New Photographer Help « Nikon Rumors Forum

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.


Nikon Rumors Forum

where there’s smoke there’s forum fire

Register or log in - lost password?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

New Photographer Help

(35 posts) (12 voices)
  • Started 1 year ago by d9sccr
  • Latest reply from d9sccr
  • Related Topics:
    1. Which Camera should I choose?
    2. Help with Camera decisions
    3. Need help to decide if I NEED the D7000 or stick with D5100
    4. Nikon D7000 Video Issue - Autofocusing
    5. D4 out, what happens to D3s prices ?

Tags:

No tags yet.

12Next »
  1. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    First off, this will be my first DSLR and only second camera. Eventually I would like to get into underwater photography, particularly macro stuff, but that is a little ways off. For now, I'll mostly be shooting landscapes, architecture, and likely want to work on shooting macro. I would also like to have the ability to make any photos I shoot into large prints, maybe up to 4 or 5 feet long.

    My first question is what camera would you recommend? I have considered the D3100, D5100, and D7000. I'm concerned that I would get over the D3100 quickly and would like this camera to last a little while. Do I need large megapixel count for the prints?Would I need a special lens to shoot panoramic shots?

    Thanks!

    Posted 1 year ago #
  2. sevencrossing

    preferred member
    Joined: Sep '10
    Posts: 1,265

    offline

    I would forget the 3100. The 5100 and the 7000 have the same mega wot nots
    so if you are thinking of a 5100, look at what the 7000 has, that the 5100 does not and ask you self if you need and can afford, the higher spec of the 7000

    but I would start by looking at UW cases, these can cost more than the camera

    underwater macro, is just about as specialised as you can get. you may have to invest in some top end flash gear

    Posted 1 year ago #
  3. adamz

    The Predator
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 3,461

    offline

    get d3100 with basic lens set 18-55vr and 55-200vr and spend the rest on learning how to take a good snap. most of ppl underestimate this part. if You are a good photographer You'll be able to take a good snap even with phone camera, if You lack knowledge even d3s will not help You and trust me there's not such thing as outgrowing the camera. pro bodies doesn't take better pictures because they are called pro and cost more, they cost more for other reasons which I'm not gonna explain right now as they aren't important for You as a beginner. it's all about photographer what counts and please never forget that.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  4. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    Thanks guys. I understand that about UW, but like I said that's a ways off and I suspect will use be using a different camera at that point. This is more of a get my feet wet thing. Will the resolution of these cameras be good enough for large prints?

    Posted 1 year ago #
  5. Bland

    preferred member
    Joined: Nov '09
    Posts: 883

    offline

    d9sccr said:
    Will the resolution of these cameras be good enough for large prints?

    A 5 foot tall picture is asking alot of any camera if you want high quality. Any of those 3 cameras are capible of getting you a good poster.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  6. Gareth

    preferred member
    Joined: Sep '10
    Posts: 591

    offline

    d9sccr said:
    Will the resolution of these cameras be good enough for large prints?

    how many megapixels is your current camera? if it is not very old then the files are probably just as big as a dslr cameras.

    would you print one 5foot wide?

    you will need to stitch shots together to print that big. i just printed a 4metre wide poster made from 20 portrait shots from a d700. it looks great, but you need the skills (as mentioned already) to be able to compose and a knowledge of many aspects to get good results.

    an slr needs lenses. have you looked into this? this will be your biggest cost when using an dslr vs digicam. you will also need a good tripod and many other bits and pieces. be prepared to take out a mortgage!

    Posted 1 year ago #
  7. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    Thanks again! I just have a Sony point and shoot with 5 MP. It's fairly old and is difficult to take good pictures with. I do a fair bit of traveling and thought I could "decorate" my place with pictures I've taken. I don't by any means expect to buy this and be able to reproduce a large panorama the same day, but I wanted to know if the MP counts are high enough to so that I could take such pictures.

    What program do you use to stitch the shots together? Do you use the RAW images or JPEGs? Sorta OT, but I since it sounds like you have some experience I thought I'd ask

    Posted 1 year ago #
  8. Willis

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 1,123

    offline

    My trusty D40 always gave me great results even with its very limited 6mp sensor. At 14MP's the D3100 has more pixels than even the D3, so it should blow up your images just fine.

    The reason to go for the D7000 is that it puts more control at your finger tips compared to the more difficult to set single dial cameras. After using my D90, I'm always frustrated when I use my D40. If I'm going to be messing w/ menus, I'd rather do it on my new V1 which is a joy to shoot once you get the hang of it.

    That said, until I knew what I was missing, I loved shooting on the D40 (which shares mostly the same layout as the D3100). Until I got my V1 last week, the D40 was my go-to walk around camera. Smallness is pretty valuable feature.

    I wouldn't bother w/ RAW unless you are also willing to invest time & money learning and purchasing a good program (like lightroom)to help you make the adjustments you might want to make (usually fixing things you didn't set properly in the first place). I've always found that Nikon's engineers know more about making good JPEG's than I do for a properly exposed and white balanced image. That said, if you know what you are doing, you can improve the images you shoot a little more w/ RAW files than you can w/ JPEG. But the time you spend on them would be better spent practicing your technique until you get pretty comfortable using your camera.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  9. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    Okay, thanks for all the input..I'm still not sure which I'll end up with, but I'm leaning towards the D5100

    Posted 1 year ago #
  10. tcole1983

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 1,553

    offline

    Well your interests are broad even though you might think they are narrow. Macro will be one lens, arcitecture and landscapes another, and lastly you will want at least one other mid range/walk around lens.

    I also believe your expectations might be too high. I would suggest getting some gear to start with and learn. I wouldn't get the D3100 as I don't think there is an advantage to getting it and the others will give you more room to grow. You will be able to make larger prints but a 60" print will only be around 100 PPI, which isn't that great..maybe you need the new D800? jk by the way.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  11. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    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?

    Posted 1 year ago #
  12. spraynpray

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 1,514

    offline

    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.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  13. jablko

    member
    Joined: Feb '12
    Posts: 16

    offline

    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.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  14. tcole1983

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 1,553

    offline

    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.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  15. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

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

    Posted 1 year ago #
  16. Willis

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 1,123

    offline

    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).

    Posted 1 year ago #
  17. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

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

    Posted 1 year ago #
  18. kyoshinikon

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 1,200

    offline

    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.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  19. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    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

    Posted 1 year ago #
  20. kyoshinikon

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 1,200

    offline

    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...

    Posted 1 year ago #
  21. tcole1983

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 1,553

    offline

    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.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  22. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    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

    Posted 1 year ago #
  23. d9sccr

    member
    Joined: Mar '12
    Posts: 15

    offline

    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

    Posted 1 year ago #
  24. rbrylawski

    preferred member
    Joined: Nov '11
    Posts: 170

    offline

    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.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  25. tcole1983

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 1,553

    offline

    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.

    Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

NikonRumors Forum (http://nikonrumors.com/forum) is proudly powered by bbPress
Disclaimer: This site has no affiliation with Nikon USA or any other subsidiary of Nikon. Please visit the official Nikon website at nikon.com
Copyright © 2008-2011 NikonRumors.com