why is people hating on the D3000

[schumionbike]

I recently shot a friend wedding (it was either me or p&s pictures from friend type of siutaion). Anyways, shot it on Auto ISO, work pretty well I say.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/professional-gallery/192869-winter-wedding.html

 

[SrBiscuit]

i didnt read all responses (bad, i know.)

they hate on it for the same reasons people hated on the D40...and look where that still stands on the big old nikon graph.

 

[Dominantly]

I think that's a bad idea because you are using a CCD sensor, and you are limited in ISO if you expect your images to come out with as little noise as possible. You're giving the camera the ability to introduce noise instead of setting up the camera to get the best shots possible with the lowest ISO possible.

I still don't understand. For a certain situatiion, I know what kind of shutter speed and aperture I want to shoot at, I'll let my camera determine wahat ISO I'll need to expose that picture correctly. That's all. For example if I'm shooting at night, I'll put the lowest aperture and and whatever shutterspeed I need to freeze actions or what not and let my camera determine whatever ISO I need to expose my picture at whatever exposure compensation I set at. Yes, for the auto ISO purpose, you can set the exposure compensation in manual mode. If I decide that I don't don't need a high shutterspeed, then my camera would know that and not turn the ISO up so high. I think it's a very useful tool. Putting something on apeture prioirty or shutter priority is in my opinion could lead up too much more volatile result as shutterspeed and aperture have much more of an effect on the photo then ISO would .

Like I say, the Auto ISO function let you tailor the exposure of different photos while still keep what ever shutter speed and aperture that you have already set. Of course you can go around shooting manual but at times that's just not practical. Beside, auto ISO let give you option to shoot at ISO in between stop that's not otherwise possible on the D40. I have seen prints from 1600 ISO file from the D40 and as long the exposure is correct, the prints are beautiful. If you pixel peep, well, I still think 1600 ISO is okay, nothing too bad.

It's awesome you're trying to explain the concept of adjusting your settings to me, but I assure you I understand the concept.
If you are happy with the results of shooting your D40 at ISO 1600, or close to it, then so be it. If it was me I would keep that ISO as close to the bottom as possible, but to each their own.

I would recommend investing in some noise reduction software.

 

[hightower]

One other camera to consider would be the d40. It has excellent low light capability (less megapixels crammed into the sensor).

The D40 is a nice little camera and has some points in it's favor, like the flash sync speed, but to say it has excellent low light capability is just not true.

The D40 (561) and the D3000 (563) have essentially the same low light capability, but the D3000 has 40% more pixels which means bigger print sizes and a larger range of cropping opportunities.

Sorry I should have chosen my words more carefully. Maybe it does not have excellent low light capability and yes the ISO sensitivities of the two cameras are about the same but the d40 has less noise than the d3000 when comparing technical image quality of photographs taken at the higher ISO levels...If you look at the Signal to Noise ratio the d3000 has as much noise at ISO 100 as the d40 does at ISO 200, as much noise at ISO 200 as the d40 does at ISO 400 and so on...click on the SNR 18% tab...the SNR of the d40 is as good as the d5000...

http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/%28appareil1%29/229|0/%28appareil2%29/331|0/%28appareil3%29/320|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28brand3%29/Nikon

So when it comes down to it you can shoot at higher ISO with the d40 with less noise than you can with the d3000

Nikon D3000 High ISO Comparison

 

[schumionbike]

I think that's a bad idea because you are using a CCD sensor, and you are limited in ISO if you expect your images to come out with as little noise as possible. You're giving the camera the ability to introduce noise instead of setting up the camera to get the best shots possible with the lowest ISO possible.

I still don't understand. For a certain situatiion, I know what kind of shutter speed and aperture I want to shoot at, I'll let my camera determine wahat ISO I'll need to expose that picture correctly. That's all. For example if I'm shooting at night, I'll put the lowest aperture and and whatever shutterspeed I need to freeze actions or what not and let my camera determine whatever ISO I need to expose my picture at whatever exposure compensation I set at. Yes, for the auto ISO purpose, you can set the exposure compensation in manual mode. If I decide that I don't don't need a high shutterspeed, then my camera would know that and not turn the ISO up so high. I think it's a very useful tool. Putting something on apeture prioirty or shutter priority is in my opinion could lead up too much more volatile result as shutterspeed and aperture have much more of an effect on the photo then ISO would .

