I love my Nikon 5100. The 3100 is more entry-level. You probably don't need the 7xxx and it's expensive.
Printable View
I love my Nikon 5100. The 3100 is more entry-level. You probably don't need the 7xxx and it's expensive.
One thing I forgot. Check out the reviews of both camera bodies and lenses at http://www.dpreview.com/. You can learn alot about what to look for by reading their reviews and you'll have a better idea what you're trading off when you go with various lenses. Remember that 50mm or 55mm are rough equivalents to human eyeball perspective in full-frame cameras -- cameras using the smaller sensors have an expansion factor so you'll really want a 35mm lens to get the same effect with the smaller sensor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by One Shot
Yup, Image Stabilization... for people that want to look like some fancy photographer with a big camera but don't have the skill to use it.
To grossly generalize, a non-IS lens will be optically sharper than an IS lens with all else being equal. If the shutter speed is so slow as to cry out for IS, you should potentially be reaching for a tripod.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcantar18c
I run a Rebel XTi and a 7D, both of which are Canon crop bodies. The newer Rebels pack a lot of features that were considered high end just a few years back. If you are unsure of how much you want to get into this, that would be my recommendation.
Bodies are expensive and don't retain much value over the years. Quality lenses are even more expensive, but retain value quite a bit. If you decided you didn't care for the hobby, you could get more of your money back with a cheap body and high end lenses then the other way around.
A lot of my gun peers who got into photography the same time I did went with Nikon. In general, Nikon bodies seem to have more features than the comparable Canon body, and the lenses are somewhat cheaper. Canon has a rep for quality glass (L series).
If you like photography, be prepared to spend far, far more in gear than your camera costs. I have a top-of-the-line ballhead* (mounts camera to tripod) that is $550, and requires a corresponding bracket which added another $125 to each camera I use it with. I have a cheap tripod at $180, with the lighter, stronger, and more compact ones going for $600+. Couple that with the cost of lenses commonly north of $1K, and hundreds of dollars in filters, remote timers, flash brackets, etc..., and it is more expensive than NFA.
I really like this stuff, and I put time and money into it. I bought books, attended classes, take photography tours, and belong to photography forums. I enjoy spending an hour at the computer processing shots of my kids, etc... But it's time consuming and a lot of stuff to lug around. Since I often want to be part of family events instead of just documenting them, I mostly use a Canon S95, which is a high-end point and shoot with full manual control and takes photos in RAW format. It does 90% of what my DSLRs do, and fits in my pocket. When I do quick-and-dirty faux product photography for the internet, it is usually what I reach for as well.
*My entry level tripod can do this:
http://www.johnnyego.com/photography...55PROBX_02.JPG
Which is useful for low angle work like getting reflections:
http://www.johnnyego.com/photography/yosemite/ys013.jpg
This is one of the reasons DSLR tripods are so much more expensive then video tripods.
Nikon 5000 here. Got a good deal on a refurb body from B&H Camera. Like it a lot. I am no pro but take a lot of pics. Most of the time the camera is traveling. Very little studio (garage) time. A Nikon 70-300mm VR is probably the most used lens (4'-infinity).
Check out Nikon lens compatibility. The lower end cameras do not have onboard motors, so older lenses will only work manually.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/
http://www.kenrockwell.com/index.htm
Why try and scare someone with equipment-geek-speak who said they have a max budget of $700?!Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyEgo
Great, you have a pricey tripod, costly software to edit/tweek the photos, lenses "North of $1K", and it's more expensive than NFA. Does that really sound like it's making the hobby appealing to someone that wants an entry level rig in the $700 range?!
It's precisely this type of drivel that makes online photo forums such chest-thumping contests, it serves nobody other than the person listing off all their gear. Sad, and patently amateurish.
Awesome reading and solid recommendations here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/index.htm
I run a Nikon body and only two lenses. An 18-200 f/3.5 zoom VR and an 80-400 f/4.5 zoom VR. The 18-240 stays on the camera 95% of the time and is an awesome walk around lens. The 80-400 is the slower, cheaper model, but good for long static shots or slow moving game. I'd like a wide prime (fixed focal length) but it's not a priority.
I started with a kit, bought better glass over time, and sold off the kit lenses for what they cost (if purchased separately.)
I'll come back later with some recommendations, but in the meantime, if you're thinking of ordering online, here's an excellent thread on how not to get ripped off from another forum.
And for your entertainment, here are some storefronts that you'll be dealing with if you merely go for the best price.
O2
Ps. Reader's Digest version: Buy from B&H or Adorama.
I am sorry I have offended your sensibilities. If you have some knowledge of photography, you know my gear is decidedly not top end and a little older. I provided the advice and expectations I wished I had when I started down this road. I went into a camera store with $600 and told them I wanted a high end camera. My perceptions were quickly reframed. I want for the OP what I wanted for myself; to make an informed decision on purchasing an expensive item to meet my needs.Quote:
Originally Posted by hatidua
I understand that you believe my post to be 'chest-thumping'. My perspective is that for the most part, a lot of people offer opinions with no basis in fact or experience. I value information more when the source appears to have it. It is why I try to provide some credential to what I say.
I think you want to find offense in my post. Per the OP's request, I provided a recommendation (current body Rebel), observations on competing products, and an alternative suggestion for the more common use (S-95, which is under $500, does 90% of what a DSLR does, and is pocketable). Since the OP wants to take outside shots with his DSLR, I provided a post showing what a photography tripod does, and pictures of why that matters. Aside from some sort of internet dick measuring, what knowledge did your post contribute to this thread?
To the OP: If I have offended or intimidated you in making a camera purchase, I apologize.