DSLR Newb, I've read a lot, still need a bit of help. (choosing a camera)

[topher1166]

Hi all,

I'm looking into purchasing my first DSLR very soon. I've scanned over manufacture websites, forums and reviews and have learned a lot. I think I just need the opinion of a more knowledgable person.

I've been looking at 4 models mostly, the Nikon D3200, D5100, D5200, & D7000 (all Nikons, for no apprent reason though, dumb move?)

What will I do with the camera?:
1. Photograph my paintings.
2. Photograph landscapes, people, & really anything so I can paint it later.
3. Other average uses, I guess it might be helpful to know, I am interested in learning the art of photography.

What am I looking for in the Images?
I suppose what we all want, a great photo. I just want something that will accuratley reproduce color and line. I'm also concerned about the low light abilities in some of the lower models I listed, maybe I shouldn't be?

The major dimlemas I've run into based on what I have read are the Mega pixel count vs the low light quality. I also have read a "macro" lense would be helpful for photographing the paitings (among other things, tripod etc, im mainly concerned about the camera at the moment)

Anyway I'll stop there, I'm not sure what other information would be helpful. Any help would be greatly appreciated

Thanks!

 

[AViking]

I think all of those will do fine as far as color. I'm going to assume you want to shoot with natural light and in that case just be aware that you will not be shooting above ISO 800 or ISO 1000 with any of those cameras. I owned the D3000 and that camera was awful for low light. The D3200 is about a stop better in low light and on par with a D7000 and D5200. Not good enough for my tastes but since you're not going to be stepping up into full frame territory I think you'll be fine with any of those cameras. Get a tripod and a decent lens.

If I could do it all over again I would probably have just bought a used and cheap DSLR and learned everything on it. Then I would have invested in the camera that I needed after that. The problem is that you don't know what you need until you truly start using the camera. Do you need bracketing, HDR, a reticulated screen, etc? I have no idea and I doubt you do either. Nothing wrong with that either. Some of these refurbished deals at Adorama and elsewhere are really good.

You're going to find that once you learn how photography works that the lenses really make a big difference. You asked about macro. A macro lens is useful for being able to focus really close to an object. I highly doubt that's going to be an issue for you. People use macro lenses for bugs, stamps, coins, flowers, and other small objects. I would think that for photographing paintings the lighting setup is going to be the most important. So you might want to look into that and then get a camera that can support your lighting needs. For example you might want to buy a camera that can act as a commander for a flash.

If money is of no concern and you just want a camera that can handle your needs look into lighting first. I would be tempted to get the D3200 if you don't need a reticulating screen, D5200 if you do, and a D7000 if you need a camera that can act as an iTTL commander for a flash setup.

For my lens I'd probably get the 18-55 since it's a good lens to learn with. Figure out which focal lengths you use the most and then buy a lens down the road.

 

[CuriousMike]

1. Buy a good tripod.
2. With the money left over after buying a tripod, buy a camera
3. You probably should use the powers of the internet to find out how to best get the light right for taking photos of your paintings.

My guess is regardless of the camera, the photo you take out of the camera and put on your computer screen isn't going to match what you think the color should look like.
In which case,
4) Use the leftover leftover money to purchase a photo editing program; this will allow you to change the color tones of the photo to match what you think your colors should look like. I use Adobe Lightroom (which you can try for free I think ) - there are others.

Also, you might read up on "color cards" (or gray card) - essentially a picture that has a known color ( n% gray ) - and when you tell your software "this is gray", it can adjust colors.

 

[topher1166]

Thank you!

I think you hit on the root of the problem, I don't have any experience in the field, making it hard to decide anything.

Anyhow, I think you helped me make up my mind, i think I'll go bang for buck until I learn everything, I do have follow up questions:

1. If I were to get a d3200 would it prevent me from using an external light source (lighting as you said)? Does the camera have to be a commander?

