Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

shaunp

Cancelled
Nov 5, 2010
1,811
1,395
agree with this. for the entry-level stuff, it really comes down to personal preference. its kind of a beatles vs stones kind of thing, some people prefer how one operates over the other. spec wise you're really not gonna find much difference.

if you plan on growing out your lens collection, i'd skip the mirrorless. also if you plan on growing out your lens collection, i'd suggest saving up more and maybe getting like a used D7000. the more mid-range bodies have functions to add capabilities to some older lenses. I have a 1980s period 24-120mm for my D7100, using it on that body allows me to have autofocus because the 7100 has an in-body lens focus motor.

in my experience, nikon is better for older lens compatibility. F-mount has been in use in some form or another since the mid-50s.

I tend to go more for used mid-range cameras too as you are less likely to outgrow the camera body as you get more into it, and the cost is about the same as a new low-end body. For example a lot of guys at my camera club have found they don't have a port for external lighting control, etc, on the lower-end bodies. The club doesn't have the money for loads of wireless kit so sometimes we have to rely on a cabled set up.

I also find the build quality better on the higher end bodies and they balance better with heavy lenses. I've gone down the Canon route and have had the 10D, 20D and 50D - all have been great. I'm sure the Nikon equivalent will be also excellent.
 

erickj

macrumors regular
May 9, 2008
108
2
Seattle
I'd look into mirroless if I were you. The Fuji lineup is particularly impressive, as is their glass. I sold my Canon and wen't exclusively to Fuji and couldn't be happier. As someone who's taken a few classes, knows my way around controls, etc. etc. couldn't be easier to use. Biggest plus is the form factor. They are no bigger than a classic rangefinder, and that's the problem with Canon and Nikon cameras, they are HUGE and just are really too much for the everyday shooter. Unless you're a 'pro' (and even a lot of the 'pros' are switching to mirroless and Fuji in particular), there is really no reason to get that much of a camera. The capabilities of mirrorless are so similar as well as quality that it's a no brainer to go with a smaller form factor that is just more enjoyable to use. The only thing that might suffer is video and fast focus a little. But again, unless you're a 'pro' that's really not something you'll likely even notice. I had the Fuji x-e2. Upgraded to an x-pro1 and just upgraded to the new x-t1. Couldn't be happier with any of them. Wish I had the funds to keep them all, as they're all amazing cameras. But for a starter, the x-e2 is a joy to use.
 

Nickwell24

macrumors regular
Nov 13, 2008
149
12
I am in the market for an entry level DSLR camera. I have narrowed down my selection to the following cameras for their compact size and weight. Portability is very important to me.

1. Canon Rebel SL1
2. Nikon D3300

Between the two, which is a better starter DSLR camera? Any camera experts want to weigh-in?

If portability is very important to you have you considered a high-end point and shoot or a mirrorless?

Regarding D-SLRs, the best advice I can give is go to the store and pick up these two models up, hold them in your hand, and see which fits your hand better and feels more natural. DSLR's are very good now and the difference between Nikon vs Canon sensors are very minimal, my 4 year old T2i still takes pictures just as good as today's T6i (it would take a very keen eye and pixel peeper to tell a difference).

Save yourself hours of reading forums, tech debates which break cameras down by statistics, and other forms of research and just go hold them. Find the camera that has the features you want and take everything into account:

- Burst Speed
- Feel in your hand
- Auto sensor cleaning
- Touchscreen/flip out screen
- Cost
- Available lenses

If you drive yourself crazy looking at everybody's opinion you'll end up back to where you are now confused. The best investment you'll make when starting with DSLR or any type of serious photography is time studying and learning (both books, online, and behind the lens). Whatever you buy, pick up a Photography book too, I personally recommend Scott Kelby.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
35,153
25,254
Gotta be in it to win it
If portability is very important to you have you considered a high-end point and shoot or a mirrorless?

Regarding D-SLRs, the best advice I can give is go to the store and pick up these two models up, hold them in your hand, and see which fits your hand better and feels more natural. DSLR's are very good now and the difference between Nikon vs Canon sensors are very minimal, my 4 year old T2i still takes pictures just as good as today's T6i (it would take a very keen eye and pixel peeper to tell a difference).

