I'm new here so I say sorry from the start if I break any rules of posting here my question and for my average English skill. Fist I want to tank the community for a nice forum and Nikon for so nice products
Now let me start with the question. I've recently (5 days ago) bought a D3000. I'm new with DSLR's cameras (had some point and shoots till now but I've decided to move to the next level). In all this five days I didn't managed to know all the camera features (It will take a while, I know) and I'm very pleased about it, I basically love IT! Now the 'problem' is that I've got a few more money to spare (a salary bonus ) that I haven't got five days ago and the store that I've bought the camera from has this offer to return a product before 30 days have passed and you can change with another. Now the question is... Is it worth it to spend those money for D3100 as an upgrade from D3000 or its better to buy a set of lents and stick with what I have?
I did some research even before I got the D3000 model. I have to say that the Live-view and movie support don't count that much for me. I don't like to rec things (they don't say pictures worth 1000 words for nothing). The only thing that I like is those 4MP that the D3100 has above D3000. But then again, even 10 are enough for a starter like me. But maybe in time I will feel the need of those +4Mp... who knows. Another feature that I like to D3100 over D3000 is the higher values of ISO sensitivity. I do many pictures in low-light areas. Even too D3000 can manage good with this, I think D3100 will be a bit better. What I don't like is the type of sensor. D3000 has a CCD (witch I've heard that is a bit better) and D3100 has a CMOS (ofc this subject is disputed all over).
I really don't know if it worths the investment to D3100 or to buy lent's kits for D3000. Thanks for reading this and sorry for a wall of text . Have a nice day! Also thanks in advance for replays.
Welcome to Nikonians! You have defined the differences in features between the two bodies quite well. The difference in peformance between a CCD sensor and a CMOS sensor is neglegable. More so considiring that the D3100 is a generation newer than the D3000. In Addition to the higher ISO sensitivity, the D3100 will provide cleaner images at high ISO settings compared to the D3000 with better resolution to boot. Now back to your question. It depends on what you plan on shooting and the ambient conditions that you will be shooting in. For shooting in low light, the D3100 will provide better Image Quality (IQ) than the D3000. With the exception of the 35mm f/1.8G AF-S to gain speed over the kit lenses you will have to spend significantly more than the price of the D3100 to gain more low light capability with the D3000. Both cameras are very capable. The answer boils down to which body fits your particular requirements the best. Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!
Congratulations of the purchase of your first DSLR, and your English skills are just fine.
Ordinarily, most people on this site recommend buying lenses instead of upgrading camera bodies, but in this case, and since you have the opportunity to exchange it without taking a loss, I think that given your need to take low light images that you might be happier with the D3100. In the US, the difference in cost is about $100 between the D3000 kit and the D3100 kit, and in my opinion, the price difference is well worth the additional features and technology that you get with the D3100. For an entry level camera, the D3100 is really cutting edge technology and is a lot of camera for the money.
That's just my opinion. Good luck with your decision.
I agree with you, but Emil isn't upgrading. He's really asking whether he should buy a D3000 or a D3100 for $100 more. He can take the D3000 back for a full refund or credit.
Although there is certainly nothing wrong with the D3000, I probably wouldn't buy one at this point in time considering the significant advances in technology and features buried in the D3100. However, I was the first one on my block to get my hands on the D3100 and am, after having used it for a few months, very impressed by its performance.
You are right MEMcD, the price I spend for this 'update' its less then a good piece of lens. So I will should take this in consideration. I really don't know what to say about the differences between CCD and CMOS. But I'm starting to think that you are right there also. CMOS is used on all the cameras this days, cameras better then D3000 or D3100 (ex. D90 and D300 and so on).
You are also right jpFoto, most people recommend me to buy lens . Thats why I've decided to ask here also.
And Asgard, d7000 its too expensive for me at this moment. But I'm also thinking of keeping the D3000 and learn how to manage a DSLR and then sell it and save some money meanwhile for a D7000 or so.
I love your post. I just bought a D3000, read Darrell's "Understanding the D3000" and Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure". The light is starting to flicker a little brighter as I begin to understand and use the camera's features. As a result, I'm trying to get my wife into photography so I can dump my D3000 on her and buy a better Nikon. I'll let you know how that works out for me.
Personally, if it was me, I'd take the opportunity to return the camera and get the D3100. It's newer technology, has better low light capability, is better ergonomically as it has a couple of dedicated buttons to some functions and you'll probably not outgrow it as quick as the D3000 due to it's superior IQ.
When I was looking at the D3100 the price difference bewteen the D3000 and D3100 was ~EUR30 so it made no sense to get a D3000.
Well in Romania the difference between them is 187 euros. But something happened today. The store added D90 - body only as a best buy offer and I can get that one at the same price as a D3100. But then I will need to wait a bit to get a new kit of lens or find a way to get some money and buy also the lens. I have to decide until the end of this month.
Fri 07-Jan-11 01:55 AM | edited Fri 07-Jan-11 07:12 AM by jpFoto
I think that I would rather have the D3100 with the 18-55 lens than a D90 without a lens, but it's a value judgment. The D3100 is a far more advanced camera with better low light capabilites, but the D90 has more features and the ability to autofocus with non AF-S lenses.
I bought the D3100 because it is a techno wonder and light, with the emphasis on "light." It's my travel camera, but it has given me a new perspective on DX cameras.
Like you I am also a beginner I bought a D3000 last year, about a month later they released the D3100 but I have to say there is much to learn about the D3000 before I can move on to anything bigger for instance getting the same exposure when shooting the exact same scene multiple times still eludes me these are things I am working on. So personally I opt to spend the money on the glass for now because that way I can dredge the depths of my creativity! I bought the D3000 kit with the 18-55mm DX VR lens and then later bought myself the 55-300mm DX VR ED lens. I was given the 35mm F1.8 prime as a christmas present and for a USD cost of $199 from amazon it's worth every cent! I eventually want to get myself a Nikkor Micro and the Nikkor 10.5mm wide angle. Nice thing about Nikon is you can trade/sell your camera body eventually and still use all the glass you've collected. Point is my Nikon D3000 is going to keep me busy for a while
Like you I have no interest in video so for me personally I think the video feature is a gimmick and actually makes me think twice about buying a camera with this included. Having said that though, I have to agree with Asgard an upgrade would be a D7000 because it has much higher ISO ratings, faster shutter speeds, takes 2 SD Cards and a must have when you're seriously into it is an index finger wheel on the grip for fast aperture settings in Manual Mode ( I wouldn't buy a D3100 or D5100 because they don't have this ) also useful is an aperture preview button ( I stand to be corrected but like the D3000 I don't think the D3100 has one either ).
Cmos sensor may be better but I can tell from a year's worth of D3000 use and 1000+ pictures later, My D3000 does ok ......... I love it!