DSLR around 30-35K

sujoyp

Grand Master
yaah D5100 have some more features but would not effect a starter anyways..

What I have learn in these 5 months of DSLR is that body just doesn't matter:smile: personal technique and lens r major factors...spend least on body and save for lenses...my advice:razz:

Like sydbarett said...if u can get a D90 its next level of DSLR...if u consider D3100, D5100, 550D most of them have similar image quality and feature set..

now if someone will say that D3100 wont autofocus old lenses...then I say old lenses dont have VR like new ones which is very imp for handheld shots..
 

Sounava

In the zone
Sounava if u can tell the differences.
See below...
Thanks for your advice ;-)
and I too am super confused between the 3100 and 5100
is the 5100 worth the extra 8k(here in chennai)
and since the 5100 is brand new I hear it is trading at a premium
I'm sure dSLR s arent like mobile phones whose prices drop every 2 weeks
so when can I expect the price to drop for this baby :)
Well, the D5100 is indeed worth the 8k. [See below]
The introductory price was 38k. Prices will reach at around 33k at max, that too after around 10months.

Stretch your budget to 40 K and get the D90 (body) + 50mm 1.8. You can add to the lens line later.
This is also a good advice, but the total budget is going towards 46k. Plus the 50mm acts as 90mm in APSC sensors. So not at all suitable for most purpose. It is good for portraits though.

You can also consider Canons but they have smaller sensors and may not offer the same picture quality especially after they pack more MegaPixels. Video quality of the Canons however would be better.
Slightly smaller sensor = true. Other things = not true. Relation between sensor size, number of pixels etc cannot be generalized to all cases, especially in case of DSLRs. They can be compared with point and shoot vs DSLR though. I can elaborate slightly more if you want.

yaah D5100 have some more features but would not effect a starter anyways..

What I have learn in these 5 months of DSLR is that body just doesn't matter:smile: personal technique and lens r major factors...spend least on body and save for lenses...my advice:razz:
Body doesn't matter is not entirely true at this age. It was true in the film era. Actually some concepts of film photography era are trickling down to the digital age, though they do not hold true in the present scenario.
For example this "body doesn't matter" thing. In the film age, all that mattered was light entered through lens, fell on film. So the lens + film mattered. Body was out of the question as far as "image quality" was concerned. But in this age "film" is replaced by "sensors" <-- this is a major factor. Image sharpness, low light performance, dynamic range, colour reproduction everything depends on the sensor + processor combo.
[Other factors are trickling down too; like 50mm is "normal". Well it IS normal, but in APSC it acts as 75mm in Nikon and 80mm in Canon which is not at all Normal, rather short telephoto. Use 35mm lens to get close to "normal" in APSC sensored cameras, but you will not hear anyone say that in the same frequency as they speak about 50mm]


Ok now the main part:

D3100 vs D5100

There are certain nifty small things in D5100 which are not present in D3100 and those are definite drawbacks.

1. ISO values: In D3100, ISO values are 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 etc.
In D5100 you get ISO's in 1/3rd increments. So you also get values like 250, 320, 500, 640,1000, 1250 in between the standard ones. This definitely helps. Once you use it you will understand.

2. ISO is not shown in the viewfinder of D3100.

3. There are on-demand gridlines in the viewfinder of the D5100 which helps in composing images esp in keeping the horizon flat.

4. The cheap (650/-) wireless remote does not work with D3100. I regularly use the remote with my D5000 and is really a boon.

5. The screen: super awesomeness in the D5100: 920,000 pixles vs 230,000 in D3100. Plus the swivel feature <-- helps in awkward angles when composing with the viewfinder is not an option.

6. Not to mention the Sensor: The sensor in D5100 is the same as in D7000 and it is being touted as the best APS-C sensor ever. You will be hardpressed to find any noise even at ISO 3200.

7. There are some limitations in the flash also which I exactly don't remember.

8. Active D Lighting can only be OFF and ON in D3100. It can be Off, Auto, Hi, Med, Low in D5100 <-- this helps in many situations.

9. Intervalometer in absent in D3100. [Continues to take pictures at a predefined interval <-- time lapse videos are done using this]

10. Cannot remember anything more at this moment. So you see, it is definitely worth the extra amount if you can stretch for it.
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
aah u misinterpreted me...actually what I was saying that when u get any DSLR say D3100...u have to spend on a good quality lens with VR
U like birding u will take Nikkor 55-300 VR for 16k or 70-300 VR for 25k
U have interest in macro u will get tamron 90mm macro for 12-15k
U take wide angle pic u get a 10-16mm (sorry I dont have much knowledge about this)
U like a allrounder u get nikkor 18-200 VR for 28k

Soo where is the body factor......ultimately u have to spend this much on a lens even if u get a D3100 or a D7000...soo make a budget accordingly else u r going to be frustrated on each step

I was soo frustrated that 18-55 mm could not take macro or bird shot I cant explain u.
 

kjuvale

Pharmaguru
D3100 vs D5100

There are certain nifty small things in D5100 which are not present in D3100 and those are definite drawbacks.

3. There are on-demand gridlines in the viewfinder of the D5100 which helps in composing images esp in keeping the horizon flat.