Save yourself hours of reading forums, tech debates which break cameras down by statistics, and other forms of research and just go hold them. Find the camera that has the features you want and take everything into account:

- Burst Speed
- Feel in your hand
- Auto sensor cleaning
- Touchscreen/flip out screen
- Cost
- Available lenses

If you drive yourself crazy looking at everybody's opinion you'll end up back to where you are now confused. The best investment you'll make when starting with DSLR or any type of serious photography is time studying and learning (both books, online, and behind the lens). Whatever you buy, pick up a Photography book too, I personally recommend Scott Kelby.

As an aside, T6i is not available yet in production, and while the t2i is s good camera, mine is now a hand me down, newer Rebels have better noise control starting from t4i.
 

Nickwell24

macrumors regular
Nov 13, 2008
149
12
As an aside, T6i is not available yet in production, and while the t2i is s good camera, mine is now a hand me down, newer Rebels have better noise control starting from t4i.

My bad, meant to type t5i which is the camera my girl has.
 

saintforlife

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2011
1,045
329
Thank you all for the tips very much. It is very helpful. I am continuing my research. I will let you know what end up doing.
 

kwikdeth

macrumors 65816
Feb 25, 2003
1,156
1,761
Tempe, AZ
I am unsure why you would suggest skipping mirrorless cameras with respect to lenses. I can see where one might suggest getting FF lenses for smaller sensor Nikons so that later, if they prefer a FF Nikon, the lenses are compatible.

The reason I perhaps differ in opinion is that various mirrorless camera makers offer some truly excellent lenses AND not only do 3rd party lens makers add to the mix, but it is possible to use Nikon lenses on them as well as other makes. As example, Fuji X series has a very respectable family of lenses and some people attach older tried and true lenses ranging from Nikon to obscure brands.

If I were today to get a small sensor Nikon, I would perhaps get 1-2 lenses made for that size sensor and invest in FF Nikon lenses where serious investment is concerned. To be fair, many mirrorless cameras exceed the needs of hobbyist photographers unless they also consider the hobby as being "gear heads" who are in the never ending quest for more/better hardware rather than just shooting. (Mea culpa, I was that way in my earliest of film camera days.)

i make my suggestion regarding skipping mirrorless for larger lens collections simply because none of the mainstream mirrorless cameras have had the same kind of lens mount longevity of the FF nikon and canons. However, you make a valid point in the use of adapters. I do agree with you though that a mirrorless has more than enough capability for most photographers. i just think its better, if one plans on going hog wild with the lens collection, to put yourself in a position where you'd have the most options available without having to make use of adapters that may not carry over all the abilities of the lens to the camera or vice-versa.

personally i dont use any modern lenses with my 7100. i have a mid-80s 24-120 which gets super-fast autofocus on the 7100 body. i also have a mid-70s 50mm prime which was a gift from my grandfather. lastly i have a full-manual 80-200 which i very rarely use. i think i spent $125 on the 24-120 and i got the 80-200 for $70. they dont have all the latest bells and whistles but that's fine for me as it makes me work on getting better shots in-camera.
 

GWalsh

macrumors newbie
Apr 18, 2015
1
0
I vouch for the Canon.
I also own a entry level DSLR Canon (this model:http://www.mbreviews.com/canon-eos-...-55mm-is-ii-one-of-the-best-entry-level-dslr/) and although I know the Nikon is also a great camera I still prefer my Canon :).
It is lighter than you would expect (very portable), the videos and photos are high quality and I thoroughly enjoy it.
The bottom line is that no matter what camera body you get, the lenses are what's going to make the real difference. That' why I would recommend to get a entry-level to mid range camera and save some money for the lenses.
The fact that you want a Nikon or a Canon is good because you will find a large array or lenses for either of these models.
 

v3rlon

macrumors 6502a
Sep 19, 2014
925
749
Earth (usually)
If you are buying a camera to take pictures, it is by definition portable unless you only want pictures of the inside of your safe (it stays home while you go out shooting images).

There is nothing about a good camera with good lens that fits in your pocket like an iPhone does with today's technology. An A7000 with a good SEL35F1.8 lens isn't going into your pocket any faster than the Nikon or Canon, even though it is smaller.

Yes, it IS smaller (also more money than a D750), but so is your lens selection. If you add that adaptor, then it just got bigger by one adaptor, and is closer to the size of its competitors.

So, portable is what you make of it. If you need to carry 3 lenses (14-24, 24-70, 70-200 F2.8), then prepare to lug some weight around. If you can live with F6, get a Tamron 18-270 F3.5-6 and go for it.

The Nikon 50F1.8 is smaller and lighter than my Sony NEX SEL50F18 (the latter is stabilized but that is not normally a factor except for video).

