# Camera advice for beginner



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Hello fellows, this is my first post in the photography section, although I have been an active member on the WUS for a couple of years now.
If you can spare a minute or two of your time and give me some advice, I will greately appreciate it;

I am only used to the point and shoot cameras (mostly Sony), but would like to get into the slr or dslr type cameras and am looking for a beginner type model up to $1000 max. (less is better of course)
I want this to be easy to use, with no unnecessary features (as I am a true beginner) but with the best quality and options for the money.
I have gone to the shops and asked for opinion of salesmen (and women) but, I feel that a better advice would come from the people that use these cameras every day for different situations, and perhaps have handled many brands and models, and are not just pushing the sale item out the door.
So please either PM me or post here, what you would suggest for a beginner that knows nothing about photography but would like to get into it.
And I have also considered taking a course on this subject.
Thanks you,
Anatoly


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

What kind of photography do you do? Where are you on the image quality vs portability spectrum? How are you planning to output the images (computer screen, small print, large print)

How do you feel about having to spend more (over time) on accessories such as lenses?

But more importantly, what are your skill levels? A good photographer will create more compelling images using junk equipment than a "camera operator" using the latest and greatest.

Do you know the difference between P, A, S, M modes?

If not, I would HIGHLY recommend you pick up a copy of "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Petersen as your first step.
Amazon.com: Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera (9780817439392): Bryan Peterson: Books

This will greatly help you take advantage of all your P&S has to offer - which can be quite a lot!


----------



## 00Photo (Jan 4, 2008)

Ebay. Used 40D runs $300ish. Spend the rest on quailty lenses. In the world of SLR, Lenses are 99.9% of the image quality. 

However the easy to use part is not part of the equation when you migrate to the world of SLR's. Just isn't. You're going to have to put in the hard work.


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Thanks for the advice, I am really a novice at this, and plan to make it a hobby in progress, I suppose I will take that photography course for starters, and do some serious research on modes of operation, cameras and lenses, etc.
I am not looking to get into it as a buisiness, only for personal pleasure.


----------



## Robert36521 (Jan 5, 2012)

Used 40D runs $300ish. Spend the rest on quailty lenses. In the world of SLR, Lenses are 99.9% of the image quality.

However the easy to use part is not part of the equation when you migrate to the world of SLR's. Just isn't. You're going to have to put in the hard work.


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

thank you, just ordered one.


~tc~ said:


> What kind of photography do you do? Where are you on the image quality vs portability spectrum? How are you planning to output the images (computer screen, small print, large print)
> 
> How do you feel about having to spend more (over time) on accessories such as lenses?
> 
> ...


----------



## Danny T (Apr 23, 2011)

I was/am in the same boat as you and researched my butt off for a camera and decided on the Sony NEX5n camera. Rave reviews and compact enough (depending on lens) that you can fit it in your jacket pocket.

I plan on taking some lessons at my local Henry's to learn how to use it.

This site is great to use to help pick a camera

Digital Photography Review

best of luck

Danny


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

If you're taking photos of watches, you want a Nikon SLR, just because of the micro-nikkor series lenses, which are the best macro lenses available. Canon would be a close second, but they don't have a macro of quite that stature.

Learning to control exposure and depth of field is a must. It's the main reason to buy an SLR over a compact.


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

Andrew McGregor said:


> If you're taking photos of watches, you want a Nikon SLR, just because of the micro-nikkor series lenses, which are the best macro lenses available. Canon would be a close second, but they don't have a macro of quite that stature.
> 
> Learning to control exposure and depth of field is a must. It's the main reason to buy an SLR over a compact.


Only true in Nikon-fanboy world. Expand your horizons a bit and you will see there are a number of not only competitive, but superior options. What is the highest rated lens on dpreview ever? The Olympus 50/2 macro ...

Also, a compact is GREAT for macro, as you are constantly struggling with light/exposure at the tiny apertures needed to get sufficient DOF (especially at the focal lengths of your beloved nikkor macro lenses). The small sensor is a big advantage here, allowing the use of much wider apertures, and therefore faster shutter speeds, for the same DOF.