2. What do you think of these packages:

$699
-D3200 Digital SLR Camera & 18-55mm G VR DX AF-S Zoom Lens (Black)
-Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR DX AF-S ED Zoom-Nikkor Lens
-Transcend 16GB SecureDigital Class 10 (SDHC) Ultra-High-Speed Card
-Nikon Deluxe Digital SLR Camera Case - Gadget Bag
-Vivitar 52mm UV Glass Filter
-Precision Design 2.5x Telephoto & .45x Wide-Angle Digital Lenses (49mm/52mm/55mm/58mm)
-Precision Design PD-58PVTR 58" Photo/Video Tripod with Case
-Precision Design USB 2.

$499
-d3200
-18-55mm vr lens
-55-200mm lens

 

[topher1166]

Ahh ok, thanks Mike I hear more & more it has a lot to do with technique, I will definitely check on the net for shooting techniques, thanks.

 

[CuriousMike]

The $699 gear I would skip; pick your own memory card and reader ( < $50 for both ).
Then pick your own tripod... the one in that bundle will be almost worthless.

The $500 deal seems fair, but you may never need the 55-200.

You might want the D3200 + 18-55 only if you can find that and save some money.

Something else to consider is a refurb; the D5100 is mentioned often.
http://www.adorama.com/INKD5100KR.html

 

[iGas]

For your purpose pretty much any camera will do.

IMHO, EOS M + 22mm or D3200 with a 35mm will be a more than good enough for your still photography needs.

 

[jaedaliu]

For your purpose pretty much any camera will do.

IMHO, EOS M + 22mm or D3200 with a 35mm will be a more than good enough for your still photography needs.

I recently purchased a camera system. (there's a thread on here.) I had a target price, and i went over, but the 2 most consistent comments from people I know were:

1) Get the smallest camera that will provide acceptable images.
2) Get the best because if you don't, you're going to want to upgrade later. Why waste money with intermediate purchases?

this contrasts with a lot of replies in my thread that went: Buy used on CraigsList and upgrade regularly.

All 3 are approaches are good. I would recommend dpreview.com to take a look at the low light performance of the cameras you are considering. In general, the larger the sensor, the better the low light performance.

For your usage, any camera should work.
1) shooting your paintings is "easy" because it's a controlled environment. You may need to bring in some desk lamps or move the painting to a different light source, but you can add as much light as you want to shoot your painting
2) you're painting a copy of a photograph. If some details are missing, you can fill it in with your brush.

 

[AViking]

If you have owned a DSLR, know how to use it, and are looking for a new camera then you should buy the best one you can.

If you have never owned one, don't know how to use it, and really are just getting started then I think it makes more sense to just buy an affordable refurb. It's gonna take a year or maybe more to learn the ins and outs of photography and by the time you know what's going on you can buy what you know you need. I think there are a few things to keep in mind though. Figure out what fits good in your hands. Think about lens availability and which manufacture might tailor lenses for your area of interest. Canon for example has a really cool macro lens that Nikon doesn't if you were into macro photography. Do you need bracketing, video, old lens support, etc? What kind of lighting are you going to be using?

Photography is kinda a neat hobby since you'll "know" what you need when the time comes. Until then don't waste your money buying stuff you might or might not need.

 

[Berliner]

What will I do with the camera?:
1. Photograph my paintings.

How big are your paintings?

What do you want to do with the photographs of your paintings and how big do you need them printed, if you want to print them?

In general you should be MORE concerned with getting a distortion free, very sharp lens with accurate color reproduction and a stable tripod.

Also, check if Canon, Pentax or Sony cameras feel better in your hand, even though I favor Nikon myself, in general.

 

[topher1166]

Thanks Jaedaliu & AViking

I'm hearing that my current needs don't require "much" out of a camera, which is great. I think I may really get into photography in the future so I’m trying to get a bit more than just enough, I don't want to turn around and buy another camera (I won’t be able to anyway $$$). I realize anything I buy will be outdated now or in a few years, I just want to make sure I have enough to play with and advance my technique for a while.

Btw, I’m not necessarily into macro photography, while reading through post on another forum someone suggested macro for photographing a painting, so I don’t think it’s a requirement.

I was originally looking a lot of packages, now I think I’m going to buy everything piecemeal, a body, a lens - 35 or 50mm, and other needed accessories. I’ll buy other lenses as I learn.