Excellent advice all through this thread:
What will you shoot? Get a camera that works for that.
Consider the lenses you will need, and do not overspend on the body while forsaking glass and lights.
Consider a used camera with more features. A used D7000 will cost about like a D3300, but be a much more powerful camera in spite of fewer megapixels.

Haunt craigslist a bit and see what lenses you can find cheap. You do not have to buy. Just feel the market out some. Does EVERYONE around you shoot Canon? This might make the lens market a little cheaper for you.

You will probably want a speedlight (flash) at some point. You can't paint with light when there is no light. On camera flashes are stopgaps. Also, they call that thing on top of a camera a shoe because, like the ones on your feet, it is a terrible place to put a light or microphone.

I would suggest a Nikon D7x00 used and a 50 1.8 lens, and then look at zoom options if you want. The aforementioned Tamron with vibration control is an excellent choice in my opinion. It isn't "pro sharp," but a nice lightweight carry around lens with tremendous range (27-405 on a Nikon DX body). It is lacking on the aperture side as all the inexpensive zooms are. You could do the Canon equivalent just as well (including the Tamron lens). The body and 50 f1.8 could be yours in the $600 range in the US.
 

Moakesy

macrumors 6502a
Mar 1, 2013
576
1,209
UK
In terms of portability being very important to you, I'd urge you to consider all options, not just DSLR.

Having had a 8 year break from photography, I returned to the DSLR world and purchased the Nikon D750 last November. I love it, and really enjoy it's capabilities. However, I have found that it doesn't suit every situation.....especially portability and when travelling light. So two weeks ago I went for a good quality compact for those occasions instead.

Last week, I tried an experiment of doing a direct comparison....Nikon DSLR+good lens (over £2.5k) vs Panasonic TZ-100 (a little over £500)...the link below shows the direct comparisons...

https://flic.kr/s/aHskxV4HzA

A couple of points to note is that both cameras were set to shoot JPEG, rather than RAW, as the Panasonic RAW format is widely supported yet (it's a new model). I also set the Nikon to match the slower aperture of the compact, so as much as possible both cameras were doing the same thing.

Pics are either labelled as Nikon-AS, or Pana AS......the "AS" bit stands for 'As Shot'...ie not photoshopping or anything....images are directly as they came out of the camera. To my mind, the differences are really small...especially considering the difference in price.

I absolutely love both cameras....and by choice I would still go for the DSLR as it gives me easy access to change settings (and I like the size of it). However, I think this shows that when taking such large and expensive kit isn't suitable to where you are going, then a decent compact can more than hold it's own in terms of image quality.

Hope this helps...although I guess it might make your decision tougher!!
 

jerwin

Suspended
Jun 13, 2015
2,895
4,652
Last week, I tried an experiment of doing a direct comparison....Nikon DSLR+good lens (over £2.5k) vs Panasonic TZ-100 (a little over £500)...the link below shows the direct comparisons...

I see. And which auto mode do you prefer?
 

Newbiep45

macrumors newbie
Apr 20, 2018
2
0
Boston, MA
Sony A6000. :cool:

How do you like this camera? Looking at the a5100 (based off this) and it looks good for the price although the a6000 looks better. I'm not sure if I should just save up a bit more and get that instead.

I see a lot of people in this thread recommending the D3300 too which is another one that I have heard people say to buy, but is it better than the A5100/A6000?

This will be my first serious camera and I plan to use it for my college's basic photojournalism classes. No plans for using it on any sort of paid gigs, but eventually I'd like something I could purchase a better lens for when I can afford it.
 

ChrisA

macrumors G5
Jan 5, 2006
12,919
2,172
Redondo Beach, California
How do you like this camera? Looking at the a5100 (based off this) and it looks good for the price although the a6000 looks better. I'm not sure if I should just save up a bit more and get that instead.

I see a lot of people in this thread recommending the D3300 too which is another one that I have heard people say to buy, but is it better than the A5100/A6000?

This will be my first serious camera and I plan to use it for my college's basic photojournalism classes. No plans for using it on any sort of paid gigs, but eventually I'd like something I could purchase a better lens for when I can afford it.


The thing about an SLR is that switching brands later is hard. Yu but the body then a couple lenses and then wheat you buy next has to be that same brand. Switching means selling everything and starting over.