----------



## MoreToasties (Jul 16, 2010)

Andrew McGregor said:


> If you're taking photos of watches, you want a Nikon SLR, just because of the micro-nikkor series lenses, which are the best macro lenses available. Canon would be a close second, but they don't have a macro of quite that stature.
> 
> Learning to control exposure and depth of field is a must. It's the main reason to buy an SLR over a compact.


With Canons (and the Sony NEX that the original poster decided on, as well as m4/3 etc) you can mount legacy lenses such as the fantastic Olympus 50/2 macro mentioned above (the 50/3.5 is no slouch either...), but with Nikon, not so much.


----------



## drspaceman (Feb 26, 2009)

What about something like this?

CANON OPEN BOX REBEL XS BLACK W/18-55 DC 2762B063AA

$350 with a decent lens, reliable canon tech and you can easily choose more specialized lenses in the future (all of my watch photography is done on a Canon 100mm f2.8, seen here tagalongphoto.ca/watches).

If you get to a point where you are trying to choose between one brand an another, be very weary of any advice that advocates one brand over another. The argument exemplifies some insane fanboy-ism. I am on my second Canon DSLR (7D rocks) but I chose it because I had buddies with Canon gear I could borrow, otherwise it would have been a toss up. Now I shoot a fair amount of video, so I like the Canon system for that use.

Canon vs. Nikon is a huge waste of time unless you're planning on buying thousands of dollars worth of gear or have to budget an entire studio, etc.

Just buy what ever is on sale, make sure it is a DSLR or a point and shoot with full manual control and RAW shooting, this will service hobby photography well. IF possible, avoid point and shoots as they wont easily expand with your skills.

Best of luck,

-JS


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

MoreToasties said:


> With Canons (and the Sony NEX that the original poster decided on, as well as m4/3 etc) you can mount legacy lenses such as the fantastic Olympus 50/2 macro mentioned above (the 50/3.5 is no slouch either...), but with Nikon, not so much.


Um, really? Legacy Nikon lenses do work, up to their capabilities, except for the few weird ones that extend into the body cavity and required mirror lock-up on the film cameras. You might need to remove coupling prongs on some very old lenses.

Anyway, to a large extent the Nikon/Canon thing is a waste of time... you'd be happy with either, and the capabilities are so close as not to really matter in practice. I'm used to Nikon, and Canon UI always annoys me, but that is mostly what I'm used to not a real practical difference.


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Thanks, I got a Henry's in my area also.


Danny T said:


> I was/am in the same boat as you and researched my butt off for a camera and decided on the Sony NEX5n camera. Rave reviews and compact enough (depending on lens) that you can fit it in your jacket pocket.
> 
> I plan on taking some lessons at my local Henry's to learn how to use it.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Thanks guys for the advice,
I am looking to do more then just watch photos, I want an all around type camera with some descent closeup possibilities as well as image quality.
I have a lot to learn so I decided to take a course on photography first. thank you all for your advice

Anatoly


----------



## mathomas (Nov 27, 2011)

~tc~ said:


> ...
> 
> Also, a compact is GREAT for macro, as you are constantly struggling with light/exposure at the tiny apertures needed to get sufficient DOF (especially at the focal lengths of your beloved nikkor macro lenses). The small sensor is a big advantage here, allowing the use of much wider apertures, and therefore faster shutter speeds, for the same DOF.


+1

Compact camera + GorillaPod = cheap, good macros
(and I have ALL SORTS of other fancy gear to choose from)


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

what exactly is this? compact + gorilla? lol, I know I am ignorant in the terminology, please clarify
thanks,
Anatoly


mathomas said:


> +1
> 
> Compact camera + GorillaPod = cheap, good macros
> (and I have ALL SORTS of other fancy gear to choose from)


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

Compact camera is the non-derogatory term for a small - sensor point and shoot camera.

Gorilla pod is a small flexible tripod. They are very handy!


----------



## mathomas (Nov 27, 2011)

~tc~ said:


> Compact camera is the non-derogatory term for a small - sensor point and shoot camera.
> 
> Gorilla pod is a small flexible tripod. They are very handy!


What he said! (Thanks)


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

thanks!


drspaceman said:


> What about something like this?
> 
> CANON OPEN BOX REBEL XS BLACK W/18-55 DC 2762B063AA
> 
> ...


