Educate me on starter DSLRs

[Homerboy]

I'm looking to pick up a DLSR for two primary uses:

Pictures for my wife's business (product shots)
Pictures of the family/vacations/adventures/sporting events etc etc. (I've sort of become the unofficial photographer of my son's baseball teams as well).

Right now I (think I) have my eyes set on either:

Nikon D3100
Nikon D5100
Canon Rebel T1i
Canon Rebel T2i

Ideally I will have two lenses: 18/55 and 55/200. (need the zoom for those baseball games)

Video is a decent concern. I know it's not a substitute for a stand alone video camera, but I like the concept of having it available on the fly.

I'm not looking to become a professional photographer here, but I'd like something that will do the job and do the job well (and easily while I learn). I will be using auto-focus I'm sure more often than not, at least until I can get more officially educated.

Can somebody tell me the major pros/cons of the models listed? Are the step-ups over kill? Will I notice and enjoy the differences? Price is a pretty solid concern, so I don't want to spend it if I don't have to, or won't even miss the extra features and improvements.

Anything you can help me out with will be appreciated.
Thanks in advance!

*** as a side note, I am more than willing to buy used (and will likely post in the FS/T forum) so if any one has something for sale, please let me know!

 

[shortylickens]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=3625

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=272333

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=45447

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=164255

 

[Homerboy]

I did review teh one link "Complete Camera Choosing Guide" which was helpful, but in the actual breakdown sections the new(er) Nikon 3100/5100 aren't discussed.

 

[Throckmorton]

If you get a Sony A35 or A55 you'll have sensor shift stabilization, which as far as I know the Canikons don't have.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

I'm looking to pick up a DLSR for two primary uses:

Pictures for my wife's business (product shots)
Pictures of the family/vacations/adventures/sporting events etc etc. (I've sort of become the unofficial photographer of my son's baseball teams as well).

Right now I (think I) have my eyes set on either:

Nikon D3100
Nikon D5100
Canon Rebel T1i
Canon Rebel T2i

Ideally I will have two lenses: 18/55 and 55/200. (need the zoom for those baseball games)

Video is a decent concern. I know it's not a substitute for a stand alone video camera, but I like the concept of having it available on the fly.

I'm not looking to become a professional photographer here, but I'd like something that will do the job and do the job well (and easily while I learn). I will be using auto-focus I'm sure more often than not, at least until I can get more officially educated.

Can somebody tell me the major pros/cons of the models listed? Are the step-ups over kill? Will I notice and enjoy the differences? Price is a pretty solid concern, so I don't want to spend it if I don't have to, or won't even miss the extra features and improvements.

Anything you can help me out with will be appreciated.
Thanks in advance!

*** as a side note, I am more than willing to buy used (and will likely post in the FS/T forum) so if any one has something for sale, please let me know!

Congrats on your decision to pick up a DSLR. All four are real gems.

There is, however, an image quality difference. The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000, and has the best image quality of all your choices. The D3100 is roughly equal to the T2i, and the T1i follows. (IQ results based on DxOMark - as reported by Snapsort).

Different features, of course, are more important to different people.

D5100 - Refurbished by Nikon (better than new) for $629.95 with 18-55 kit lens.
http://www.adorama.com/INKD5100KR.html

Nikon 55-200 kit lens, Refurbished by Nikon (better than new) for $149.95.
http://www.adorama.com/NK55200VRR.html

Ken Rockwell's review of the D5100, D3100, T1i and write up on the T2i. He loves all four cameras.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5100.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3100.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/t2i.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/rebel-t1i.htm

Here are some feature vs feature comparisons from Snapsort:

T2i VS D5100
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_Rebel_T2i-vs-Nikon-D5100

T1i VS D3100
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_Rebel_T1i-vs-Nikon_D3100

JR

EDIT: To explain why Refurbished by Nikon is better than new. All refurbished items will have been checked over by the manufacturer by hand, inspected very thoroughly, diagnosed, and calibrated by experienced technicians, and could therefore turn out to be more dependable than a new item - which will only have been checked by a process of systematic quality control protocol (ie by random sampling as it comes off the conveyor belt).

 

[Munky]

Either one of those is a good entry-level DSLR. Try them out at a store to see how they feel in hand, how the controls are arranged, how intuitive they are to operate. Also consider the prices and availability of the lenses for each system. I consider the D5100 having technical superiority over the others, but they are all close enough that you could be happy with either one, depending on personal preference.

 

[swanysto]

To be honest, I went with a Canon because of the forums. I don't know if I am allowed to link the site here(http://photography-on-the.net/forum/), but it is absolutely huge and everyone there is willing to help out and answer questions no matter how noob. They don't attack you either. There are tons of guides as well from equipment to post processing. There were some nice Nikon forums, but they did not seem as big or as friendly.

