Photography people, where do I find information about digital SLR cameras

[CanaryMelody]

I'm not a photography expert (just a enthusiastic amateur) but wanted to share how I just wrestled with this decision.

 

I went to Best Buy and was pretty set on getting the D3100. The reason I choose it over the D3200 was because of the high megapixels on the 3200. I don't print anything larger than a 11x14 and don't need high MP. There are many many articles explaining the "Megapixel Myth". I'd rather spend the money on lens instead of MP that I won't be using.

 

Out-of-the-box with a 50mm f/1.8 lens, it had soft images and my photos were extremely "cool" and needed a lot of tweaking in Photoshop to warm them up. I read many threads on Flickr, thephotoforum, dpreview, nikonites, and other forums about the soft image "issue". Users tend to really tweak their in-camera settings a lot or were spending a lot of time editing in Photoshop. I don't know. I just wasn't all that impressed, TBH.

 

I also wanted faster frames-per-second (fps) and shutter lag speeds as well as a camera that I wouldn't outgrow anytime soon. The average serious amateur seemed to outgrow the D3100 within a year or so. I ended up returning it under BestBuy's 30-day return policy.

 

I skipped the D5100 because I felt I'd probably outgrow it quickly as well, and because of its slower fps.

 

My decision was then Nikon D7000 or Canon 7D? I liked that the Canon was much much faster (both fps as well as shutter lag) and had a bigger buffer than the D7000. For photographing my kids in dance, gymnastics, and horse back riding, this was a definite plus for me. Birders and sports photographers tend to use Canon. But the D7000 held the clear edge toward ISO/low-light capabilities and larger color depth. Since I photograph a lot inside and like doing a lot of macro work, this made the decision even harder.

 

I went to a local camera store (where the cameras were not tethered down like at BestBuy) and held both. They each had a kit lens on, and I was able to shoot pictures within the store. To be honest, I **really** liked the Canon better (man it was FAST!) but it was so much bigger and heavier in my hands. I didn't like where the buttons were placed because it meant my hand had to literally move to reach those buttons. My hands are on the small side, and the Nikon D7000 fit better in them. The Nikon menu seemed easier to navigate (more intuitive) and the buttons seemed better positioned for my fingers. It was hard decision, though. If the Canon would have fit better in my hands, I probably would have gone that route (for the speed).

 

I ended up with the Nikon D7000 with kit lens 18-105mm and 35mm f/1.8 to start. (I really splurged!!) I have had it for about a week and a half now, and so far I really like it. Not soft straight out-of-the-box like the D3100 was. Nice color, nice straight-out-of-camera (SOOC) photos before even tweaking in-camera settings or using Photoshop. Still undecided if this camera is "fast enough" for my needs but it certainly is faster than anything I have had before!

 

This post is turning out longer than I intended. lol Honestly, for your decision, if you are limited with money:

 

I'd pick the D3100 with kit (18-105mm) over the D3200 because of the MP and save that $100 towards a 35mm or 50mm prime lens or an extra battery or speedflash or extra memory cards.

 

Between the D3100 and D5100, I'd go with the D5100 for the slighter faster fps (D3100 3fps vs D5100 4 fps), better sensor, and better ISO (D3100 3200 ISO vs D5100 6400 ISO).

 

If you wanted to go with a classic work horse and can spend a bit more (but not as much as the D7000), look for a D90. It is the predecessor to the D7000. Though it is 4 years old, it has remained a best seller for a reason: it is a high quality camera. You won't get super high MP (12.2mp) or great video, but you'll get faster fps (4.5) and a solid camera. I've seen D90s go on Craigslist for around $650 for body with kit. B&H has a nice used one for around $819 with kit lens. Just throwing another option out there.

 

Note: You'll need the AF-S version of the primes which run $220 at BestBuy since both the D3100/D3200 and D5100 do not have an internal focusing motor. The D90 has an internal focusing motor, so you can use any non-AF-S lens. The non-AF-S primes run $110.

 

Posters on all of the camera forums always say to go and hold the cameras before deciding and I would have to agree. It makes a huge difference just between brands (Nikon vs Canon vs Olympus etc) and models within a brand (D3100 vs D5100 vs D7000 etc). See which one feels better in hand. Which one seems more intuitive?