----------



## Danny T (Apr 23, 2011)

MoreToasties said:


> With Canons (and the Sony NEX that the original poster decided on, as well as m4/3 etc) you can mount legacy lenses such as the fantastic Olympus 50/2 macro mentioned above (the 50/3.5 is no slouch either...), but with Nikon, not so much.


I planned on getting the 30mm Sony macro lens (SEL30M35) for my nex5n....after reading your post would you recommend that I get the olmpus 50/2 or 50/3.5?

I looked into it and can you confirm if these are the lenses you are referring to:

Olympus 50/2 macro:

OLY.ACC.CAM.261003
Zuiko Digital EP F2.0 Macro 1:2 lens 50mm

Olympus 50/3.5 macro:

OLY.ACC.CAM.261053
Zuiko Digital ED F3.5 1:1 macro lens 35mm


----------



## spacemanspliff (Oct 6, 2010)

Pentax k-r or k-x


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

can you please elaborate just a little on this?
I am assuming Pentax is a brand name?
thanks 


spacemanspliff said:


> Pentax k-r or k-x


----------



## spacemanspliff (Oct 6, 2010)

Yeah Pentax is a brand. Actually one of the oldest brands out there and one of the first to make a SLR. Just search it in google.


----------



## George Riemer (Mar 9, 2008)

Anatoly:

I'm in the same boat you are. I would cruise this site, be amazed by the photographs people were getting, and feel the frustration at the poor shots I was able to achieve, even when I deciphered the macro settings on my point-and-shoot. Deciding the make the jump, I checked into entry-level DSLR's.

I actually first started with "Digital SLR All-In-One for Dummies", loading it onto my Kindle so no one would see I was reading a "Dummies" book. Now that I've scratched the surface of DSLR, I also recommend the Peterson book. The more you know before you pick up a camera for the first time, the shallower your learning curve will be.

My search eventually lead me to the Nikon D3100. You can start off with it in full auto mode and transition to the modes that allow you more freedom when making your decisions. It even has a "Guide" mode to walk you through some of those decisions -- pressing the "?" button gives you explanitory screens. Sort of like having a guide/cheat sheet built into the camera.

The final factor for me was reading reviews from photographers on the web. Some people felt this entry level model was all they needed. A lot of others mentioned that when they felt they wanted a more advanced camera body, they still held onto their D3100 either as a backup body, or for travel.

With any SLR, the lens choice is critial. I've had good results with the Nikon AF-S Micro 40mm. It's a good overall lens, but with close focusing ability (macro -- what Nikon insits on calling micro).

I just got the camera for Christmas, and I'm enjoying the watch shots I'm getting. Playing with depth of field is fun.


















The two big players in the market are Nikon and Canon, probably followed by Sony, Pentax, and a host of others. It's gotten to the point that it's hard to buy a bad camera. Pick one, and I hope the story of my experience helps!


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Got the Petersen book, wow, very informative!
Now here is a question:

I found a local kijiji deal for a 2009 model Nikon d3000 (with kit lense) in mint condition, 10.2Mpix, guy wants 300 bucks! (and I can buy other lenses on my own) Should I jump on this deal? I read the reviews on this camera and it seems like a great beginner dslr.
Please chime in soon, If I am to grab this it's gotta be today or tomorrow,
Thanks ,
Anatoly


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

thanks, I am currently looking at a d3000, I think very similar to the d3100


George Riemer said:


> Anatoly:
> 
> I'm in the same boat you are. I would cruise this site, be amazed by the photographs people were getting, and feel the frustration at the poor shots I was able to achieve, even when I deciphered the macro settings on my point-and-shoot. Deciding the make the jump, I checked into entry-level DSLR's.
> 
> ...


----------



## George Riemer (Mar 9, 2008)

I'd do it. For $300, how wrong can you go?


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Scooped it up! Mint condition 2009 Nikon d3000 full package(18-55 lense included), all accessories that come with the kit, manuals, straps, cds, + carry case all for $275!!!! Let the fun begin.


----------



## heebs (Nov 9, 2008)

Anatoly said:


> Scooped it up! Mint condition 2009 Nikon d3000 full package(18-55 lense included), all accessories that come with the kit, manuals, straps, cds, + carry case all for $275!!!! Let the fun begin.


