I just got into DSLRS and I'm amazed by how amazing the photos come out to be. I'm currently debating between a D3100 and a D5000. Could anyone give me some advice as to which one I should get, thanks.
Thu 30-Sep-10 03:17 AM | edited Thu 30-Sep-10 09:24 AM by jpFoto
The D3100 is newer technology. My son has the D5000, and it is a very nice camera, but the D3100 is really "state of the art." I just bought that camera for a travel camera and as a backup to my D700, and it is really a quality camera
so, what if the D3100 is newer, has this bell or whistle that the D5000 doesn't? in about 6 months or so we'll probably be having this debate again about D90 replacement (nikon seems to phase out most of their cameras after 2-3 years or so) state of the art doesn't stay state of the art for all that long in this world ATM, anywho, thats just my 2 cents
I just had the same choice and bought the 3100. Bracketing would be nice but you can always bracket manually. If you need to remove all possible shake from pressing the shutter, use the timer. There is no work around for betterlow light performance. Plus amazon.com has a great deal on the 3100 and the 55-200mm lens.
Thu 30-Sep-10 08:57 AM | edited Thu 30-Sep-10 09:22 AM by jpFoto
I thought that you would get a few more posts, but I guess that the D3100 is just too new.
As for pros and cons, there really are no cons other than you can purchase the D5000 as a body only as opposed to the bundled (kit) D3100 with at least one lens. In your case, however, I would assume that you probably want to get at least one lens.
The pros are:
1. Nikon has developed and incorporated a new 14 megapixel sensor that gives you far superior low light, low noise, capabilities that rivals the results of some of their, far more expensive, pro and prosumer cameras. I compared images taken with my D700 at high ISO settings (1600-3200)and they were very similar.
2. The D3100 is less expensive than the D5000 and uses the newer technology.
3. Although this was not of much interest to me, the D3100 has advanced 1080 video capabilities. (I haven't really used it yet, so I can't comment on it.)
4. The D3100 is smaller and lighter. The size and weight were important concerns for me, since this was to be my "travel camera," but it may not be of concern to you.
There are other factors that you should consider, so I would suggest that you research this some more. This camera is so new that there are very few reviews thus far. DPReview should have an extensive review soon.
I don't know if you have other Nikon lenses, but you should keep in mind that neither the D5000 nor the D3100 will auto-focus with non AFS lenses, so if you do have other lenses, you may want to look at the more expensive D7000 which is going to be available soon.
Good luck with your research, and feel free to ask any other questions that you might have about the D3100. I really like mine.
Do you plan on any available light shooting? The 5000 is very good but test shots of the little D3100 indicate it is in another league entirely. I hate to bring up a sore subject for some people but here is a ISO range test between D3100, D40 and D3. Some people, myself included do not pay much attention to K.R. but this link is interesting indeed. http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/comparisons/2010-09-29-iso/index.htm
Amazing for any camera let along the lowest cost entry level camera in the line up. If the choice was D3100 and D90 there would be more things to judge like focus motor but still the 3100 leaves the wonderful D90 looking a little wimpy Stan St Petersburg Russia
Fri 01-Oct-10 12:16 AM | edited Fri 01-Oct-10 04:36 AM by MEMcD
Welcome to Nikonians! If you are referring to the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S (there is no 55mm f/1.8 lens in the Nikkor line) it is an excellent choice and is fully supported by the D3100 including AF. The 50mm f/1.8D has a screwdriver type AF drive and will not AF on a D3100 camera body because the D3100 does not have an AF motor built into the body. Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!
Sun 03-Oct-10 04:58 AM | edited Sun 03-Oct-10 05:21 AM by caspar76
>I'm planning to do daytime and night time shooting. I would >probably be using it a little more in the night time. > >Anyone know which lens would be good for nighttime shooting? > >And which lens would be good to start off with besides the kit >lens. > >I was thinking of getting a 55mm f/1.8 prime lens and a >55mm-200mm f/4.5-5.6 zoom lens.
For the nighttime shooting, I guess it really depends on what your subject will be. When I go night shooting I like to take pictures of the city since I live in the Tokyo area. For this, I want to capture as much as the area as possible so I use my wide angle lens. In my case I use a Sigma 8-16mm. There are some other good wide angle lens out there as well, but the 8-16mm is currently the widest available for DX format I believe.
>The only bad thing I can find about the 3100 is the it >doesn't support bracketing. > >I guess a wireless remote I can just use a wired one, but >wouldn't it be kind of annoying to create HDR pictures with no >bracketing support from the camera?
I'm kind of surprised the D3100 doesn't support bracketing. I suppose if you went with the D3100 you would just have to take your shot and over/under expose the next two shots manually which could be a minor pain in the butt I suppose.