Like I say, the Auto ISO function let you tailor the exposure of different photos while still keep what ever shutter speed and aperture that you have already set. Of course you can go around shooting manual but at times that's just not practical. Beside, auto ISO let give you option to shoot at ISO in between stop that's not otherwise possible on the D40. I have seen prints from 1600 ISO file from the D40 and as long the exposure is correct, the prints are beautiful. If you pixel peep, well, I still think 1600 ISO is okay, nothing too bad.

It's awesome you're trying to explain the concept of adjusting your settings to me, but I assure you I understand the concept.
If you are happy with the results of shooting your D40 at ISO 1600, or close to it, then so be it. If it was me I would keep that ISO as close to the bottom as possible, but to each their own.

I would recommend investing in some noise reduction software.

yeah, I look at your works and I was like why is he so suprise. And you're not the only one that tried to keep the ISO down, the camera does too

 

[littlemissSissy]

Thank you all for your advice...lol the thing that made me lean more toward to the d5000 is video mode and shooting pics in the screen. Maybe one day i'll have kids or want to shoot special events in video mode. I went to best buy and test both out and i feel for the money i want to get the d5000. i just do not want to upgrade later lol, but yall i can tell i have alot to learn about it and the one i'm getting comes with a dvd instruction guide lol. and i know i can learn a crazy amount on this forum. lol yall seem to know what your talking about. I'm still pretty young and just got out of college so i think i'm capable of learning a this camera. I'm happy i picked this as my new hobby!!!

 

[hightower]

I went to best buy and test both out and i feel for the money i want to get the d5000.

If you want a killer deal buy it here...

INKD5000RD Nikon D5000 DX-Format 12.3 Megapixel Digital SLR Camera Kit - Refurbished - by Nikon U.S.A. with Nikon 18mm - 55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX (VR) Vibration Reduction Wide Angle Autofocus Zoom Lens, - Refurbished - by Nikon U.S.A.

Its refurbished (nothing to worry about in and of itself) but just buy a $40 extended warranty and you are covered for two years (longer than Nikon's 1 year warranty on new cameras).

 

[rlcphotos]

what do yal think i should buy for my 1st camera the d3000 or d40x or d5000 (rather not spend that kind of money thou - D5000)

lol,, think Canon, Canon

 

[KmH]

Can-none........I....just....can't....get.....past.....that....association....:lmao:

Ni-can That clicks for me. :thumbup:

 

[357mag]

Why do people hate? Because they're dicks. And misguided. How can a $500.00 camera by one of the worlds best camera manufacturers be crappy? It's got an excellent image sensor the CCD type which is proven when image quality is paramount. There is so much bull**** on internet forums. And then they try to talk you into a more expensive D3100 or something. Why should someone pay $100.00 extra to get a camera that has features like live view or the capability to shoot HD Video when he could care less about those features?

Image quality is the most important thing and the D3000 delivers. More expensive cameras don't give sharper photos. They just have more features so they will cost more.

Some of the posts I've read on this forum slandering the D3000 are ridiculous and unwarranted. Even from a common sense standpoint they sound absurd.

 

[Stradawhovious]

Arise my thread......... ARISE!!!!

Wake from the dead, and join the children of the night!

 

[kundalini]

Welcome to TPF and thanks for pulling up a thread that has been idle for 14 months old just to rant. :roll:

 

[Dominantly]

Image quality is more important than composition/subject?

I have been reviewing some photos taken during the civil war, and while the quality is not the best, the subjects and composition make them very powerful. Might just be me though

 

[KmH]

Why do people hate? Because they're dicks. And misguided. How can a $500.00 camera by one of the worlds best camera manufacturers be crappy? It's got an excellent image sensor the CCD type which is proven when image quality is paramount. There is so much bull**** on internet forums. And then they try to talk you into a more expensive D3100 or something. Why should someone pay $100.00 extra to get a camera that has features like live view or the capability to shoot HD Video when he could care less about those features?

Image quality is the most important thing and the D3000 delivers. More expensive cameras don't give sharper photos. They just have more features so they will cost more.

Some of the posts I've read on this forum slandering the D3000 are ridiculous and unwarranted. Even from a common sense standpoint they sound absurd.

Since you brought up people being dicks!

Why didn't you just start your own thread instead of digging up one over a year old so you could post spew on page 4? :lmao:

 

[357mag]

Didn't make sense to start a new thread just to get some things off my chest concerning a specific camera. The thread I responded to was the subject matter at hand.