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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 13, 2011, 4:50 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7
Default Which nikkon for first dslr?

So I took photography 2 years in high school and really enjoyed it even although Iv forgotten most of it since then. Now Im Looking to get my first dslr. I really like the d5100. I also like the d7000 although it is a little more then I wanted to spend. I was thinking that investing in the d7000 might be a good idea since I would be able to buy the cheaper, older non AF-S lens for it. For example you can find a non AF-S 50mm 1.4 for about $100 while the AF-S version is $450. That alone almost makes up the price difference. Or am I going the wrong way completely and stick with the basic d3100?
smacigidsevets is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 13, 2011, 7:16 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

You need to keep in mind the camera is not full frame. A 50mm lens on either of those cameras is like a 75mm lens on your old film camera back in high school. So, a valid question is: why is it you want the 50mm 1.4 to begin with?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2011, 7:41 AM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smacigidsevets View Post
...For example you can find a non AF-S 50mm 1.4 for about $100 while the AF-S version is $450.
$100, huh? Not if it's Autofocus. Try over $300 for the older non AF-S version of a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (D) Autofocus lens at most reputable dealers. Here's an example for $369.95:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_4D.html

The newer AF-S version of the 50mm f/1.4 is over $500 now at authorized Nikon USA Dealers. Here's an example at around $549:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_4G.html

You're probably thinking of the cheaper 50mm f/1.8 (D). Note that the 50mm f/1.4 lenses are almost twice as bright, have better build quality, and cost a lot more.

The dimmer 50mm f/1.8 (D) AF lens sells for around $139 now for a Nikon USA warrantied (versus grey market) lens. Here's an example:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...kkor_50mm.html

But, note that Nikon recently announced a new AF-S version of a 50mm f/1.8 that will Autofocus on the entry level bodies. It should show up on dealer shelves around June 16th and will sell for around $219. Here's a listing for one;

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_8G.html
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2011, 8:37 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
rienz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Middle East
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smacigidsevets View Post
So I took photography 2 years in high school and really enjoyed it even although Iv forgotten most of it since then. Now Im Looking to get my first dslr. I really like the d5100. I also like the d7000 although it is a little more then I wanted to spend. I was thinking that investing in the d7000 might be a good idea since I would be able to buy the cheaper, older non AF-S lens for it. For example you can find a non AF-S 50mm 1.4 for about $100 while the AF-S version is $450. That alone almost makes up the price difference. Or am I going the wrong way completely and stick with the basic d3100?
Both are great cameras ... although d7000 is a "better allround" camera I'd go with d5100 because of its tilt screen ... I recently purchased Canon 60D for its tilt screen for macro photography and I cannot begin to tell you how great it is to be able to view your shot from any angle.
__________________
Current Gear: Canon 7D+BG-E7 Battery Grip & 60D with EF 24-105 f/4 L IS; EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II; EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS; EF 100 f2.8 L IS; EF 50 f/1.8 II; Canon Speedlite 430 EX II; Metz 58 AF-1; Canon RC-5 Wireless Remote Controller & RS-80N3 Remote Switch; Manfrotto 190CX PRO4 with Manfrotto 322RC2 Grip Ball Head; Kenko Extension Tube Set; B+W UV & Polorizing filters
rienz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2011, 10:58 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
You need to keep in mind the camera is not full frame. A 50mm lens on either of those cameras is like a 75mm lens on your old film camera back in high school. So, a valid question is: why is it you want the 50mm 1.4 to begin with?
I want a 50mm because iv always heard its one of the best basic lens and I am a pretty firm believer in getting composition done right yourself not with zoom.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
$100, huh? Not if it's Autofocus. Try over $300 for the older non AF-S version of a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (D) Autofocus lens at most reputable dealers. Here's an example for $369.95:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_4D.html

The newer AF-S version of the 50mm f/1.4 is over $500 now at authorized Nikon USA Dealers. Here's an example at around $549:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_4G.html

You're probably thinking of the cheaper 50mm f/1.8 (D). Note that the 50mm f/1.4 lenses are almost twice as bright, have better build quality, and cost a lot more.

The dimmer 50mm f/1.8 (D) AF lens sells for around $139 now for a Nikon USA warrantied (versus grey market) lens. Here's an example:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...kkor_50mm.html

But, note that Nikon recently announced a new AF-S version of a 50mm f/1.8 that will Autofocus on the entry level bodies. It should show up on dealer shelves around June 16th and will sell for around $219. Here's a listing for one;

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_8G.html
what im saying is the 50mm lens with its own focus motor is over $400 while one like this

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nik...5561559&sr=8-3

doesn't have a built in focus motor is only $150. Since the d7000 has a built in focus motor wouldn't the $150 lens be just as good as the $400 lens and still have AF?

