Entry-level Nikon DSLR advice please

C

ChalfontStGiles

Messages
42
Edit My Images
Yes
As I mentioned in my intro, I've got a Panasonic micro 4/3 camera at the moment and I like this for its portability (I usually carry it with just the 14mm lens attached). Recently I borrowed a Nikon D90 and it instantly took me back to the years when I owned a 35mm film SLR and I really enjoyed the experience. I'm therefore thinking of buying a basic Nikon DSLR. Why Nikon? Well, before I bought my Panasonic I tried various cameras and I liked the feel of the Nikon but I decided at the time I wanted something more compact for traveling, hence the Panasonic. I have also become a bit used to the D90's menus etc. Another reason is I have an option on a used 18-55 zoom so I can buy the camera body only to save a bit of cash (to put towards another lens maybe).

I'm struggling a bit deciding which model so I'd welcome some assistance/advice. I had my mind on the D5300 but comparing it with the cheaper D3300 I'm having a hard time justifying the additional £150 or so. Both appear to have the same sensor and processing system and both have the same external controls. What the 5300 has over the 3300 is more AF points (possibly helpful, I don't know), a flippy screen, gps and wifi. I can live without those last 3. On this basis, is the 5300 worth the extra money? Will I "grow out" of the 3300 too quickly? Thanks everyone.
 
It's a close call for me between those two. However, you sound like someone who doesn't seek immediate gratification by buying the latest gear. If that's the case, I'd be tempted to stump up the extra £150 for the AF as it sounds like it may last you a long time. Good luck hunting.
 
Have you handled the D3300 or D5300? They're very different to hold from the D90 and the viewfinder is not nearly as good. I'd go looking for a used D7100 instead and it may be worth waiting until you get access to the members' market here as there are usually very good deals to be had.
 
I'm new to dslr cameras but i sold my d3200 after only weeks and i'm using a d7000.
I find the latter much better in ease of use.
 
I've handled the D5300 as I was, at the time, comparing to the D5200 and I thought that both fitted my hand very nicely. The newer model felt a bit more comfortable though for some reason. I've not tried the viewfinder. In what way is the viewfinder less good than the D90?
 
Jesus Quintana said:
It's a close call for me between those two. However, you sound like someone who doesn't seek immediate gratification by buying the latest gear. If that's the case, I'd be tempted to stump up the extra £150 for the AF as it sounds like it may last you a long time. Good luck hunting.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. I generally consider my purchases carefully and keep stuff for a long time. My Panasonic is quite a few years old (and probably considered ancient in digital camera technology) but I have no real desire to replace it, for example.
 
The better autofocus is not to be sniffed at, my wife has the D3300 & it's a good camera. The bells & whistles on the D5500 put me off a bit, I'd choose either the D3300 or D7100 if you can push the budget.

BTW my wife hates the button on the 18-55mm. She now uses her 40mm instead after loosing many shots by forgetting the button.
 
ChalfontStGiles said:
A bit old maybe?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's older relative to these other models, but it still takes perfectly good photographs. Unless you really need stupid high ISO capabilities, wifi, etc., I'd probably rather have a D90 than any of the other cameras mentioned in this thread, but to each his own.
 
Last edited:
ChalfontStGiles said:
Sorry for my ignorance, but what does that button do?
Click to expand...

The button "locks" the lens closed. So to use the camera, you turn on the camera - try to take the shot - swear - think happy thoughts - press the button on the lens while turning the zoom to unlock the lens - try to take the shot - swear because you haven't turned the zoom far enough - think happy thoughts - turn the zoom a bit further - successfully take the shot of the unicorn's bottom disappearing behind a tree - throw the lens into a nearby lake & buy one without a button. Grrr.
 
ChalfontStGiles said:
I've handled the D5300 as I was, at the time, comparing to the D5200 and I thought that both fitted my hand very nicely. The newer model felt a bit more comfortable though for some reason. I've not tried the viewfinder. In what way is the viewfinder less good than the D90?
Click to expand...
It's a porroprism/penta-mirror rather than a pentaprism as it's cheaper to make but it's small and dark in comparison.
 
Get a good used D90, it is older but a really great camera and (I think) still in production, so if it good enough for Nikon....

You don't have to dig into the menus to adjust settings, IQ is brilliant, reasonable ISO capabilities, all round regarded as a semi-pro camera. I would definitely take this over most current lower spec Nikon models. If you really want something newer, maybe a used D7000 if in your price range.

I agree with this wholeheartedly:
skysh4rk said:
Yes, it's older relative to these other models, but it still takes perfectly good photographs. Unless you really need stupid high ISO capabilities, wifi, etc., I'd probably rather have a D90 than any of the other cameras mentioned in this thread, but to each his own.
Click to expand...
 
And in everyday practical use? Also 'worse than' doesn't make the D90 a bad or unsuitable camera.
 
Last edited:
ChalfontStGiles said:
I have also become a bit used to the D90's menus etc.
Click to expand...

You might find a D3000 or D5000 series frustrating in the handling department in that case as they involve far more button pushing and menu diving than the D90. For what a used D90 costs it has to be worth a punt.Unless you're obsessed with having the latest sensor tech a D90 would be my suggestion.
 
skysh4rk said:
I'd be very surprised if you saw any difference in image quality between these cameras unless you required high ISO. I mean really, what is the real-world difference between 12.5 and 12.8 Evs with regard to dynamic range?
Click to expand...

