Question for you camera guys

[Volzfan]

I am looking to get back into photography, just as a hobby. Back in the early 80's I bought a Nikon FM 35mm and really enjoyed it but for some unknown reason I stopped. I still have that camera and a 200mm zoom lense that I guess I'll be lucky to get $100 for on ebay.

Now I want to get a good digital SLR and I saw these at Sam's yesterday.

http://www.samsclub.com/sams/shop/product.jsp?productId=prod4210102&navAction=push

What do you think about this set? How easy is it to learn and operate? I sold a Sig that had been residing in my safe to fund this purchase.

They also have a Canon that's about $150 less. Would it be just as good as the Nikon set for an amateur? Please address the same questions for this one.

http://www.samsclub.com/sams/shop/product.jsp?productId=prod2720095&navAction=push

Is there anything else that I would need to know or consider before buying one of these or something completely different. Any input will be appreciated and considered while coming to my decision on my new camera.

Thanks!

TGO members are the best!

[C.lunn]

If you stick with canon or nikon you won't go wrong with either of their beginner dslrs. Go and hold both and decide on which feels better. The specs on both aren't going to be to different.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

[Guest bkelm18]

Both cameras will serve you well. I am more of a Canon type guy so I would definitely go for the Canon. That's good price for everything that you get with it. Digital SLR's can be as easy or as difficult to operate as you want them to be. There are several automatic modes that require little input from you or there are several manual modes where you can customize anything you want pretty much.

Edited April 4, 2012 by bkelm18

[Steelharp]

You're a Nikon guy. That Nikon set will be like getting back on a bike. It'll feel natural to you. And that's a pretty good range in the two lenses, from 18 to 200. They're not fast glass; that's expensive. And, the lens you have will mount to it. It won't do the auto stuff, but it will work.

[gjohnsoniv]

I'm a Nikon guy and that's the way I would go. Go feel both though and see what feels better.

[quietguy]

You're a Nikon guy. That Nikon set will be like getting back on a bike. It'll feel natural to you. And that's a pretty good range in the two lenses, from 18 to 200. They're not fast glass; that's expensive. And, the lens you have will mount to it. It won't do the auto stuff, but it will work.

Normally, I would agree, but there a lot of difference in the ergonomics and feature placement from a FM to the new bodies. I would try both and see which feels better, and which controls are easier to reach. Since your in Nashville, I would try Dury's (on Ewing Ave), or maybe the Wolf on West End (which used to be their pro store, but I haven't been in there in years). They should have most of the models available for you to try out.

I would rule out Sony either. They are the old Minolta product line.

[reed1285]

I have a canon rebel that i really like alot, it does everything I need and then some, while still being a good entry level, easy to use camera.

[MattCary]

If you're in Nashville, +1 on going to Dury's. They will be able to walk you through what you want and put the best model in your hands for what you want.

Also, don't write off that old Nikon glass as worthless, some of the most valuable nikon lenses are the old ones they don't make anymore.

I believe the 5100 only works with AF-S lenses (lenses that have motors built in for autofocus.) You may be better served (depending on how serious you ultimately want to be with photography) to consider a used D90 which works with all Nikon lenses made after 1977, and is a higher grade body with more features than the 5100.

If you really think you'll want to stick with it and get the most out of your new camera body, I would suggest you take a look at the new D7000. It's about $300 more than what you've linked, but it's widely considered to be the best all around camera body Nikon has made to date.

It's basically a professional grade camera body at a prosumer price point. It would likely prove to be more camera than you'd ever need, and would hold a much higher resale value in the future vs the D5100 which is a consumer grade body.

Regardless, enjoy your renewed interest in photography.

[Jasongar8]

I bought the Nikon D5000 last summer and love it. I still haven't figured everything out on it yet, but the pictures I take look good to me.

[peejman]

I'm a Canon guy, but there's really not that much difference. A friend who's a much better photographer than I, put it this way.... Nikon makes better cameras, Canon makes better lenses.

I'd stay away from the package deals. They look like a great savings right up until you realize the lenses are crap. There's just no substitute for good glass.

Keep an eye on B&H Photo's used equipment store. Good deals appear from time to time. You should be able to pick up a body and much better lenses for about the same price as that package. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/browse/Digital-Photography/ci/6387/N/4294246666

[Steelharp]

I'd stay away from the package deals. They look like a great savings right up until you realize the lenses are crap. There's just no substitute for good glass.

Agreed, but define the parameters of "crap." Are you talking about the quality of the glass itself, and the image it produces, or the 5.6 speed instead of a very nice (and very expensive) 1.8?

[Guest jkintn]

I agree with the posts above about handling both Nikons and Canons to see what fits your hand. I bought a DSLR a few years ago. Specs were basically the same so I went with ergonomics/feel in my hand. The Nikon won out but again it was purely based on personal feel. I have the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses. It came with the 18-55 and I bought the 55-200. The zoom was the low end model (about $200). I don't like carrying a big camera bag with me and often find myself wanting both lenses. And even if I have both with me, it can be a pain to change them out. I really want a good 18-200 to cover the spectrum. A good lens in that range seems to be about $800. Not ready to jump on that just yet.

[Steelharp]

A good lens in that range seems to be about $800. Not ready to jump on that just yet.