Buy the Nikon if you like Nikon lenses. I bet MANY people have bought Nikon just so they could use Nikon's 80-200 f/2.8 lens. Look at the used lens market too. See if lenses you might like are available on the used market for your brand.


Each brand does have a kind of style. Sony seems to push their sensor specs, Canon has always come out first with features and Nikon has a reputation of conservatism and user interface.
 

Newbiep45

macrumors newbie
Apr 20, 2018
2
0
Boston, MA
You realize the last post in this thread was two years ago? might wanna start a new one.

Oops, sorry!
[doublepost=1524267925][/doublepost]
The thing about an SLR is that switching brands later is hard. Yu but the body then a couple lenses and then wheat you buy next has to be that same brand. Switching means selling everything and starting over.

Buy the Nikon if you like Nikon lenses. I bet MANY people have bought Nikon just so they could use Nikon's 80-200 f/2.8 lens. Look at the used lens market too. See if lenses you might like are available on the used market for your brand.


Each brand does have a kind of style. Sony seems to push their sensor specs, Canon has always come out first with features and Nikon has a reputation of conservatism and user interface.

Thanks Chris, what brand do you use out of curiosity?
 

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,353
6,495
Kentucky
The thing about an SLR is that switching brands later is hard. Yu but the body then a couple lenses and then wheat you buy next has to be that same brand. Switching means selling everything and starting over.

I switched brands a little over a year ago.

My motivation was in the fact that I've always considered digital complementary to film, but my main film system(Canon FD) was incompatible with my main digital system(Canon EOS). I know that I COULD have bought a good EOS film camera or two(the EOS 3 came under strong consideration) I ultimately decided that I didn't want to completely give up manual focus and all mechanical cameras.

For peaceful co-existence in the same bag, that made Nikon the only choice for me.

I don't want to think what my total Nikon investment is now. It's a LOT higher than my Canon FD mount investment ever was, but then I have more disposable income now. I'm easily in the low 5 figure category, and that was buying virtually everything used. In fact, the only new Nikon item I've bought was the dandy little 35mm f/1.8 DX lens-it was $150 for a used one in the local shop vs. $190 for the open box display model with a full warranty and the lens hood(the used one didn't have that). This is normally a $200 lens anyway.

My experience with modern Nikon bodies is mostly with the higher end ones-I use a D800 as my main DSLR, an F100 or F5 as my "film with modern lenses" body, a D600 as my back-up, and occasionally a D2X and D300s. Oh, I also have a Fuji FinePix S5 that serves for quick and dirty "studio" work(Ebay photos, other routine photos under studio strobes). I actually used a D200 in that last role for a while, but found the dynamic range difficult to live with while the 12-year old S5 is better in that department than many modern cameras.

In any case, I find the high end Nikon bodies straight forward and intuitive. I can pick up an unfamiliar one and have it pretty well set up to take photos the way I like in a couple of minutes. The only thing that sends me to the manual(or the internet) are new features or things that are cryptically named in the menus. In fact, it's a LOT better than setting custom functions on the F5, F100, or N80-unless there are certain ones you set all the time, I'd defy anyone to do it in-camera without the manual or at least a cheater card. Fortunately, with the right hardware you can set them from a computer.

By contrast, I find that it takes me a lot more button presses and a lot more trial and error to set up a high end Canon the way I like, although the common settings are easy enough to find. They're in different places and sometimes use a different operating philosophy, but ultimately CAN use one without much trouble.

Both brands are equally easy to use at the low end if you stick to "green box" or scene modes. I give Canon the edge, though, if you want to move into modes where you have more control over the camera. That's only true at the low end, though-by the time you hit say the D7x00 series Nikons I think the ease of use shifts.

I'll also add that switching back and forth can an infuriating experience as-going even back to the early days-EVERYTHING is reversed on the two cameras. You start noticing it the moment you mount the lens-when looking at the lens mount, you align index mark on a Nikon lens at about 2:00 and turn it counter-clockwise. Canons align at 12:00 and turn clockwise. From your perspective operating the camera(eyepiece facing you) infinity is fully CCW on Nikons and fully CW on Canons(with the exception of the Nikon 45mm f/2.8 GN). For lenses with an aperture ring, Nikons are at their largest aperture fully CCW, and Canons fully CW. On cameras with a real shutter speed dial, CW(looking down) goes to higher speeds on Nikons and CCW goes to higher speeds on Canons. On "two dial" cameras, the rear dial is primary on Nikons and the front is primary on Canons(also, by default, the rear does shutter speed on Nikons and the front on Canons).