The dynamic range is close but you're looking at twice the resolution and the difference in low light performance is not trivial. What they're saying is that you realistically won't be able to go above 800 asa with the D90 and it won't be great at 800. That's good for seven years ago but quite low these days. If you're talking about domestic usage, that would be below the level that you might want for simple indoor family shots without flash. You could do it but everyone would have to stay very still.

I agree with others that viewfinders are important though.This is an area where modern, budget DSLRs are lacking.
 
Last edited:
HectorHughMunro said:
The dynamic range is close but you're looking at twice the resolution and the difference in low light performance is not trivial. What they're saying is that you realistically won't be able to go above 800 asa with the D90 and it won't be great at 800. That's good for seven years ago but quite low these days. If you're talking about domestic usage, that would be below the level that you might want for simple indoor family shots without flash. You could do it but everyone would have to stay very still.

I agree with others that viewfinders are important though.This is an area where modern, budget DSLRs are lacking.
Click to expand...

As I've said, high ISO is probably the one area where the newer cameras might have a clearer edge, yes.

That said, what good is an extra stop in low light performance if the camera doesn't handle as well in all light conditions? Many folks get caught up in the technical specifications to the detriment of the practical applications and usage.

The extra resolution probably doesn't matter much either unless you're printing large enough to justify it.
 
Last edited:
gary43 said:
If I was the OP I would get the Nikon D300s which is FS here on TP. Ticks all the boxes and for a good price.
Click to expand...

Also a nice camera, although the OP only has seven posts, so he likely does not have access to the classifieds.
 
Thanks for the advice so far. I'm still undecided :-\. I'm going to see if I can use the D90 for some low light shots to see how it is on high ISOs. I'd be perfectly happy with one of these (I have no issues with s/h gear) but want to make sure I've fully considered all the sensible options within budget.

skysh4rk said:
Also a nice camera, although the OP only has seven posts, so he likely does not have access to the classifieds.
Click to expand...
Need to get my posts up so I can access the classifieds.
 
I'd skip entry level all together, get a d90 or d7000 having to delve into menu's to change settings is not the way to learn anything entry level cameras are pointless imho.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ChalfontStGiles said:
I'm going to see if I can use the D90 for some low light shots to see how it is on high ISOs.
Click to expand...

I'd do that and make my own decisions on low light performance rather than look at technical comparison sites or take the advice of internet nerds.
 
Why does everyone worry about low light:-S use a flash and I would think 95% time people shoot in day light unless your a concert friek
 
petert said:
Why does everyone worry about low light:-S use a flash and I would think 95% time people shoot in day light unless your a concert friek
Click to expand...
If you photograph wildlife then low light performance matters, as it does for photographing people candidly indoors. There are other situations where flash isn't wanted. Different strokes for different strokes. :)
 
petert said:
Why does everyone worry about low light:-S use a flash and I would think 95% time people shoot in day light unless your a concert friek
Click to expand...
Both our children are talented musicians. I would like to get some photos of them on stage. I can't afford fancy lenses so I'll have to push the ISO and hope for the best ;).
 
ChalfontStGiles said:
Both our children are talented musicians. I would like to get some photos of them on stage. I can't afford fancy lenses so I'll have to push the ISO and hope for the best ;).
Click to expand...

If thats the case I would think the D7000 or D7100 maybe better. The AF on the D7100 is very good and it will also be better at higher ISO than the D90, which will be useful for stage photography.

With the D7100 as it's 24mp it also gives you more cropping flexability over the 12mp D90 which may also be useful depending where your sitting in relation to the stage.

Depending on your budget you can get a D7100 new from HDEW for around £500 and maybe cheaper on here when you can access the classifieds.
 
Ed Sutton said:
If you photograph wildlife then low light performance matters, as it does for photographing people candidly indoors. There are other situations where flash isn't wanted. Different strokes for different strokes. :)
Click to expand...
Yes I know I wasn't being critical just everywhere I read people seem obsessed with low light, how did people ever manage without high mp cameras? most wildlife comes out at night all lenses are useless for that
 
Last edited:
I have a d7100, with a 1.8 excellent for lower light, so is my d700 12mp so don't get hung up on mp it means nothing really, knowledge will get you much better shots
 
Last edited:
I'm in a similar position and am looking forward to getting access to the members' market. i think buying a used on from someone on here who has taken care and simply upgraded is far better than a brand new entry level.
 
Ed Sutton said:
You might find a D3000 or D5000 series frustrating in the handling department in that case as they involve far more button pushing and menu diving than the D90. For what a used D90 costs it has to be worth a punt.Unless you're obsessed with having the latest sensor tech a D90 would be my suggestion.
Click to expand...

This very much. I seem to spend forever in the menus on my 5100 just to change the slightest thing
 
ChalfontStGiles said:
Both our children are talented musicians. I would like to get some photos of them on stage. I can't afford fancy lenses so I'll have to push the ISO and hope for the best ;).
Click to expand...

Both the 35 F1.8 and 50 F1.8 are excellent lenses and won't break the bank.
 
I got my dad the 35 1.8 for his D5000 and it's worked a treat. Nice bit of kit. I'm sure the new D5100/5200's are even better- The screen on the 5000 was the only letdown really
 
You could get d7000 ergonomically a far better camera
 
petert said:
You could get d7000 ergonomically a far better camera
Click to expand...

Agreed, the D7000 was good for me ergonomically also, but I think the OP needs to handle the cameras and then he can decide what is good ergonomically for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top