DSLR Recommendation

[Aloha_Shooter]

Sounds like I have alot to learn, not sure the difference between a non IS lens and an IS lens. I'll have to do some reading and some more research. I'm thinking that's Image Stabilizing?

I'm thinking the smaller Rebel T3i would be a good starter since its smaller(wife might appreciate that too) and to get some of the basics down and then I can always sell it and get a different body or upgrade at another time. I'm wanting something that will do HD video as well. I just dont want to limit myself and wish I would of gotten something alittle better.

I've gotten some good responses from everyone, I appreciate the input from everyone!

IS is Image Stabilization. I think Nikon calls it VR (Vibration Reduction). Other manufacturers have different names for it but the bottom line is some in-line image correction in the lens to correct for jerkiness in holding the camera. One thing I forgot -- learn to hold your camera like a rifle -- support the lens with your off-hand since it usually weighs more than the camera body these days. Then all you have to worry about is your trigger finger on the button. ;-)

[hatidua]

Try to get into it without getting suckered into buying the "kit" lens - all of which are junk. A lens, which has a range of 17-55 or 55-300, is like buying a rifle that claims to shoot both .22LR and .338LM down the same barrel...it's not going to do either one very well. There is no such thing, in photography, firearms, or anything else, in which one single piece of gear does all things well. There never has been, there never will be.

While not a popular suggestion nowadays, I'd strongly suggest buying one single focal length lens and actually learning how to shoot that one lens. Start with a 50mm 1.8, they are inexpensive and you can actually learn about depth of field, how different shutter speeds can be utilized to convey what you are after, Etc. Handing a couple of top cameras and a half dozen lenses to someone that doesn't really know what they are doing is not going to serve any purpose whatsoever.

Don't get caught up in the Nikon vs Canon debate, in 2012, it no longer matters. One of those two adopted FF sensors first but your budget isn't going to access those sensors anyhow so it's a non-issue. It's the Indian, not the arrow.

[brutal]

Try to get into it without getting suckered into buying the "kit" lens - all of which are junk. A lens, which has a range of 17-55 or 55-300, is like buying a rifle that claims to shoot both .22LR and .338LM down the same barrel...it's not going to do either one very well. There is no such thing, in photography, firearms, or anything else, in which one single piece of gear does all things well. There never has been, there never will be.

While not a popular suggestion nowadays, I'd strongly suggest buying one single focal length lens and actually learning how to shoot that one lens. Start with a 50mm 1.8, they are inexpensive and you can actually learn about depth of field, how different shutter speeds can be utilized to convey what you are after, Etc. Handing a couple of top cameras and a half dozen lenses to someone that doesn't really know what they are doing is not going to serve any purpose whatsoever.

Don't get caught up in the Nikon vs Canon debate, in 2012, it no longer matters. One of those two adopted FF sensors first but your budget isn't going to access those sensors anyhow so it's a non-issue. It's the Indian, not the arrow.

Not necessarily. The Nikon 18-55 "kit" lens is a shockingly good starter package $100 lens.

This is a great starter package including the D5100 and this lens. http://www.adorama.com/INKD5100KC.html