Plus the nikons are expensive now for what they are. If you are looking at a D5100, you can save about $50 and get the T3i which reviews a lot better than the D5100.

I went with the Canon T3 cause it is an inexpensive hobby for me. The shots are gorgeous, I really don't think you can tell a difference between it and a T3i unless you are printing posters. And the best shots came when I upgraded from the kit lens. It is almost night and day difference in some cases.

 

[twistedlogic]

Price is a pretty solid concern

Do you have a budget?

If sports is a major concern, I'd skip the 55-200 and start saving for a 70-200/80-200 2.8. Even if the 70-200 is too much, a 70-300 VR would focus much faster than the 55-200.

This is where the Canon would have an advantage, they offer a 70-200 F4, 70-200 F4 IS, 70-200 2.8, and a 70-200 2.8 IS.

 

[xchangx]

Be careful, photography isn't as easy as that what you seem to think. Especially sports, you find that with a kit lens, your images will be on par with a point and shoot.

It's an expensive hobby that I see a lot of people jump in to with that frame of mind.

With that said, most of the new cameras out there are about the same image wise. I would pick one up at the store and see which ones feel better in your hands. You are buying into a system of bodies and lenses as it is expensive to change once you obtain a lot of equipment.


If you are buying used, look at www.fredmiranda.com, they have a buy and sell section. I buy and sell there all the time.

 

[CuriousMike]

The 55-200 is fine for little league baseball games.
They're likely 60foot basepaths (6-12 year olds; juniors move up to 90 feet); you'll cover the infield fine.

These games aren't played at night, although they can run into dusk... at which point, crank your ISO up a few clicks and you'll maintain your shutter-speed.

If you want to pick your kid out in the outfield and not have to crop the bejesus, Nikon offers the 55-300 for not much more coin.

Video is a question I can't answer. Canon has historically been known for better video, but the D5100 purportedly does pretty good.

I've shot a lot of little league baseball; these are with my D5000 and the aforementioned 500-200.

 

[blastingcap]

If you get a Sony A35 or A55 you'll have sensor shift stabilization, which as far as I know the Canikons don't have.

IBIS not as good for video. Moving the sensor around generates heat closer to the sensor = more noise. Also IBIS is not as effective as OIS at longer focal lengths. On the plus side you only pay for IBIS once, and the lenses can be made a little smaller/lighter than if they had to incorporate OIS.

 

[RobDickinson]

Sony's SLT system throws away a third of the light before it gets to the sensor. all that just so it can focus as well as run the (battery draining) evf...

Theres other minor gotchas with the sonys too, there OK cameras but IMO more limited than the canikons.

But in general the low end SLR's are all pretty much the same.

 

[Throckmorton]

Sony's SLT system throws away a third of the light before it gets to the sensor. all that just so it can focus as well as run the (battery draining) evf...

Theres other minor gotchas with the sonys too, there OK cameras but IMO more limited than the canikons.

But in general the low end SLR's are all pretty much the same.

2/3 the light gets through yes, but you can use a slower shutter because of the stabilization.

 

[Throckmorton]

IBIS not as good for video. Moving the sensor around generates heat closer to the sensor = more noise. Also IBIS is not as effective as OIS at longer focal lengths. On the plus side you only pay for IBIS once, and the lenses can be made a little smaller/lighter than if they had to incorporate OIS.

I'm guessing you can set it to only move the sensor when you press the shutter. P&S and superzooms let you do that.

Interesting that it's not as good at longer focal lengths... Never thought of that before but yes the sensor has to move more.

 

[Homerboy]

Thanks for all the info guys.
From what I can decipher thus far, it sounds like if I am willing to spend some extra pesos, the D5100 may be the best bang for the buck? But when it comes down to it, I really can't go wrong with any of those 4 at this point? I've sort of weeded out the T1i I think.

I see sometimes newegg will have "refurbished" Canons or Nikons. Is that safe? Am I possibly better off just buying a body right now and lenses separate? I seem to see lenses for sale ALL the time on these forums...

As far as lenses and sports etc, yes this is just LL games (U10 right now) My son plays pitcher and first so I don't have to zoom too far to the outfield. But of course I want to snap shots of all the kids.

I used a relatively crappy Olympus DSLR last summer (in-laws) and while it worked, I could tell it just was not up to the task.

https://plus.google.com/photos/104349911794608818274/albums/5630083592161078129

https://plus.google.com/photos/104349911794608818274/albums/5623095053462764817
https://plus.google.com/photos/1043...s/5617482582546147425?authkey=CI-wqMqHmNDz3AE

 

[RobDickinson]

Lenses can come later, the standard 18-55ish kit lens is fine for normal use.