What does everyone think of the below options? I would add in the other needed items later memory tripod etc. I picked a 50m nikon lens, is this crap? I also found Nikon - AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G Standard Lens for $199.99, better option? Note the last option includes 2 additional lenses (which I may not need), among other things.


refurbished D5200 @$ 529.00 with Nikon - Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF Lens @ $109.99 = $ 638.99

new D5100 @$ 546.99 with Nikon - Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF Lens @ $109.99 = $ 656.98

new D7000 $ @ 656.00 with Nikon - Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF Lens @ $109.99 = $ 765.99

New D3200 @ $ 499.00 with Nikon - Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF Lens @ $109.99 = $ 608.99
This also includes Includes: 8-55mm VR and 55-200mm lenses

 

[topher1166]

How big are your paintings?

What do you want to do with the photographs of your paintings and how big do you need them printed, if you want to print them?

In general you should be MORE concerned with getting a distortion free, very sharp lens with accurate color reproduction and a stable tripod.

Also, check if Canon, Pentax or Sony cameras feel better in your hand, even though I favor Nikon myself, in general.

Hi and thanks,

my painting are not normally larger than 24 x 24, most of the time smaller. I'll probably look to re-printing them but definitley nothing larger than the original, somewhere around 8x6 or smaller.

check on the lens part, thats what i hope im trying to figure out now.

I'll have to check out the feels of the cameras i've been looking at.

 

[AViking]

Those cameras are all crop cameras (DX). That means that they have a 1.5x magnification compared to a full frame camera or if you ever used a non-digital 35mm camera. So on that camera a 50mm lens is 75mm which is kinda a medium zoom and mostly useful for head and shoulder portraiture. I have that on my full frame camera though as a walk around. I don't recommend it on DX unless you're doing portraiture.

For you I would get one lens and one lens only to start. Get the 18-55mm kit lens. It's not the greatest lens but it has a wide variety of focal lengths for you to try out to see what works best for you. Basically a good lens to learn on. If you find that you want a faster lens, ie one better for hand held low light photography, the 35mm F1.8 is a good and affordable option to add later. I had it and used it as my walk around on my old DX camera.

I also have the 55-200 and used it in Africa once on Safari but honestly I don't really like it or recommend getting it. I got it as part of a kit and quickly replaced it with a 70-300mm lens that is much much better. For paintings you're not going to need it.

You're gonna want a tripod. So many opinions there that I wish you luck. I'll tell you right now that if you have ANY desire to carry a tripod around you're going to want to buy carbon fiber. I hate carrying around my aluminum tripod since it's just too heavy. If that's too expensive go take a look at the Manfrotto 190xprob and see if that is good enough for you. It's pretty affordable and maybe not too heavy.

 

[Berliner]

You can only use auto focus with the 50mm 1.8 AF on a Nikon D7000 and higher. For the smaller models you will need an AF-S lens. As a Nikon owner, I would certainly get the D7000 because the handling is so much better than in the smaller models (and because it can use older, cheaper lenses, as I just mentioned.)

That said, the equivalent 50mm 1.8 AF-S G has much more distortion than the older model, which is also not ideal, but also not bad. In any case, you can get rid of most kinds of distortion with software like lightroom.

If you only want to reproduce the 24" images at their own size at most, any current DSLR will do fine.

 

[topher1166]

You can only use auto focus with the 50mm 1.8 AF on a Nikon D7000 and higher. For the smaller models you will need an AF-S lens. As a Nikon owner, I would certainly get the D7000 because the handling is so much better than in the smaller models (and because it can use older, cheaper lenses, as I just mentioned.)

That said, the equivalent 50mm 1.8 AF-S G has much more distortion than the older model, which is also not ideal, but also not bad. In any case, you can get rid of most kinds of distortion with software like lightroom.

If you only want to reproduce the 24" images at their own size at most, any current DSLR will do fine.

So, Berliner, you would prefer a D7000 over lets say a D5200 based on the type of lens you'd need?

 

[jaedaliu]

So, Berliner, you would prefer a D7000 over lets say a D5200 based on the type of lens you'd need?