I'll add too that my main other system is a Hasselblad 500C, and the lens mounting, aperture ring, and focus all the same as Canon's direction. It throws me off to switch. My Mamiya RB67 doesn't bother me as much since the lenses are breech lock and the ring turns the same direction as on Canon breech lock lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdechko

jdechko

macrumors 601
Jul 1, 2004
4,230
325
In fact, the only new Nikon item I've bought was the dandy little 35mm f/1.8 DX lens-it was $150 for a used one in the local shop vs. $190 for the open box display model with a full warranty and the lens hood(the used one didn't have that). This is normally a $200 lens anyway.

+1 for the 35 f/1.8. We bought a D90 kit about 7 or 8 years ago. That's the only other investment we made as far as glass. For indoors/family pictures, that's what's on the camera 99% of the time.


Now, it's finally (past) time to upgrade and I'm wondering whether to go with the D750 or the D810.
 

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,353
6,495
Kentucky
+1 for the 35 f/1.8. We bought a D90 kit about 7 or 8 years ago. That's the only other investment we made as far as glass. For indoors/family pictures, that's what's on the camera 99% of the time.


Now, it's finally (past) time to upgrade and I'm wondering whether to go with the D750 or the D810.

What are your needs?

As it stands now, you don't have any lenses that will fill the frame on a full frame camera(your D90 kit lens might at certain zoom settings, but corner performance will be poor).

The D810 is PROBABLY overkill for you unless you want to go whole hog on building up a system.

Also, I'd evaluate whether or not you even need to go full frame. The D7x00 cameras are great. If I were to buy one, I'd choose the older D7200 over the current D7500, but that's just a specific quirk/preference of mine due to some features not present on the D7500.
 

jdechko

macrumors 601
Jul 1, 2004
4,230
325
What are your needs?

As it stands now, you don't have any lenses that will fill the frame on a full frame camera(your D90 kit lens might at certain zoom settings, but corner performance will be poor).

The D810 is PROBABLY overkill for you unless you want to go whole hog on building up a system.

Definitely looking at this as an investment over time. Bite the bullet once and make the switch to FX along with either a 50 f1.4 or an 85 f/1.8. My wife does a lot of portraits and events. I’ve got what I think is a nice list

The 810 may be overkill, especially in the resolution department. And I know that bodies are disposable but the glass is forever (esp with Nikon). Anyway, won’t hijack this thread anymore. :)
 

kenoh

macrumors 604
Jul 18, 2008
6,507
10,850
Glasgow, UK
Definitely looking at this as an investment over time. Bite the bullet once and make the switch to FX along with either a 50 f1.4 or an 85 f/1.8. My wife does a lot of portraits and events. I’ve got what I think is a nice list

The 810 may be overkill, especially in the resolution department. And I know that bodies are disposable but the glass is forever (esp with Nikon). Anyway, won’t hijack this thread anymore. :)

Don't forget to factor in the space needed to store the images and the horsepower needed to edit the big files too. Last thing you want to do is spend your budget then find your editing machine cant handle it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdechko and dwig

mofunk

macrumors 68020
Aug 26, 2009
2,421
161
Americas
I just helped someone acquire a slightly used Nikon D7100. I would say I was very impressed at the features. While I was helping them set up their D7100, I brought along my D750 and they were pretty close in layout and whatnots. Inside the camera there were some simiarlites too. Definitely a nice contender for entry level. I told them to skip the D3000-D5000 series because the D7000s have more room to grow.
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
57,003
56,026
Behind the Lens, UK
I just helped someone acquire a slightly used Nikon D7100. I would say I was very impressed at the features. While I was helping them set up their D7100, I brought along my D750 and they were pretty close in layout and whatnots. Inside the camera there were some simiarlites too. Definitely a nice contender for entry level. I told them to skip the D3000-D5000 series because the D7000s have more room to grow.
I have the D7100 and D750. Controls are pretty much the same.
I still use the D7100. Mostly with my 200-500 for extra reach.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
35,153
25,254
Gotta be in it to win it
I responded to this thread 3 years ago. :eek:

Since then, I gave my son an old Canon t2i with some lenses to use as he wanted a camera(and gave me back my stuff). He ultimately decided on the D7100. There is no right answer. It used to be Nikon for the sensor and Canon for the glass; not sure how true that is anymore. Any system one ultimately picks is a good system, there are no bad choices.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.