If you get a canon get the excellent 55-250IS.

 

[iGas]

All of those cameras are great starter cameras. However, I would lean toward Canon as said due to the 70-200mm offerings, which are great for outdoor sport photography.

Both the 70-200mm f/4 L & the IS are quick at focusing and are some what affordable.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=canon+70-200mm+f+4&x=0&y=0

 

[Throckmorton]

Thanks for all the info guys.
From what I can decipher thus far, it sounds like if I am willing to spend some extra pesos, the D5100 may be the best bang for the buck? But when it comes down to it, I really can't go wrong with any of those 4 at this point? I've sort of weeded out the T1i I think.

I see sometimes newegg will have "refurbished" Canons or Nikons. Is that safe? Am I possibly better off just buying a body right now and lenses separate? I seem to see lenses for sale ALL the time on these forums...

As far as lenses and sports etc, yes this is just LL games (U10 right now) My son plays pitcher and first so I don't have to zoom too far to the outfield. But of course I want to snap shots of all the kids.

I used a relatively crappy Olympus DSLR last summer (in-laws) and while it worked, I could tell it just was not up to the task.

https://plus.google.com/photos/104349911794608818274/albums/5630083592161078129

https://plus.google.com/photos/104349911794608818274/albums/5623095053462764817
https://plus.google.com/photos/1043...s/5617482582546147425?authkey=CI-wqMqHmNDz3AE

You didn't do any post processing did you?

 

[Homerboy]

You didn't do any post processing did you?

Not on those no. I have a few of my son that I "tweaked".
Those were just for the masses.

I need to learn the post-processing side of the biz too

 

[twistedlogic]

I used a relatively crappy Olympus DSLR last summer (in-laws) and while it worked, I could tell it just was not up to the task.

Where did it fail you?

The only downfall I see is it only has 3 AF points, although AF performance good.

[edit: Olympus E-420 for those wondering]

 

[Homerboy]

All of those cameras are great starter cameras. However, I would lean toward Canon as said due to the 70-200mm offerings, which are great for outdoor sport photography.

Both the 70-200mm f/4 L & the IS are quick at focusing and are some what affordable.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_n...aps&field-keywords=canon+70-200mm+f+4&x=0&y=0

quite honestly, I don't expect to pay $1000 for a 200mm lens. My wife would KILL Me.

I'm not looking to go pro here or anything. I just want to make some good memories.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Thanks for all the info guys.
From what I can decipher thus far, it sounds like if I am willing to spend some extra pesos, the D5100 may be the best bang for the buck? But when it comes down to it, I really can't go wrong with any of those 4 at this point? I've sort of weeded out the T1i I think.

I see sometimes newegg will have "refurbished" Canons or Nikons. Is that safe?

Very safe, if Refurbished by Nikon/Canon. These are, perhaps, better than new due to the individual attention they recieve from skilled technicians.

And, yes, any of the four will do fine. The edge, right now, belongs to the D5100 (available Refurbished by Nikon for $630 with the 18-55 lens from Adorama).

JR

 

[iGas]

quite honestly, I don't expect to pay $1000 for a 200mm lens. My wife would KILL Me.

I'm not looking to go pro here or anything. I just want to make some good memories.

$599 isn't bad for an L caliber lens. If you are patient, the 70-200mm f/4L non IS can be had for as little as $450 used.

 

[CuriousMike]

My D5000 was a refurb; couldn't be happier.

Your photos look pretty good -- maybe go for single-point focus.

The night games (you guys have lights!) were rough; you'd need some flash expertise to help you there.

 

[elitejp]

Like others have said any of those dslr's will be great. I shoot canon and therfore plan on sticking with canon however nikon has been putting out some really good new cameras and its just as easy to recommend nikon as well as canon. Nikon does have the benefit of sigma lenses just working better than on canon. Canon and sigma dont seem to get along as well as nikon and sigma. And I am of the persuasion that sigma makes some pretty good lenses. What i would do is prob just pick up one of those 4 bodies pair it with the tamron 28-75. They say besides the build quality and focus speed this lens is just as good as the canon 24-70mm L version.(Sorry i can only really do comparisons with canon lenses since thats what i research more) Afterwords I personally would just buy a cheap telephoto. I picked up a sigma 100-300mm for about 100 dollars. The main difference between lenses is how much light they let in other words the aperture value. A f/2.8 zoom would be alot more expensive than a f/4 zoom. With that in mind a flash is a highly recommended tool to use make the most out of so called cheap glass. So again I would highly recommend you take a look at the yongnuo line of flashes. Very cheap and work well.