This has to do with the focusing mechanism on the camera body.

Modern lenses have auto-focus motors in the lens. Those are commanded by contacts that connect when you mount the lens. The D5200 & smaller can autofocus these.

Some older lenses use an auto-focus motor on the camera body. There's a physical connection made where the camera body motor turns a screw which will adjust the lens focus. The D5200 & smaller can't autofocus these.

 

[topher1166]

This has to do with the focusing mechanism on the camera body.

Modern lenses have auto-focus motors in the lens. Those are commanded by contacts that connect when you mount the lens. The D5200 & smaller can autofocus these.

Some older lenses use an auto-focus motor on the camera body. There's a physical connection made where the camera body motor turns a screw which will adjust the lens focus. The D5200 & smaller can't autofocus these.

Is this enough reason to flat out go with a 7000 over a 5200, or are we talking a really old lens. If i have one of these old lenses on a 5200 i would have to manually focus it?

 

[Syborg1211]

Any AF-S lens can be used on any new Nikon camera. The lenses jaedaliu are referring to that require an autofocus motor built into the camera (D7000/D7100 and higher) are AF-D lenses.

In my experience, there are very few AF-D lenses out there that don't have newer, updated AF-S counterparts. I wouldn't let the autofocus motor really dictate your decision.

However, the one reason to get a D7000 would be for ergonomics. If you really intend to get into the hobby and learn how to fully control your camera, the D7000/7100 has two configurable dials that make the most important controls (shutter speed/aperture/ISO) right at your fingertips without having to delve into menus. I started out on a D5100 and eventually went to a D7000 then D600. The D5100 was pretty awesome in terms of size and weight, but when it came to actually learning the effects of changing say the ISO level, it was so much more difficult because you have to make so many menu clicks to get there. When I jumped from the D5100 to the D7000, it was like night and day in terms of being able to quickly rotate a dial and snap a photo and instantly see what changed.

That said, you really have to decide whether you are going to get that far into the hobby. If I could go back, I don't think I would make myself skip a D5100 since at the time I had no idea I would actually get into the hobby. I actually bought the camera for my wife and ended up using it more than her and eventually wanting my own camera. I am also an engineer so I love the technical side and figuring out all the different settings. You could be perfectly satisfied with full auto mode, just like most "normal" people are. Though most the geeks here on these forums are probably more on the technical side.

 

[topher1166]

Any AF-S lens can be used on any new Nikon camera. The lenses jaedaliu are referring to that require an autofocus motor built into the camera (D7000/D7100 and higher) are AF-D lenses.

In my experience, there are very few AF-D lenses out there that don't have newer, updated AF-S counterparts. I wouldn't let the autofocus motor really dictate your decision.

However, the one reason to get a D7000 would be for ergonomics. If you really intend to get into the hobby and learn how to fully control your camera, the D7000/7100 has two configurable dials that make the most important controls (shutter speed/aperture/ISO) right at your fingertips without having to delve into menus. I started out on a D5100 and eventually went to a D7000 then D600. The D5100 was pretty awesome in terms of size and weight, but when it came to actually learning the effects of changing say the ISO level, it was so much more difficult because you have to make so many menu clicks to get there. When I jumped from the D5100 to the D7000, it was like night and day in terms of being able to quickly rotate a dial and snap a photo and instantly see what changed.

That said, you really have to decide whether you are going to get that far into the hobby. If I could go back, I don't think I would make myself skip a D5100 since at the time I had no idea I would actually get into the hobby. I actually bought the camera for my wife and ended up using it more than her and eventually wanting my own camera. I am also an engineer so I love the technical side and figuring out all the different settings. You could be perfectly satisfied with full auto mode, just like most "normal" people are. Though most the geeks here on these forums are probably more on the technical side.

Interesting, I've found both models at the same price (with different lenses). I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything with the older camera (or newer camera for that matter). I'm reading the 7000 is still pretty solid. decisions decisions, i've changed my mind about 20 times, but i'm getting more excited each time!

