Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 27, 2010, 9:20 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
Just know that you are only going to be able to AF-s or AF-i lenses or 3rd party lens with built in motors. The d3000, d3100 and d5000 camera's do not have a in body motor. So regular AF series lenses
Which isn't a huge issue anymore, as the number of lenses that will AF is about 90, and are available at all price levels and cover every focal length. The only type of lens that is short in number are primes. Also, even non af lenses can be mounted and used, of course without AF.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 9:23 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo1210 View Post
Heres something that struck me today when I was reading on dpreview...

Nikon D3000: 2.7MP/cm square

Canon EOS 1000D: 3.1MP/cm square

Is this meant to be a good or bad thing for the Nikon? I think the sensor in the Nikon is also larger by a fraction?
You're really splitting hairs. It may theoretically give the Nikon a small advantage, however I doubt that this advantage would be noticeable under normal (really most any) use.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 1:32 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

It is an issue if the lens you need is one that will not AF on the body. Only the person using can decide if it is huge or just minor. And reading the OP's budget, it might be a issue down the line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjseeney View Post
Which isn't a huge issue anymore, as the number of lenses that will AF is about 90, and are available at all price levels and cover every focal length. The only type of lens that is short in number are primes. Also, even non af lenses can be mounted and used, of course without AF.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 4:51 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
frank-in-toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 1,083
Default

I want to bring sony back into the discussion. the op said he likes to take "pictures of my cars, friends at parties or get-togethers and also some landscapes". Given approx equal iq of these cameras, it comes down to ergonomics. he's not a pro with a big need for primes. the kit zooms will be fine. i love show and shines. i use the flip-out lcd on my sony almost exclusively. any shots at hood or hubcap level are much easier with lv. look at these shots i took. now imagine squatting for the low shots. many times. and if there had been low-riders there, the camera would be at ground level.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/frank-i...46868827/show/
frank-in-toronto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 5:37 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
It is an issue if the lens you need is one that will not AF on the body. Only the person using can decide if it is huge or just minor. And reading the OP's budget, it might be a issue down the line.
I think you missed my point. As I said, the only thing missing in the AF-s lineup are primes (aside from the 35f1.8 and the 50 and a few other third party offerings). So obviously if your primarily shooting primes, then a lower end Nikon won't work for you. Otherwise there isn't a shooting situation that isn't covered at almost any budget by the available af-s lenses made by Nikon or other 3rd parties. So aside from primes, I can't imagine you not being able to find the lens you need, either used or new. The whole lack of lenses argument just isn't that valid anymore (for the most part) and shouldn't be a major factor in your decision (unless you shoot primes and want AF...if you don't mind manually focusing, then there isn't a problem at all)

Last edited by rjseeney; Nov 27, 2010 at 5:40 PM.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 11:49 PM   #26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 13
Default

GREAT shots Frank!
andysly5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2010, 12:37 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

To be honest, all the brands dslr can produce excellent photos. It really comes down to features one wants, ergo, and what difference in processing each brand takes to produce the end product.

Here is a canon taking some autoshow photos
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/tr...auto-show.html
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Nov 28, 2010 at 12:40 AM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2010, 7:49 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
frank-in-toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 1,083
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
To be honest, all the brands dslr can produce excellent photos. It really comes down to features one wants, ergo, and what difference in processing each brand takes to produce the end product.

Here is a canon taking some autoshow photos
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/tr...auto-show.html
yep. features. we can split the hairs about this and that but a missing desired feature is a deal-breaker. i have my list (fold-out lcd, 16:9 jpg, pop-up flash, high iso, grip). using elimination i was left with sony. ok. done. then all i needed to do was buy it.
frank-in-toronto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2010, 2:07 AM   #29
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 43
Default

okay, i was about to put the money down for the D3000 this morning but then the salesperson said that if i went with the nikon, the lenses are very expensive. for my purpose of depth of field, i was told i'd need a 50mm f1.8 lens in the future (when I have more money) a nikon lens of that equivalence is $400 but it doesn't focus automatically since nikon doesn't make an AF-S 50mm lens. now they said if i went with a canon (extra $40) then i would be able to pick up an EF or EF-S series 50mm lens off any shelf for around $100 and it would autofocus in the body. The shop salesperson said the Cdanon might cost more for now, but apparently i'll be jumping for joy in the future when i need new lenses?

what do you guys think? pay the extra $40 for the canon or not?
stevo1210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2010, 2:59 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
frank-in-toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 1,083
Default

both will produce great quality photos. canon has live view. cheaper primes down-the-road. neither has in-body image stabilization. so, no draw-backs compared to the nikon that i can see. and one day you can put a white L lens on it.

$40 is nothing. wait till you have to ante up for a filter. oh, you thought they'd throw that in? sometimes. not usually.
frank-in-toronto is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:38 PM.