you manipulate a jpeg you lose information. You also have greater ability to adjust white balance and other technical aspects of the photograph after the fact with RAW.

As far as print size, I've done beautiful 11x14s from a 10 MP point and shoot in jpeg. At 18 MP, you'll be able to do 16x20 in either fine jpeg or RAW without a problem.

So any advice about memory cards?

I shoot a Sandisk Extreme 4 GB in my 40D and I've been happy with it. Good transfer speeds with not too much lag with long bursts. If you don't plan on doing video, transfer speed isn't necessarily as important, so you should probably just get the most memory for your dollar. Basically, better transfer rates for just shooting photos means that it will take less time for a large burst of shots to transfer to your card, so your camera will be ready to take pictures again faster.

And would a 50mm 1.8 lens allow me to get shots of my dogs with less blur?

It will allow you to use faster shutter speeds in low light, yes, so that should result in less blur if you're shooting indoors or in low light without a flash.

 

[ladynikon]

Just thought I'd put my 2cents in since I just upgraded from a d90 to a d7000! The d7000 is an amazing camera!!! I can't say that enough! The iso performance alone was what sold me! With the d90 u can't get above iso 800 without getting terrible noise! With the d7000 I can shoot at 3200 with no problem at all!!! That combined with other features is worth spending the extra $$$. If I were you I would buy the body only and pick up either the 50mm 1.8 lens or the 35mm 1.8. You will not be disappointed!!!

 

[behirab]

In practice, what is the difference between shooting with a 35mm vs 50mm? I've also seen D7000s for sale packaged with 85mm lenses, and I've been wondering about prime lenses. My P500 doesn't have any markings, so I don't know how many mms I'm shooting at.

 

[ladynikon]

On the d7000 the 35mm becomes more of a 55mm and the 50 becomes a 75mm because of the cropped sensor. They are both great starter lenses the one you choose is really up to personal taste since the only difference is focal length they are both very sharp and will have you looking like a pro in no time!
I also saw the d7000 packaged with the 85mm lens but be careful because the 85 I saw it with was the 3.5 not the 1.4. Which I guess wouldn't be bad for a starter kit but if photography is something you are truly into then I guarantee u, u will out grow any lens thats not a at least a 2.8 very quickly!!!!! Saving up to buy that 1.4 will save u money down the road if you don't waste the money buying something ur going to want to replace a few months from now.
I have read that prime lenses tend to be sharper than zoom lenses because their is less elements and or glass to shoot threw. And also they make the best starter lenses because since they dont zoom it forces the photographer to move in and out and try different angles to get a good composition. I hope this was helpful!

 

[Kerbouchard]

Just thought I'd put my 2cents in since I just upgraded from a d90 to a d7000! The d7000 is an amazing camera!!! I can't say that enough! The iso performance alone was what sold me! With the d90 u can't get above iso 800 without getting terrible noise! With the d7000 I can shoot at 3200 with no problem at all!!! That combined with other features is worth spending the extra $$$. If I were you I would buy the body only and pick up either the 50mm 1.8 lens or the 35mm 1.8. You will not be disappointed!!!

I shoot with my D90 at ISO 2000 pretty often. If you care to look at some of the threads I started, you'll see shots at ISO 2000+ in fairly dim conditions. I won't push ISO 3200, but if you weren't comfortable going above 800 on the D90, I would say it was more of a technique issue than an equipment issue.

On the d7000 the 35mm becomes more of a 55mm and the 50 becomes a 75mm because of the cropped sensor. They are both great starter lenses the one you choose is really up to personal taste since the only difference is focal length they are both very sharp and will have you looking like a pro in no time!

Really? Is that all it takes?

I also saw the d7000 packaged with the 85mm lens but be careful because the 85 I saw it with was the 3.5 not the 1.4. Which I guess wouldn't be bad for a starter kit but if photography is something you are truly into then I guarantee u, u will out grow any lens thats not a at least a 2.8 very quickly!!!!! Saving up to buy that 1.4 will save u money down the road if you don't waste the money buying something ur going to want to replace a few months from now.

Nikon lenses hold their value pretty well and a used 85mm 1.8 would be more in line with a half decent suggestion. There is no way I would recommend an 85 1.4 as a first lens. For one, it takes very good technique to shoot at 1.4 and there just isn't any reason for any beginner who doesn't know what focal length they normally shoot at to buy such a lens.

I have read that prime lenses tend to be sharper than zoom lenses because their is less elements and or glass to shoot threw. And also they make the best starter lenses because since they dont zoom it forces the photographer to move in and out and try different angles to get a good composition. I hope this was helpful!

So, what else have you read?

You know what I have learned from experience, people should probably start out with a kit lens because it is the most economical and they can find where they want to further invest their money. Turns out, not everybody can just go pick up an 85 1.4 or the newest 2.8 lens. If they could, they probably wouldn't be weighing the options between a D5000 and a D7000. You know what else I have learned from experience? Not to trust anybody who claims that somebody should buy a camera and a lens that will have them 'looking like a pro in no time!' Experience has also taught me that pretty much anybody who is advising a new shooter on a budget of what gear to buy, wants to spend the very top end(or in this case much, much higher) of the OP's budget and doesn't mention reflectors, flashes, modifiers, tripods, or books probably doesn't know why those devices are valuable or why they should be part of the overall budget plan.

But then again, why would you care about any of those things? Heck, slap a 35mm 1.8 on a D7000 and you'll be shooting like a pro in no time... :roll:

 

[2WheelPhoto]

But then again, why would you care about any of those things? Heck, slap a 35mm 1.8 on a D7000 and you'll be shooting like a pro in no time... :roll:

Why didn't that work for me, I'm having to take classes!?

And the 35mm F1.8 G I used with my D7000, I sold it! Something about those pretty aberation colors that didn't agree with with me.

 

[Kerbouchard]

But then again, why would you care about any of those things? Heck, slap a 35mm 1.8 on a D7000 and you'll be shooting like a pro in no time... :roll:

Why didn't that work for me, I'm having to take classes!?

And the 35mm F1.8 G I used with my D7000, I sold it! Something about those pretty aberation colors that didn't agree with with me.

I guess you should have went with the 85mm 1.4. I hear it's a good lens to start with.

 

[ladynikon]

Wow! I'm terribly sorry to have offended you, who ever you are...

Of course it takes more than "slapping" on 35 1.8 to shoot like a pro. But I'm assuming that a person who wants to invest in a DSLR isnt just looking to buy the camera but to also LEARN HOW TO USE THAT CAMERA!!!! and after this person learns how to shoot, which isn't really all that complicated they are going to wish they had some good glass to go along with that camera! Whats so wrong with that??? If this person is interested in an 85 they shouldn't waste $500 on the 3.5 at least spend the extra $100 or so on the 1.8 but honestly in the long hall that 1.4 is worth EVERY PENNY! No experienced photographer would deny that! I do apologize to the op for suggesting such and expensive lens with out regard to your budget. But would also like to note that photography it self has no regard to budget!!!! Experience has taught me that I need to invest my money where it's going to last!!! Starting off with a kit lens is fine and dandy but good glass is more important starting out than getting bogged down with reflectors and other accessories. Bottom line, learn your camera get good glass and photography will pay for itself!