Thanks, I figured that the majority of that stuff was trash, just wanted to make sure. I'll spend a few more days looking for a D5100 with the 55-105mm lens as a kit before moving on the body and lens only

d9sccr said:
The kit I posted is one of only two I can find. The other just has a smaller memory card, but everything else is the same. I'm guessing Nikon no longer sells it as the 18-105mm bundle alone?

It might not ever have come as a kit like that. Usually the kits for it were the 18-55 or the 18-55 and 55-200. At some points they had rebates to get other lenses and body only, but it wasn't actually a "kit".

You are really better off piecing together something yourself. Pick and choose what you want...read about stuff. There are reviews for everything. I would hate for you to rush into buying stuff and it not be what you wanted or be useful at all.

d9sccr said:
Amazon seems to be the only place to get the 18-105mm lens as kit anymore.

Is this a good deal: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-18-105mm-3-5-5-6G-Autofocus/dp/B005AJRLS0

Or would it be better to buy the body or 18-55mm lens with a better kit and then purchase the 18-105mm lens separately?

No that is not a good deal. Most of that stuff is junk. The "wide angle and telephoto lenses" aren't worth paying for. The memory card is an off brand and mine lasted around a week before it became corrupt and I lost all my pictures.

You should be able to find a refurbished body for around $550 right now. For that price you posted you could get a D5100 and 18-200.

If you want to go to a camera shop (I don't really like them much even though the shop itself is nice). Roberts downtown Indianapolis (about an hour drive for you). looks like they want $295 for a refurbished 18-105 and $650 for a body only D5100...of course plus tax, but you can hold it before you buy it and see if you actually want that.

The kit I posted is one of only two I can find. The other just has a smaller memory card, but everything else is the same. I'm guessing Nikon no longer sells it as the 18-105mm bundle alone?

Pointless. Go straight for the 18-105 separately or as a kit if possible. when you've used it a while look through the exif data to see what focal length you use it at mostly then if you want, you could get a prime of that focal length. I am enjoying the 35mm f1.5 G right now and on a small camera like the D5100 it is easy to carry.

Amazon seems to be the only place to get the 18-105mm lens as kit anymore.

Is this a good deal: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-18-105mm-3-5-5-6G-Autofocus/dp/B005AJRLS0

Or would it be better to buy the body or 18-55mm lens with a better kit and then purchase the 18-105mm lens separately?

Sorry spraynpray...I've been looking at so many different lens sizes and such that I thought you had said 18-200 and 18-300. I'm looking for a kit with that lens, but there don't seem to be many.

Thanks Mike..I'm just looking to get my feet wet and start learning some of the basics. I believe that the D5100 with the 18-105mm lens is probably the best fit. I just need to find the right package now.

Thanks everyone, I appreciate how helpful everyone's been

Hi D9sccr,

In looking at your postings, and to be clear, any of the modern and new DSLRs from Nikon will have adequate pixels for enlargements.

What you might want to look at are the immediate requirements you have for picture taking, and what you want to do in the near term.

Many of the Nikon cameras will come with a "kit" lens, usually a 18-105mm that is a really good lens, but not a 'fast' lens, meaning that it's aperture is f3.5 - f5.6 (variable with the telephoto setting), and it's sort of plasticity. I have a pretty extensive collection of lenses, probably over 20, and I use the 18-105 as much or more than any of the rest and it's on my D7000 right now. It's not a bad lens, just inexpensive.

Lenses are characterized by aperture opening - wider and thus faster - means you can shoot with less light and faster shutter speeds without blurring your images. VR -Vibration Reduction doesn't always work well for all users since you have to turn it on by clicking the shutter on for each shot, then shoot the photo. Fast lenses also aid in both focusing and isolating the subject matter. I generally turn it off since I use a tripod as much as I can.

The camera body itself matters in features. What's important to you and how that differs from me or someone else, well, who's to say?

My best,

Mike

If saving money is important, you should consider just the 18-105mm as I said before, it is excellent bang for the buck. I have it and the 70-300mm and I have to say that I only put that long lens on when I am shooting motorsport or timid wildlife so the bit between 105 and 200 will not worry you if your op was correct in terms of what you want it for.

How big of a deal would it be to have the 18-55mm lens AND the 55-200mm lens vs the 18-200mm? I know it may require changing between shots, but if I want to save some money, is this that big of a deal?

d9sccr said:
Neglect the previous post.

I found these: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=d5100&N=0&InitialSearch=yes

http://bloomington.craigslist.org/ele/2878404924.html

I'm leery of buying used because I don't know exactly what I'm looking for

There have been some pretty good deals on refurbished D5100's lately. Nikon refurbished by Nikon equipment is like new condition...I have had 5 refurbished products and they all worked great and I couldn't tell they were used at all.

I have the D5100. I bought the kit which included the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses. I wound up selling the 55-200 and bought the much better and certainly more expensive 18-200. I've since added the more affordable 40 MM macro, but the lens I use most is the 18-200. I will be selling my D5100 with the 18-55 (which I never use at all) later this year, when the D7000 replacement comes out.

Neglect the previous post.

I found these: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=d5100&N=0&InitialSearch=yes

http://bloomington.craigslist.org/ele/2878404924.html

I'm leery of buying used because I don't know exactly what I'm looking for

What's everyon think of this? The lens focal lenght is 55-200. They also have a 55-300. I'd prefer the 18-200/300, but this seemed like a decent deal.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nikon+D5100+16.2MP+Black+Camera%2C+Backpack+and+55-200mm+Lens/9999174000050052.p?id=pcmprd173700050052&skuId=9999174000050052&st=d5100%20nikon&lp=3&cp=1

Other than Nikon there is Sigma, Tamron and Tokina. I like the one Tokina lens I own. I have used a handful of Sigma and Tamron which are decent lenses and usually priced less than Nikon, but they seem to have quality control issues and some seem to be less reliable in the long run than Nikon. I think you will find lots of bias from us toward expensive (Nikon) equipment though :) I think for the most part Photography is one of those you get what you pay for applications.