Sounds like a good deal. Now the rest is up to you! I've been shooting Nikon for quite awhile now so feel free to PM if you have questions. I'm currently shooting with a D700, but have put lots of miles on a D70, D100, D90 and D200 (plus miles of slide film before that too).

Now that you are able to take higher quality photos, you may start to notice subtle things that you don't normally pay attention to (lint drives me crazy, fingerprints and smudges, tiny scuffs, dust on your camera sensor etc.).

Good luck shooting. Enjoy discovering your new camera, and enjoy seeing the world around you in new ways. A bit of imagination and creativity can go a long way in watch photography. I'm not saying I have much creativity or that I'm any good at it, just that I like it  Here's a couple sample shots that I took in my living room: 


















Couple quick suggestions: 
Get closer 
Try shooting horizontal and vertical 
Try shooting from different heights and angles. This might just be the difference in point of view to make a composition more interesting. 
Most importantly: have fun with it, take lots of photos, but don't let having a camera with you interfere with your enjoyment of what's happening in front of your lens.

-***** in Calgary


----------



## MoreToasties (Jul 16, 2010)

Danny T said:


> I planned on getting the 30mm Sony macro lens (SEL30M35) for my nex5n....after reading your post would you recommend that I get the olmpus 50/2 or 50/3.5?
> 
> I looked into it and can you confirm if these are the lenses you are referring to:
> 
> ...


Actually, I was talking about old film lenses that can be found on eBay and the like. Modern macro lenses can be very expensive but using old film lenses with an adapter can be a cost-effective way to get extremely good results. While they may or may not be appropriate for general photography depending on your skill level, they're fantastic for macro work.


----------



## The Elf (Nov 20, 2011)

I found just a decent compact with manual controls very good for a beginner, teaches you to use all the major controls you need for slr use. I bought a canon s90, with a larger sensor than most compacts giving better low light photos, so I rarely use the flash
Most people also will use a compact much more as can just put it straight in my pocket, and the pictures can come out very well with Raw files tweaked slightly - of course the downside is less zoom/dof flexibility you get with the a
SLRs. 
The last thing you want is to buy a nice new camera and not learn to use it properly, I see so many people using new SLR cameras outside on a bright summer day and the pop up flash firing!

Anyway good luck with whatever you decide on!


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Thanks for the offer *****, I may take you up on it, so don't be surprised if I PM you for advice.
Anatoly


----------



## heebs (Nov 9, 2008)

The Elf said:


> The last thing you want is to buy a nice new camera and not learn to use it properly, I see so many people using new SLR cameras outside on a bright summer day and the pop up flash firing!


Nice pick with the S90. I looked at the S95 recently and will pick up some version of that model when it's time to get a new P&S camera.

Nothing wrong with a bit of flash in the middle of the day.

Try it sometime, especially if you are shooting an "environmental portrait" (people plus surroundings). If you're shooting with the sun at your back or at the side, the flash will throw a bit of extra light to fill in the dark shadows you'll get in people's faces. If the subject is backlit, then a bit of flash will brighten up the foreground and if exposed properly you won't get a washed out background or a silhouetted foreground (unless that's what you wanted in your photo).

Took this one with flash on to give some detail in the foreground watch, 'cept it was with my phone and the DSLR was in the bag at my feet


----------



## heebs (Nov 9, 2008)

Anatoly said:


> Thanks for the offer *****, I may take you up on it, so don't be surprised if I PM you for advice.
> Anatoly


Happy to help. I've taken a LOT of (bad) photos in my time and learned a lot from my mistakes  I have experimented a lot with macro shooting, mostly natural subjects but have found watches to be a great subject- no wind in my living room to blow them around, and easier to control lighting.

Been shooting on Nikon for 15+ years and I still go back and revisit the classics. I'll still occasionally put a roll of B&W through one of the oldies like my F2, F3, FM2, Ft just for fun.

Like I said, feel free to contact me anytime if you have questions. And please share your work with us!

-*****


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Here is my first shot! Since I got this one up in the sales forum right now.
This is just a quick shot, with poor lighting, using flash in Auto Mode using 18-55mm lense (resized to upload for WUS) Can't wait to learn all about operating in Manual Mode and other lenses.


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

First thing of all to learn is how to turn the flash off... the change in effect is ENORMOUS. Not that the above is a bad shot, not at all.