Last edited by smacigidsevets; May 16, 2011 at 11:05 AM.
smacigidsevets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2011, 11:04 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
$100, huh? Not if it's Autofocus. Try over $300 for the older non AF-S version of a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (D) Autofocus lens at most reputable dealers. Here's an example for $369.95:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_4D.html

The newer AF-S version of the 50mm f/1.4 is over $500 now at authorized Nikon USA Dealers. Here's an example at around $549:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_4G.html

You're probably thinking of the cheaper 50mm f/1.8 (D). Note that the 50mm f/1.4 lenses are almost twice as bright, have better build quality, and cost a lot more.

The dimmer 50mm f/1.8 (D) AF lens sells for around $139 now for a Nikon USA warrantied (versus grey market) lens. Here's an example:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...kkor_50mm.html

But, note that Nikon recently announced a new AF-S version of a 50mm f/1.8 that will Autofocus on the entry level bodies. It should show up on dealer shelves around June 16th and will sell for around $219. Here's a listing for one;

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_8G.html
what im saying is the 50mm lens with its own focus motor is over $400 while one like this

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nik...5561559&sr=8-3

doesn't have a built in focus motor is only $150. Since the d7000 has a built in focus motor wouldn't the $150 lens be just as good the $400 lens and still have AF?
smacigidsevets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2011, 11:06 AM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smacigidsevets View Post
I want a 50mm because iv always heard its one of the best basic lens and I am a pretty firm believer in getting composition done right yourself not with zoom.
Well, that notion started with film cameras. On an aps-c sensor DSLR, 50mm is a bit longer. Again, in film days - no one was suggesting a 75mm lens was "one of the best basic lens". So, on the cameras you're considering, a 35mm lens would give a field-of-view similar to what a 50mm lens did on film camera.
As to "getting composition done right yourself" - that's great. But it also depends on what you want to shoot. For example, if you want to take a photograph of a group indoors. If you're using a 50mm lens on an aps-c sensor camera you need to take a wrecking ball to the wall of the house to be able to back up far enough to get everyone in the frame. And, if you want to take photos of birds in the trees, you may need to learn to fly yourself and become invisible to get close enough to take a photo with a 50mm lens.

There is a lot to be said for using a prime lens for a while and "zooming with your feet" but the problem is - the "correct" focal length for a photographer to use depends on the type of photography they do. But if you simply want to steadfastly stick to "I want 50mm because that's what people tell me I should have", then what you really want is a 35mm lens on those cameras you're considering. That will give you a similar field of view to the 50mm prime on a film camera.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2011, 11:12 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
rienz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Middle East
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Well, that notion started with film cameras. On an aps-c sensor DSLR, 50mm is a bit longer. Again, in film days - no one was suggesting a 75mm lens was "one of the best basic lens". So, on the cameras you're considering, a 35mm lens would give a field-of-view similar to what a 50mm lens did on film camera.
As to "getting composition done right yourself" - that's great. But it also depends on what you want to shoot. For example, if you want to take a photograph of a group indoors. If you're using a 50mm lens on an aps-c sensor camera you need to take a wrecking ball to the wall of the house to be able to back up far enough to get everyone in the frame. And, if you want to take photos of birds in the trees, you may need to learn to fly yourself and become invisible to get close enough to take a photo with a 50mm lens.

There is a lot to be said for using a prime lens for a while and "zooming with your feet" but the problem is - the "correct" focal length for a photographer to use depends on the type of photography they do. But if you simply want to steadfastly stick to "I want 50mm because that's what people tell me I should have", then what you really want is a 35mm lens on those cameras you're considering. That will give you a similar field of view to the 50mm prime on a film camera.
Well said ... and so true
__________________
Current Gear: Canon 7D+BG-E7 Battery Grip & 60D with EF 24-105 f/4 L IS; EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II; EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS; EF 100 f2.8 L IS; EF 50 f/1.8 II; Canon Speedlite 430 EX II; Metz 58 AF-1; Canon RC-5 Wireless Remote Controller & RS-80N3 Remote Switch; Manfrotto 190CX PRO4 with Manfrotto 322RC2 Grip Ball Head; Kenko Extension Tube Set; B+W UV & Polorizing filters
rienz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2011, 5:08 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 22
Default

Since d5100 and d7000 have the same sensor, the image quality would be around the same. I would suggest the d5100 and spend the money saved on better lenses.
jellyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2011, 6:33 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
john7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 21
Default

To date, I don't think any camera in its class can match (IMO) it's picture quality, f/2.0 lens for night shooting, excellent simple design and functionality.
john7 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 8:32 AM.