Sadly there are no gridlines in viewfinder in d5100 too, I tried looking in all menus and settings but could find it anywhere, neither in users guidelines :(
But of-course its there in live view.
 

sydbarett

Broken In
The D90 alongwith the 50mm f1.8 shouldnt cost more than 41-42 k max. Apart from the fact that the D90 offers better control (compared to D5100/D5000), Depth of Field preview, superior optical viewfinder and Continuous shooting at 4.5 fps, the more practical reasons for suggesting something like a D90 are :-

(1) like sujoyp mentioned, the D90 and D7000 are two dSLRs in Nikon's lineup which autofocus with FX lenses. This means you can AF on AF FX lenses for a much much cheaper price. It also means you utilise the central part of an FX lens which would be sharp throughout its frame for a DX format SLR. It further means you can buy FX lenses and future proof yourself for buying a FX format camera later when the prices go down (only a matter of time).


(2) While its true that a 50 mm FX lens would behave like a 75 mm on DX SLRs, the 50 mm f1.8 is the sharpest and fastest lens you'll get for the price. Its great at whatever it does. Low light shooting is much more a function of lens speed than anything else and the D5100 sensor cannot compensate for lack of a fast lens.

Should you want to have a quality fast "zoom" lens for budget pricing you can go for the TAMRON 28-75mm f2.8 or the TAMRON 17-50mm f2.8. Both should be available around 20k and will equip you with a reasonable spread of focal range for general photography.
 

Sounava

In the zone
Sadly there are no gridlines in viewfinder in d5100 too, I tried looking in all menus and settings but could find it anywhere, neither in users guidelines :(
But of-course its there in live view.
Oh thats bad sorry for the mistake. They are present in D5000 so I thought that naturally it will be in D5100 too.

The D90 alongwith the 50mm f1.8 shouldnt cost more than 41-42 k max.
The 50mm f/1.8 itself costs 5.6k approx. How will you get both in 41k.

(1) like sujoyp mentioned, the D90 and D7000 are two dSLRs in Nikon's lineup which autofocus with FX lenses. This means you can AF on AF FX lenses for a much much cheaper price.
Both of you got it wrong. There is no relation with autofocus and FX. The relation is with AF or AF-S. D5100, D5000, D3100 etc do not autofocus only on AF-S lenses and do not autofocus on AF-S lenses. But D90, D7000 have in-body focus motors so they can autofocus on screw-drive AF lenses.
For example Nikkor 70-300 VR is an FX lens, but AF-S and so D5100 will autofocus on it.

It also means you utilise the central part of an FX lens which would be sharp throughout its frame for a DX format SLR.
True for all DX cameras.

It further means you can buy FX lenses and future proof yourself for buying a FX format camera later when the prices go down (only a matter of time).
1. Prices of FX cameras will never come down.
2. Not everyone will buy or feel the need for FX format cameras.


While its true that a 50 mm FX lens would behave like a 75 mm on DX SLRs, the 50 mm f1.8 is the sharpest and fastest lens you'll get for the price.
True. I never contradicted it. I said 75mm is not for general shooting.

D5100 sensor cannot compensate for lack of a fast lens.
Could not understand.
 
So what are my options for 35k ??
Nikon d5100+stock or
Nikon d3100+ some lens that you havent told me yet
I'm confused o_O :C_insane:
Forgive my ignorance what Is an FX lens/camera ???
 

Sounava

In the zone
FX camera = Full frame DSLRs. The sensors in those camera are 35mm = same as the size of a standard film. DX = APSC sized sensors. FX cameras cost around 1.5lakhs upwards.

What lens you will buy depends on you. Tell me your preferences.
 
I go for mid-range and long range shots macro isn't exactly my thing,
so I was thinking along the lines of a 22-200 ish
and
I think I'll play around with my stock lens for a year (to save some cash) and then get an additional lens
or get the d3100 (body only) and an additional lens ???? o_O
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
I think we can have the pricing too :)

D3100+18-55+55-200 = 29+11 = 40k (This is what I have)
D3100+18-105mm = 29+14 = 43k (u have to sell that 18-55mm saperately coz there is no only body for D3100..good thing is 18-105 have descent zoom and no need to change lens again and again.)

D5100 + 18-55 = 34k

If u seriously want to wait for sometime for next lens then getting a 18-105 lens would be the best
 

Sounava

In the zone
^ Ah yes I should have included the prices also. Btw, D5100 with kit lens at 34k? :O :O I thought it retails for around 38k.

And D3100 is available Body-only also ---> Nikon India Private Limited It is 5.5k cheaper than the with-kit version.
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
oooh a my time it was with kit lens only no body only option...then I think he should go for
D3100+18-105 = 25+14 = 39k:razz:

I am sure the street price of D5100 must be around 35k

When the MRP of D3100 was 33k I got it for 28-29k
 

bhaskar

Broken In
Hi,

I want to buy a DSLR at around 32k. I have these three models in mind. Nikon D3100, D5000 and Canon EOS 500D. Can you guys please suggest one among these three? Which will be the best buy? Thanks for your help.
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
at 32k u have only 2 options D3100 and canon 1100D

leave D5000 and 500D they r nearly dead.

between these two we can decide according to your preferences..

what do u shoot most??
Can u spend on the SLR in future or this fill be the final investment.
 

warrior047

In the zone
oooh a my time it was with kit lens only no body only option...then I think he should go for
D3100+18-105 = 25+14 = 39k:razz:

I am sure the street price of D5100 must be around 35k

When the MRP of D3100 was 33k I got it for 28-29k

sujoy, where can i get good deals in cameras...flipkart and letsbuy have costly rates for cameras...D3100 is still 29k there even when mrp is 29k itself!
 

warrior047

In the zone
Top Bottom