 

[Smoove910]

Hmmm, if you are liking image quality of the D7000 and are open to other manufacturers, take a look at the Pentax K5. I personally have it and am soooo glad I went away from the Canikon marketing. The K5 has the same sensor as the D7000, woot!

Benefits of Pentax K5
- Full weather sealed
- Magnesium Body
- In body image stabilization
- K mount (k mount has been used by Pentax for around 30 years, which means you can adopt cheaper vintage lenses and they work on your modern DSLR, does Canikon do that?)
- Great glass... possibly not as great as the top level Canikon glass, but it's comparable
- It's cheaper!

If you have any questions about it, feel free to ask. Here's an article that compares the Pentax K5 to the Nikon D7000: http://www.neocamera.com/article/nikon_d7000_pentax_k5

 

[topher1166]

Very nice, I'll have to check into a few Pentax!

 

[Berliner]

So, Berliner, you would prefer a D7000 over lets say a D5200 based on the type of lens you'd need?

Yes, I would. It also has much better ergonomics, which are important if you want to shoot for a little longer than just a few minutes and/or if you want to shoot in manual, which I prefer to do.

If you buy a D7000 oder D7100 you already have the top tier of the current cropped (DX) line from Nikon, while the D3xxx or D5xxx models are more entry level and consumer oriented. And the premium for the D7000 is actually very low (or even non-existent).

 

[iGas]

I recently purchased a camera system. (there's a thread on here.) I had a target price, and i went over, but the 2 most consistent comments from people I know were:

1) Get the smallest camera that will provide acceptable images.
2) Get the best because if you don't, you're going to want to upgrade later. Why waste money with intermediate purchases?

this contrasts with a lot of replies in my thread that went: Buy used on CraigsList and upgrade regularly.

All 3 are approaches are good. I would recommend dpreview.com to take a look at the low light performance of the cameras you are considering. In general, the larger the sensor, the better the low light performance.

For your usage, any camera should work.
1) shooting your paintings is "easy" because it's a controlled environment. You may need to bring in some desk lamps or move the painting to a different light source, but you can add as much light as you want to shoot your painting
2) you're painting a copy of a photograph. If some details are missing, you can fill it in with your brush.

The camera depends on how much you are into photography.

The first and foremost is buy a camera that is comfortable in your hands and easy to use menus and dials, other wise you will not want to carry it around or use it.
Second is to not buy more camera than you need, because it may discourage you from using it due to complex features and menus.
And, I strongly lean toward used camera, because you can often get more bang for your buck. However, recent crop of cameras offers so much more than older cameras for not much more money.
If you think that photography will be a serious hobby, then you will likely have more than 1 lens (perhaps 3-5 pro lenses) in the future, hence it make perfect sense to invest in the best lens/es that your pocket book can handle, and buy a used pro body to learn the features (because it is likely that you will buy and get rid of many bodies in the future but will keep the lenses).

 

[CuriousMike]

If you think that photography will be a serious hobby...

Like so many things in life... the bicycle, boat, RC cars.... we tend to over buy because we have a vision of what we think we'll end up doing... but rarely do.

 

[waggy]

Hmmm, if you are liking image quality of the D7000 and are open to other manufacturers, take a look at the Pentax K5. I personally have it and am soooo glad I went away from the Canikon marketing. The K5 has the same sensor as the D7000, woot!

Benefits of Pentax K5
- Full weather sealed
- Magnesium Body
- In body image stabilization
- K mount (k mount has been used by Pentax for around 30 years, which means you can adopt cheaper vintage lenses and they work on your modern DSLR, does Canikon do that?)
- Great glass... possibly not as great as the top level Canikon glass, but it's comparable
- It's cheaper!

If you have any questions about it, feel free to ask. Here's an article that compares the Pentax K5 to the Nikon D7000: http://www.neocamera.com/article/nikon_d7000_pentax_k5

wow....

very nice.

i'm impressed.

I am excited about getting my first DSLR (Cannon T3). i have had a SLR (film) years ago. i took a tons of pictures. then got out of the hobby (damn kids!)

i suspect i will get into it again and upgrade from the intro level T3. at least at the lenses.