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

noted! thanks
I am a complete newbie, i am sure with time I will learn how to use all tools of the camera properly.


Andrew McGregor said:


> First thing of all to learn is how to turn the flash off... the change in effect is ENORMOUS. Not that the above is a bad shot, not at all.


----------



## Hubris (Aug 21, 2011)

I'll throw my two cents in:

1. Both Nikon and Canon are both very good platforms to build your hobby on. We should all hope they both stay viable since the competition has greatly advanced dslr technology much more quickly than if one had failed!

2. I'll again emphasize the adage: buy a decent camera body and spend your money on lenses. The lens is the key to sharpness and IQ (image quality). My strategy from the beginning was to buy NO third party lenses and to buy non-DX or full format lenses. I did this because I wanted to ensure the highest chance of lens compatibility with future body technology and to allow the lens to be used with a full frame sensor if I ever graduated to that format. Good thing I did....I now shoot with a Nikon D700!

3. Try to shoot in manual mode as much as you can. No doubt it will be frustrating at first but it will teach you everything about your camera and the fundamentals of how to make and manipulate your exposure. I would recommend buying the book "Understanding Exposure" Amazon.com: Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera (9780817439392): Bryan Peterson: Books I think it gives a great overview of how exposures are made and how to get the most out of them and its simply to cheap to pass up.

Good luck with your hobby!

3.


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Hi thanks, I guess you didnt go through all the posts, its ok, I now have this book, it is very informative!
I also now have the DSLR camera Nikon d3000, got such an amazing deal on it, I could not pass it up.
Right now I just have the kit lens 18-55 that came with the camera, I am going to play with this for a while and do some research about other types of lens.
Is a 50mm prime lens a good one to get? (from numerous photography blogs, it is evident that such a lens is good for learningto shoot in manual)
Here is a quick shot (phone camera pic) of my DSLR


Hubris said:


> I'll throw my two cents in:
> 
> 1. Both Nikon and Canon are both very good platforms to build your hobby on. We should all hope they both stay viable since the competition has greatly advanced dslr technology much more quickly than if one had failed!
> 
> ...


----------



## Danheng1 (Jan 17, 2012)

Anatoly said:


> Hi thanks, I guess you didnt go through all the posts, its ok, I now have this book, it is very informative!
> I also now have the DSLR camera Nikon d3000, got such an amazing deal on it, I could not pass it up.
> Right now I just have the kit lens 18-55 that came with the camera, I am going to play with this for a while and do some research about other types of lens.
> Is a 50mm prime lens a good one to get? (from numerous photography blogs, it is evident that such a lens is good for learningto shoot in manual)
> Here is a quick shot (phone camera pic) of my DSLR


Welcome to nikon world. Word of advice, this hobby is the same as Collecting watches. You won't stop with just one lens (or body). Pretty soon you'll find you have out grown D3000 and will be looking to upgrade to a better/newer model (egD7000). Not to mention all the lenses you'll be buying soon.

Coming back to your questions about 50mm prime. Get the new AFS 50 1.8G. Take note your D3000 do not have a built in motor. So, you can only use lens which have built in motors in them. The 1.8G is a great lens for the price you pay. It's great for portraits and low light situation.

However, you might want to consider a good macro lens since you'll want to shoot your watch collection. I'll recommend the Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8. Great value for money. Built quality isn't as good as Nikon but for what you pay, it's a IQ is pretty similar to Nikon.


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Thank you, I will keep this in mind.


Danheng1 said:


> Welcome to nikon world. Word of advice, this hobby is the same as Collecting watches. You won't stop with just one lens (or body). Pretty soon you'll find you have out grown D3000 and will be looking to upgrade to a better/newer model (egD7000). Not to mention all the lenses you'll be buying soon.
> 
> Coming back to your questions about 50mm prime. Get the new AFS 50 1.8G. Take note your D3000 do not have a built in motor. So, you can only use lens which have built in motors in them. The 1.8G is a great lens for the price you pay. It's great for portraits and low light situation.
> 
> However, you might want to consider a good macro lens since you'll want to shoot your watch collection. I'll recommend the Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8. Great value for money. Built quality isn't as good as Nikon but for what you pay, it's a IQ is pretty similar to Nikon.