Generally Nikon users use nikon gear so they gravitate to either nikon lenses or zeiss lenses for nikon. Canon currently is the most used, beating nikon by a very slim margin. However many including me are not impressed by canon as they always seem a step behind technologywise. Sony doesn't have enough variety in their system and pentax doesn't offer a fullframe body...

Thanks...I knew the lenses weren't interchangeable among major camera manufacturers, but I didn't know if everyone used Nikon or if there was a lens maker everyone tends to gravitate towards

They are referring to thew Nikon brand. Near competitors are Sony, Canon, and Pentax. Nikon makes many different lenses and bodies. Tokina is a brand that makes lenses to fit other brand cameras (in our case nikon). You cannot interchange most dslr lenses between brands.

Sorry, I'm really new to this and just jumping in, but can you guys tell the brands you're referencing?

I'll second the 18-200 (although, you might give that 18-300 a look... I've never used one). The 18-200 is an incredible lens, and if, like me, you do most of your shooting w/o a clear expectation of what you are going to shoot before you leave, its like magic.

If you get the 18-200 though, than you owe it to yourself to shell out a little more to also get the 35mm f1.8.

Shooting fixed focal length lenses can be quite liberating in its own right (when its not infuriating that is).

Thanks for all the input. When I get some time I'll go and look up some brands and prices for the lenses

To get pictures that large in somewhat "flawless" or unpixelated quality people use medium format cameras and possibly the new D800 when it comes in. They are high megapixel cameras that cost lots of money...30-40 MP cameras that cost $10's of thousands of dollars. With my D5000 (12.3 MP) I have made prints to around 3 feet and they still look OK...I imagine you can print to maybe 4 feet with the D5100/D7000 and they not look too bad.

It isn't totally necessary to get an ultra wide angle lens, but it depends on what your expectations are. I can't show any examples here at work because flickr is blocked. Say you are standing near a building. With the 18-55 kit lens I could almost get the whole thing in from across the street, but not all of it. With the 12-24 F4 you can get the whole thing in. I have the 35 F1.8G, 105 F2.8 VR Micro, Tokina 12-24 F4, and Nikon 18-200. I can shoot everything you mentioned. If you add it up though it is around $2400 of lenses at the prices I paid when I purchased them...now you don't have to get the 105 F2.8, some of the other micro lenses work well and do a great job also (40 F2.8, 60 F2.8, 85 F3.5).

I started with the 18-200. Personally I wouldn't get the 18-55 if you can help it. Just because it is has a short focal range and if you are just starting with one lens the 18-105 or 18-200 are more flexible. The 18-55 is decently sharp, build quality is so so, it works, but I think there are better options for a walk around/starting lens. Either the 18-105 or 18-200 will give you a good starting point. Once you shoot with them for a little while you can decide what you think you need. My second lens was the 35 F1.8G to have a fast lens and try a prime out (it is a pretty good lens and fairly cheap). Then I decided I wanted macro so I opted to spend a little more and get the best one (in my opinion)...the 105 F2.8. Most recently I got the Tokina 12-24 F4 for landscapes and architecture and it is an awesome fun lens.

I'd go for the D5100 in your position. Its got a better sensor and features than the D3100 while being cheaper than the D7000 but comparable in image quality. I think you'll also appreciate the extra pixels if you're trying to print that large. Also, when you're just beginning, you'll find your money is best spent on lenses rather than higher-end bodies ... particularly when you don't know how to use the advanced features that set the D7000 and D5100 apart yet.

I'd recommend making a list of what lenses you actually want to use. My guess is the kit lens won't be on it, and if that's the case, you're better off buying the body only.

At the college where I work, we're setting up bags for student photographers to grab when they are on assignment. Our list might be rather different from yours, since we're mostly concerned with events, athletics, and some portraiture, but it might give you an idea of what you may want. Here's what we decided on for each bag:
Nikon D7000
Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8 prime
Nikkor 85 mm f/1.8 prime
Sigma 17-50 mm f/2.8 zoom
Sigma 70-200 mm f/2.8 zoom

We figured with those four lenses, the students could handle just about any assignment. We are also on a limited budget, which is why we went with the Sigma lenses. I've had really good experiences with Sigma, and have found them to be on par with the more expensive Nikkor offerings in just about every way except weather sealing. My experience with Tamron hasn't been as good, mostly because of auto focus issues. The videographers in our office particularly love the Sigma 17-50, which is a much faster lens than the 18-55 kit, giving it more flexibility in tricky lighting situations.

I hope my ramblings help. Photography has a steep learning curve, and I'm certainly no expert yet, but it's been a rewarding journey so far.

Building on what tcole said and what you asked, I would get the 18-105mm as a walk around. The 18-55 isn't bad, but the 18-105 is best performance and range bang for the buck. Then you can save-up the £ for your architecture and landscape lenses.

I think you are right to go for the 16.2mp cameras if you are going to blow up the images that large. How big are the rooms in your house? If they aren't big, you will be pixel peeping. You will need to be back a bit to view such large images.

Thanks, I knew macro would be it's own lens, but was unsure about architecture and landscapes. Can anyone offer any input as far as the standard 18-55mm VR lens that comes with the D5100? Would that be okay to start with or should I just purchase the body and lens separately?