 

A camera that doesn't feel right is a camera that won't be used regardless of how fancy it is. ;)

 

HTH! Have fun choosing! :D

[PeterPan]

I'm not a photography expert (just a enthusiastic amateur) but wanted to share how I just wrestled with this decision.

 

I went to Best Buy and was pretty set on getting the D3100. The reason I choose it over the D3200 was because of the high megapixels on the 3200. I don't print anything larger than a 11x14 and don't need high MP. There are many many articles explaining the "Megapixel Myth". I'd rather spend the money on lens instead of MP that I won't be using.

 

Out-of-the-box with a 50mm f/1.8 lens, it had soft images and my photos were extremely "cool" and needed a lot of tweaking in Photoshop to warm them up. I read many threads on Flickr, thephotoforum, dpreview, nikonites, and other forums about the soft image "issue". Users tend to really tweak their in-camera settings a lot or were spending a lot of time editing in Photoshop. I don't know. I just wasn't all that impressed, TBH.

 

I also wanted faster frames-per-second (fps) and shutter lag speeds as well as a camera that I wouldn't outgrow anytime soon. The average serious amateur seemed to outgrow the D3100 within a year or so. I ended up returning it under BestBuy's 30-day return policy.

 

I skipped the D5100 because I felt I'd probably outgrow it quickly as well, and because of its slower fps.

 

My decision was then Nikon D7000 or Canon 7D? I liked that the Canon was much much faster (both fps as well as shutter lag) and had a bigger buffer than the D7000. For photographing my kids in dance, gymnastics, and horse back riding, this was a definite plus for me. Birders and sports photographers tend to use Canon. But the D7000 held the clear edge toward ISO/low-light capabilities and larger color depth. Since I photograph a lot inside and like doing a lot of macro work, this made the decision even harder.

 

I went to a local camera store (where the cameras were not tethered down like at BestBuy) and held both. They each had a kit lens on, and I was able to shoot pictures within the store. To be honest, I **really** liked the Canon better (man it was FAST!) but it was so much bigger and heavier in my hands. I didn't like where the buttons were placed because it meant my hand had to literally move to reach those buttons. My hands are on the small side, and the Nikon D7000 fit better in them. The Nikon menu seemed easier to navigate (more intuitive) and the buttons seemed better positioned for my fingers. It was hard decision, though. If the Canon would have fit better in my hands, I probably would have gone that route (for the speed).

 

I ended up with the Nikon D7000 with kit lens 18-105mm and 35mm f/1.8 to start. (I really splurged!!) I have had it for about a week and a half now, and so far I really like it. Not soft straight out-of-the-box like the D3100 was. Nice color, nice straight-out-of-camera (SOOC) photos before even tweaking in-camera settings or using Photoshop. Still undecided if this camera is "fast enough" for my needs but it certainly is faster than anything I have had before!

 

This post is turning out longer than I intended. lol Honestly, for your decision, if you are limited with money:

 

I'd pick the D3100 with kit (18-105mm) over the D3200 because of the MP and save that $100 towards a 35mm or 50mm prime lens or an extra battery or speedflash or extra memory cards.

 

Between the D3100 and D5100, I'd go with the D5100 for the slighter faster fps (D3100 3fps vs D5100 4 fps), better sensor, and better ISO (D3100 3200 ISO vs D5100 6400 ISO).

 

If you wanted to go with a classic work horse and can spend a bit more (but not as much as the D7000), look for a D90. It is the predecessor to the D7000. Though it is 4 years old, it has remained a best seller for a reason: it is a high quality camera. You won't get super high MP (12.2mp) or great video, but you'll get faster fps (4.5) and a solid camera. I've seen D90s go on Craigslist for around $650 for body with kit. B&H has a nice used one for around $819 with kit lens. Just throwing another option out there.

 

Note: You'll need the AF-S version of the primes which run $220 at BestBuy since both the D3100/D3200 and D5100 do not have an internal focusing motor. The D90 has an internal focusing motor, so you can use any non-AF-S lens. The non-AF-S primes run $110.