Yeah, that's hard to justify, in other than a serious photog's world. That's why I think $1500 1911's are crazy...

[Guest bkelm18]

I'd stay away from the package deals. They look like a great savings right up until you realize the lenses are crap.

I'll disagree with that. For the casual amateur photographer, the "budget" lenses are more than capable of producing excellent imagery, and for most people that's all they'll ever need. Someone who isn't really into serious photography doesn't need to buy a $1500 lens when the kit lens will do just as good. Good glass doesn't make a good photographer.

[10-Ring]

I have a Nikon D40 that knock around with and throw in the bag for some sort of event of what not. It's small and sufficient for most things. Then I have a Canon Mark III that I use to make a living and use for situations the D40 can't handle. Now, comparing the two, besides the fact that the Canon is a serious professional camera, the interface on the Canon is MUCH easier to learn. I still find myself stumbling around trying to figure out settings on the Nikon. I've shot with a friends Rebel, which is very similar to my Nikon and thought that the Rebel was more user friendly. It's whatever you get used to but I prefer Canon.

I will agree for sure that glass is very important. I wish I could find a good lends that worked for me for $800 but it ain't gonna happen. As an experiment I recently used a Sigma 70-200 2.8 lens then used a Canon 70-200 2.8, I was culling about 3 times as many shots with the Sigma lens. Keep in mind though that the Canon lens costs $2500. It doesn't make sense for most people to drop that kind of money on a lens, but there is a difference for sure.

If I personally wanted to get into photography right now at the OPs price range I would be looking for a good used Canon 1D Mark IIn, you can pick them up for under $1000 and they are more than sufficient for an amateur photographer.

[peejman]

Agreed, but define the parameters of "crap." Are you talking about the quality of the glass itself, and the image it produces, or the 5.6 speed instead of a very nice (and very expensive) 1.8?

Both speed and quality of the glass itself. I bought a Canon Rebel DSLR for work which came with the kit 18-55 lens. I bought the 60mm macro lens at the same time as that's mostly what I do... take pictures of small stuff. I really never used the kit lens until a couple months ago when I needed to take pics of a big machine. I put the kit lens on and took pics. When I looked at them on my PC, they were horrible... grainy, fuzzy, ... just bad. I retook the same pics with the 60mm lens and the difference in quality was staggering.

I'll disagree with that. For the casual amateur photographer, the "budget" lenses are more than capable of producing excellent imagery, and for most people that's all they'll ever need. Someone who isn't really into serious photography doesn't need to buy a $1500 lens when the kit lens will do just as good. Good glass doesn't make a good photographer.

I'm not talking about the $1500 lenses, nor even the $800 ones. You can get very good, general purpose lenses for $300-$500...

This body.... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800850449-USE/Canon_2756B001_EOS_Rebel_XSi_Digital.html

plus this lens... http://www.bhphotovi...f_4_5_6_IS.html

and this lens... http://www.bhphotovi...3_5_5_6_IS.html

is a little more than the kit and you'll have much better equipment.

Edited April 5, 2012 by peejman

[Guest alloyguitar]

I have a d70s/d80/and just got the d5100. I've also shot with d50's, d2x, pentax *ist DS, 5d's, and other digitals, as well as medium format film, etc.

Out of the two you posted, I'd go nikon. It's 16mp, versus the 12mp of the canon, plus, with the hd video support, the swiveling screen of the 5100 is incredibly handy. Plus it WILL work with your older len(es), if you find the need, but the autofocus won't work. I regularly shoot with a 50mm f1.8 from the 70's or so with it, and, since it has such a narrow depth of field, I use the live view feature (where you can see what you're shooting on the back screen, much like a point and shoot) to focus, since it's a lot easier to see on the screen. Also, the resolution of the screen is incredibly compared to the one on my d80. It really is a nice camera....

....BUT, that being said, compared to a heavier, weather sealed frame with a battery grip that I'm used to, the d5100 feels almost toy like. I'll be adding a battery grip in the near future, though, to combat that. Also, the d5100 doesn't have a full manual mode for the video, which is a bit of a pain. There are things you can do to change settings on it, but not a 100% full manual mode.

When it comes to user interface, I've shot canon, nikon, pentax, etc, and they're all pretty much the same once you get used to them. Once you figure the one you have out, it's no big deal.

All in all I'm very happy with it, and I shoot quite a bit. If you'd like to see some of the photos I've shot with it, as well as my d80, I have a flickr account here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/speedgood/sets/

I should also add that some of my most memorable/published photos are with lenses that a "professional photographer" would find horrifying. Old lenses from the 70's, some off brands and such. Some ripped off other cameras and modified to fit my bodies. Some medium format lenses (bronica etr and such). Expensive glass is good, and I own some, but isn't the whole equation.

Hope that helps.

[gjohnsoniv]

Cameras are like rifles. Cheap to buy the rifle, but the glass will get ya. Also finger control.

[East_TN_Patriot]

We owned a Canon Digital Rebel and sold it to buy a Nikon D5000. I personally preferred the Canon because I thought it was easier to use, but my wife prefers the the Nikon, so that's what we went with (because we all know how that works). Neither one really performs better than the other overall. It's like comparing a Springfield 1911 to a Kimber 1911. Like others have said, you really can't go wrong either way. Just pick the one you like.