Newb to SLR's Questions

[Dulanic]

So I am very new to the SLR scene.... aka never had one. I have a P&S canon currently and it has been very good. However, it is a PITA to use for manual focus etc. A recent trip to the zoo showed me how much of a pain a P&S camera can be. So I have been looking at the D3100 or D3200.... is there much difference outside of the additional MP? Which I don't think is a huge deal since 14.2 is already fine IMO.

Is this is good deal for a D3100? It comes with 2 lenses which seems good considering the lenses sell for $200. I found a ton of packages /w 1 lens and extra fluff like a tripod for $500.... but $550 seemed really good for 2 lenses since the lenses alone run $400. Am I missing something or does this seem like a good deal for a SLR newb? The cheapest I can find the D3200 /w the same lenses is > $700. I can't imagine the D3200 is worth $200 more for a SLR newbie? Any opinions would be great!

Any reasons to go /w a Canon instead? Doesn't seem so with everything I have read, but there is also a 2 lens package for $579.

http://www.bjs.com/nikon-d3100-142m...-and-55-200mm-vr-lenses.product.220575?dimId=

http://www.bjs.com/canon-eos-rebel-...onus-8gb-sd-card.product.191489?dimId=2003222

 

[Silenus]

These are both previous generation entry level DSLR's. That is a good thing because they are discounted and fantastic cameras to start with. And they will be VASTLY better than any P&S. Either package is a good deal. They are both very good camera systems, I wouldn't say there is any particular advantage to either the Nikon or the Canon, just your preference. If you know anyone well enough that is a nikon or Canon DSLR shooter who would be willing to 'lend' you lenses from time to time...I might lean toward the system they have so lenses would be compatible.

 

[SecurityTheatre]

Right now, I'd say Nikon has the technological lead with sensors, though in lenses, they're about on par, with maybe a slight nod to Canon for the "mid range" L glass (in the $600-$1000 range) and a nod to Nikon on the higher end (the $1000-$2000 per lens range).

But, for someone who is new, get whichever brand your friends have. Then you can share lenses.

Also, remember, (in my opinion) you should save your money on the camera body. Invest in lenses. They hold their value better and will be useful if/when you upgrade.

The 18-55 and 55-200 is a decent range of lenses, although they're some of the cheapest ones Nikon makes. It looks like the 18-55 lens is the model without VR (optical stabilization), so that reduces its value to about $110. But it's still not a bad package.

The 18-55 is a far more useful range to most people than 55-200 which is a bit of a longish telephoto range on a DX body, but having both can be nice.

 

[Dulanic]

Right now, I'd say Nikon has the technological lead with sensors, though in lenses, they're about on par, with maybe a slight nod to Canon for the "mid range" L glass (in the $600-$1000 range) and a nod to Nikon on the higher end (the $1000-$2000 per lens range).

But, for someone who is new, get whichever brand your friends have. Then you can share lenses.

Also, remember, (in my opinion) you should save your money on the camera body. Invest in lenses. They hold their value better and will be useful if/when you upgrade.

The 18-55 and 55-200 is a decent range of lenses, although they're some of the cheapest ones Nikon makes. It looks like the 18-55 lens is the model without VR (optical stabilization), so that reduces its value to about $110. But it's still not a bad package.

The 18-55 is a far more useful range to most people than 55-200 which is a bit of a longish telephoto range on a DX body, but having both can be nice.

Thanks for mentioning that.... I didn't even notice that. That might lean me towards the Canon package as both lenses have IS. This is rather important to me as I have a medical condition that causes me to shake slightly so IS is pretty important.

 

[Syborg1211]

The description and specifications of that Nikon package indicate that both lenses have VR.

 

[randomrogue]

The Nikon one definitely has VR on both lenses.

One thing worth noting is that while a DSLR is a definite upgrade from a P/S you might find that unless you learn how the thing works and how to post process a bit you will not get the same quality of images you're used to. Just a forewarning.