----------



## George Riemer (Mar 9, 2008)

Time to experiment taking different photos. Remember, in science there are no failures -- if you didn't get the exposure you wanted, you learned what didn't work.


----------



## Danheng1 (Jan 17, 2012)

Anatoly said:


> Thank you, I will keep this in mind.


Glad I can help. Side note : You can use AF-D lens (without built in motor) but you have to use manual focus. Anyway, for watches I use the Nikon 60mm AF-D and for macro photography I mostly use manual focus. Photography is like playing the piano, the more you practice the better you get. Unless you are a born natural. So keep on shooting. Good Luck!


----------



## ~tc~ (Dec 9, 2011)

I tend to differ with many others concerning M-mode (full manual):

Since the advent of reliable, intelligent, built in metering, I think you are silly to not take advantage of it. Of course, there are some times when m-mode is advised (sunny 16, off camera flash, and stitched panoramas) but, generally, you are wasting time. Why simply dial in what the meter tells you? What are you learning from that? Better, IMHO, to become expert in how DOF and motion blur influence the impact of tour image and learning how to dial those in, while taking advantage of the built in metering to ensure your exposure is close. While you are learning those, you will also probably learn about program shift and exposure compensation, and then you will have all the control of m-mode with much lower risk of a totally missed exposure


----------



## Anatoly (May 22, 2010)

Some practicing (macro) shots of my Omega SMP Chrono using Nikon D3000, stock 18-55mm lens.
Unfortunately I had to further resize them to be able to load them on here. Hope it turnst out....

Anatoly


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

Looking good! Focus, lighting, setup, all good.

One thing I see you need to do: pay attention to where the edges of the frame lie in relation to the subject and background. That will improve your composition.


----------



## MHe225 (Jan 24, 2010)

Great thread with some good advice; thanks to all who contributed. I am in a similar boat as Anatoly and am looking to purchase my first dslr. I did buy a film-slr when I was only 16 y.o. and have enjoyed that camera very much. Only a few years ago, I've put a roll of film in it and made some more pictures with it, convincing myself once more that it's easier to shoot the pic I really want with a slr camera than with my (now 7 y.o.) digital point & shoot. Now is not the first time that I've made attempts to select a camera and the previous times I got a bit frustrated as I couldn't see the forest for the trees s to speak. Apologies for the long intro .....

After some reading / researching I landed on the Canon T3 / EOS 1100D and Nikon D3100 as the best bang for my budget. These are outgoing models and within days I sort of convinced myself that I should spend maybe a little bit more and get the newer Canon T3i / EOS 600D or Nikon D5100. I will say that I have no hard facts to support this view / choice, only gut feel.

My questions to those in the know:

Nikon or Canon (I know each brand has a strong fan-base and I don't want this to end up in the equivalent of the Omega - Rolex "dispute"). Just highlights of what I may gain / miss out on.
do the features / extras on the newer cameras justify the higher prices or should I just get the previous generations?
any additional insights?
Thanks in advance for your advice.

RonB


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

Nikon vs Canon is very much like Omega vs Rolex (or vi vs emacs, if you know that one).

Consensus seems to be this: Nikon handle a bit quicker, because more settings are available with quick button and dial shortcuts (as opposed to digging through menus). Both have essentially equal technical quality; they leapfrog each other with each new camera introduction. Canon do video a bit better, as you'd expect from a company that has done pro video cameras forever. So it comes down to preference, but if you want a technical criterion it's 'do you shoot action with stills or video?'.

Newer cameras perform better in two areas: video shooting, and low-light performance. The low light improvements are absolutely spectacular, and are definitely worth the extra money. The video improvements are probably worth it too, if you care about video at all (which I don't).


----------



## MHe225 (Jan 24, 2010)

Thanks, Andrew, useful feedback / insights, confirming my own "leanings".

Must say that I'm tickled to get a reply from "the home of John Britten"

RonB


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

MHe225 said:


> Thanks, Andrew, useful feedback / insights, confirming my own "leanings".
> 
> Must say that I'm tickled to get a reply from "the home of John Britten"
> 
> RonB


Heh... John passed away a while ago now. But he was a household name over here, and I've seen the bikes run.

So, one thing to say about camera selection: it's really about lenses, and if you decide what lenses you want, you can work back to the camera.