 

Posters on all of the camera forums always say to go and hold the cameras before deciding and I would have to agree. It makes a huge difference just between brands (Nikon vs Canon vs Olympus etc) and models within a brand (D3100 vs D5100 vs D7000 etc). See which one feels better in hand. Which one seems more intuitive?

 

A camera that doesn't feel right is a camera that won't be used regardless of how fancy it is. ;)

 

HTH! Have fun choosing! :D

 

That's a good summary! Glad you're enjoying your d7000! And yes, that was how I chose between the d7000 and the 7D. I *loved* the way the 7D felt in my hands, but I wasn't willing to put up with the extra bulk if I wasn't getting full frame.

 

As far as editing, have you tried Lightroom yet? It's non-destructive and really whizbang fast when all you're doing is the basics. It's the big kid brother to ACR (which comes with your PS and what some people use). The controls are the same, but LR just does more. And with the r-clicks in LR you can go seamlessly back and forth to PS. LR also has great cataloging. LR4 has tone curves. There *is* stuff that's better in PS (burn, dodge, skin touch, cloning), but a lot can be done (and more easily) in LR. But it's just a thought. Everyone has what they adhere to.

 

If you haven't been to Creative Live yet, definitely head over there. Their classes are free and rebroadcast all evening, meaning you can stay up and watch them after the kiddos go to sleep. Jared Platt's class was amazing, and Lesa Snyder was superb. Snyder is author of CS6 the Missing Manual. They usually do deals during the CL workshops. CS6 Missing Manual was half price during Lesa Snyder's workshops, and Jared Platt put his presets half price. And they often run a sale on the other workshops by the person, putting them back at the day of broadcast price. Snyder was a phenomenal teacher, and her style is just like her book, very clear and humorous. :)

 

Well cool, you made a good choice with your d7000. I took a lot of classes the first part of this year at Clickinmoms, and I really grew to love my camera. It's just a beast, a workhorse. The d50 I had before (antique, ancient, hehe) was so tricky even to get to focus. The d7000 just WORKS. It gets out of the way and lets you get on to making good images.

[Stayseeliz]

I hope to upgrade to the d7000 at some point. The d5100 has been awesome for my first DSLR though.

[CanaryMelody]

As far as editing, have you tried Lightroom yet? It's non-destructive and really whizbang fast when all you're doing is the basics. It's the big kid brother to ACR (which comes with your PS and what some people use). The controls are the same, but LR just does more. And with the r-clicks in LR you can go seamlessly back and forth to PS. LR also has great cataloging. LR4 has tone curves. There *is* stuff that's better in PS (burn, dodge, skin touch, cloning), but a lot can be done (and more easily) in LR. But it's just a thought. Everyone has what they adhere to.

 

I have actually migrated several years ago from GIMP to Photoshop CS4. Talk about doing something more easily! lol But With GIMP, a person can do pretty much everything they can do in PS, so it is an option for someone with zero dollars to spend. There are some differences between the two, primarily with the color depth and extra bells and whistles. But for being free, GIMP is a very viable option to PS. :D

 

I actually have been entertaining adding Lightroom for ease and because PS4 does not support NEF files.

 

If you haven't been to Creative Live yet, definitely head over there. Their classes are free and rebroadcast all evening, meaning you can stay up and watch them after the kiddos go to sleep. Jared Platt's class was amazing, and Lesa Snyder was superb. Snyder is author of CS6 the Missing Manual. They usually do deals during the CL workshops. CS6 Missing Manual was half price during Lesa Snyder's workshops, and Jared Platt put his presets half price. And they often run a sale on the other workshops by the person, putting them back at the day of broadcast price. Snyder was a phenomenal teacher, and her style is just like her book, very clear and humorous. :)

 

I haven't taken a Creative Live class yet. Been so busy but it is something I would like to do.

 

Well cool, you made a good choice with your d7000. I took a lot of classes the first part of this year at Clickinmoms, and I really grew to love my camera. It's just a beast, a workhorse. The d50 I had before (antique, ancient, hehe) was so tricky even to get to focus. The d7000 just WORKS. It gets out of the way and lets you get on to making good images.

 

:iagree: That's what I found between the the D3100 and D7000. :)