Whatever you get, get a book along with it, and learn how to fully take advantage of it.

Personally I'd get the one that feels best in your hands. Nikon is probably a step ahead of Canon at the present time but that can quickly change so it's not worth worrying about. The odds of you borrowing lenses from friends isn't that high either so I wouldn't make that a sticking point. Your buddies are not just going to let you borrow their $1000 lens for the weekend and if they do it won't be very often. You'll want your own.

 

[TerryMathews]

Any reason you're not looking at micro four thirds mirrorless cameras? They can be a nice bridge between DSLR and P&S.

 

[corkyg]

. . . I have a medical condition that causes me to shake slightly so IS is pretty important.

Have you considered using a monopod?

 

[Childs]

Look into the Sony RX100. Its not a DSLR, but the quality is close, and you dont have to invest in lenses. There are other superzooms that cost less. Entry level DSLRs are comparable to high end P&Ss and mirrorless as far as quality, and even exceed them in some ways. Lugging around a DSLR and lenses can get old quick. I guess it depends on how you plan on using it, how much you want to invest in lenses and the time to learn how to use everything.

 

[Dulanic]

Have you considered using a monopod?

Na, too inconvenient to carry around. It's not severe enough that IS can't resolve it.

 

[TerryMathews]

Na, too inconvenient to carry around. It's not severe enough that IS can't resolve it.

How about a gorillapod micro? http://joby.com/gorillapod/micro250

 

[CuriousMike]

If you buy a DSLR, please spend a few evenings reading about how to get the best out of it.

Why are my photos blurry?
Why are my photos dark?

Example:
Learning how to read the current shutter speed and understanding what it's telling you can make a huge difference in the quality of photos you're taking - this is part of the jump from P&S->DSLR.

A DSLR will be just as dumb as a P&S if you let it, and then you'll wonder why only some of your photos look better.

 

[randomrogue]

I think you meant histogram and not shutter speed.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Thanks for mentioning that.... I didn't even notice that. That might lean me towards the Canon package as both lenses have IS. This is rather important to me as I have a medical condition that causes me to shake slightly so IS is pretty important.

I don't think that Nikon ships any kits with the old non-VR version of those lenses. I don't know if your link is for the Nikon kit or a kit the retailer is putting together.

Here is the D3100 with the 18-55 VR kit lens for $349 (Refurbished by Nikon which is better than new)

http://www.adorama.com/INKD3100KR.html

And here is the 55-200 VR for $159

http://www.adorama.com/NK55200VRR.html

 

[Throckmorton]

If you get a Sony, every lens will be stabilized

 

[iGas]

The Nikon kit 18-55mm in the OP look like the non VR version that have poorer optic than the Canon IS version. While both the 55-200mm Nikkor VR and Canon 55-250mm IS optic quality and built are similar to each others.

IMHO, I would take the Canon due to the slight advantage in optic with the standard zoom that will see 90% of the action. Even those Nikon have better sensor.

That said, you can't go wrong with either kit.

 

[Syborg1211]

The Nikon kit 18-55mm in the OP look like the non VR version that have poorer optic than the Canon IS version. While both the 55-200mm Nikkor VR and Canon 55-250mm IS optic quality and built are similar to each others.

IMHO, I would take the Canon due to the slight advantage in optic with the standard zoom that will see 90% of the action. Even those Nikon have better sensor.

That said, you can't go wrong with either kit.

Seriously? Why do people keep saying the Nikon kit linked by OP doesn't have VR? It takes two seconds to read the description and specifications listed and both mention VR on both lenses.

 

[iGas]

Seriously? Why do people keep saying the Nikon kit linked by OP doesn't have VR? It takes two seconds to read the description and specifications listed and both mention VR on both lenses.

I stand corrected.

I originally though that the 18-55mm Nikkor isn't the VR version because of the title in the link.

In this case I would pick the Nikon kit over that of Canon, because of the superior sensor.