I'm a Nikon user for that reason: between myself, my father, and my sister, we have probably $20k in Nikon lenses. No point in even looking at Canon.


----------



## markot (Mar 17, 2010)

MHe225 said:


> My questions to those in the know:
> 
> Nikon or Canon (I know each brand has a strong fan-base and I don't want this to end up in the equivalent of the Omega - Rolex "dispute"). Just highlights of what I may gain / miss out on.
> RonB


A few years back when I was buying my first DSLR I was in the same boat and eventually found out that both brands perform pretty much equal at the same price point. So how did I decide? I went to a store and handled both cameras and made a decision based on ergonomics and design. In my hands Nikon felt better, while my friend preferred Canon.


----------



## nickalew (Jan 24, 2012)

Just got a d5100, can't wait to start shooting. Are there any lenses you guys would recommend as a go-to lens? As in I'll only need this lens and nothing else. I'd be using it for portraits, scenery etc.


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

So, there's no such thing as 'one lens to rule them all'. But in Nikon DX format, like your 5100, there is the 18-200 VR. There are two things it doesn't do perfectly: low light (it has a relatively slow aperture, but you may not care) and macro (and since this is a watch forum, you probably care about that).

Since you have a 5100, it probably came with an 18-55 VR and a 55-200 VR. Between them they do pretty well.

The Micro-Nikkor series are phenomenal macro lenses, you really want one of those. Actually, the later f/2.8 ones are better at low light than the zooms as well... but the low-light specialists are the f/1.8 or f/1.4 fixed focus lenses.


----------



## nickalew (Jan 24, 2012)

Andrew McGregor said:


> So, there's no such thing as 'one lens to rule them all'. But in Nikon DX format, like your 5100, there is the 18-200 VR. There are two things it doesn't do perfectly: low light (it has a relatively slow aperture, but you may not care) and macro (and since this is a watch forum, you probably care about that).
> 
> Since you have a 5100, it probably came with an 18-55 VR and a 55-200 VR. Between them they do pretty well.
> 
> The Micro-Nikkor series are phenomenal macro lenses, you really want one of those. Actually, the later f/2.8 ones are better at low light than the zooms as well... but the low-light specialists are the f/1.8 or f/1.4 fixed focus lenses.


Thank you for the info! My d5100 only had the 18-55. I've decided that t8-200 is ultimately out of my price range. I was thinking about getting a 55-200 and just use the 18-55 and 55-200 (the camera bag I'm planning to get has room for an extra lens). Do you think these two lenses would be good enough for a wide variety of uses (as in I shouldn't need to buy any other lenses)?

I was also considering a 35mm prime lens for everyday use as well.


----------



## Andrew McGregor (Dec 27, 2011)

Well, there's a lot you can do with just the two zooms. The 35 mm is a nice lens, but actually not as sharp as the 18-55 at 35, so you only really want it if the wider aperture really matters to you. I decided not to bother with the 35 initially, and I haven't missed it much, although I'd have to get some fast lens if I was going to be shooting concerts or theatre.

For what it's worth, I have a D90 with an 18-200, a 60mm f/2.8 micro and a 10.5 f/2.8 fisheye (crazy lens that).


----------



## walkm0ke (Oct 27, 2008)

My current setup is a Nikon D7000 with three lenses. 
Nikkor 18-105
Tamron 70-300
Nikkor 50mm 1.8D

With that said, some of the micro 4/3's cameras are very intriguing.


----------



## Scottish Steve (Sep 7, 2010)

Andrew McGregor said:


> Well, there's a lot you can do with just the two zooms. The 35 mm is a nice lens, but actually not as sharp as the 18-55 at 35....


I find that very surprising. I was going to buy the new AF-S 85mm f/2.8 DX, but it looks like I'll be getting a compact instead.
Ive got the d5100, had it for 4 months and am very happy to be learning this hobby. Everyone on the web I looked at seemed to be EOS 550D mad, but I ultimately went with the 5100 due to the very low noise. My only prime is the AF 50mm f/1.8 D, which I manually focus. This is not a problem and at 998 Chinese yuan for one of the sharpest lenses around, I'm actually a bit worried about getting an AF DX in case it's not as sharp. Even the kit lens can be brought round to much sharper focus if you don't rely on the motors and do it by hand, assuming you have the time of course.


----------

