Possibly Moving to Nikon

[Shokinen]

Originally Posted by ccting

and i learn photography by receiving your critiques..

Just because you cannot use your D5100 properly doesn't make it a bad camera. You are so frustrated with the thing your camera cannot do that you are completly missing the boat. Ever thought the D5100 could be to advanced for you and this is why you are getting better results with the D3000 ?

Wake up buddy, every stong posters here have the same reaction when we read your post: "What the...?".


You should spend more time on the field and less time here. You would learn a lot more and confuse less people.

My 2 cent

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by ccting

+1 for D4,

a) you can use Fx and Dx lenses
b) You can have cropped factor from 1x to 2.7x
c) You can remotely control and view the photo
d) Much better ISO performance than previous models
e) Less limitation compared to other cameras, that can serve you long long time..

First off: Nobody suggested the D4. "+1" refers to you agreeing with someone. You can't agree with nothing.

A) ALL nikon cameras can use FX and DX lenses. On a D4 (or other FX cameras) you actually lose functionality from DX lenses; on DX cameras you don't lose any functionality. So You've got this one completely wrong.

B) The x2.7 crop is for video only, not for stills.

C)You can remotely control and view photos on any Nikon body, provided you have CaptureNX and a suitable laptop connection.

D)We don't know that yet: nobody's tested straight-up HighISO tests. I'm gonna suggest the D3s probably still does it better, but it'll be close, and I'll wait for tests before jumping to any conclusions.

E) My D80 lasted me 5 years, my D300s has already served me 2, and I dont expect to buy anything more, really. My lenses are all fine too. What do you mean "less limitation"?

Originally Posted by ccting

Agree... but i love the latest technology, and i learn photography by receiving your critiques..
I could not agree with SK for D5100.. I would change my D5100 for D3000.. I wander why Nikon..??

As Shokinen said, your failings with the D5100 is not the fault of the camera, it's a fault with you. That said:

Originally Posted by ccting

Dear SK, can you compare between the following "items" among D5100 vs D3S vs D4
a) ISO performance (ease of use)
b) Lenses Compatibility (Cost efficiency)
c) Remote control & viewing via Laptop / computer (Learning curve & more accurate & instant analysis via big monitor; get instant display on big screen for clients to see)
d) Battery cost and how many hours it can last?
etc

For starters, comparing an entry-level camera (D5100) to the absolute top of the line (D3s/D4) is pure folly. It's idiotic at best.
A) "ISO performance" and "ease of use" are in no way related. Which do you want answered?
B) As I pointed out, DX bodies are actually more compatible than FX bodies because they natively support both DX and FX lenses.
C) Again, see above: Capture NX works on all bodies. Completely moot point.
D) Uh, have you LOOKED at an EN-EL4a (D3s) or EN-EL18 (D4)? $110 and $170 respectively. They're not cheap, especially compared to the D5100.

Originally Posted by ccting

I wander why you replace your D3 with D4?? I wander why you are not getting D5100 instead of D7000 LOL.. I believe the latest is the best (on paper) .. ;D

Because he's a professional that needs better video? Because his D3 is, as it's been used by a pro, nearing the end of it's life? As for the D5100/D7000: there are features on the D7000 that the D5100 just doesnt have: AF motor, CLS commander, dual scroll wheels. These the same big features that the D7000 has over the D3000, in case you were worried I'd forgotten.

Originally Posted by ccting

If i am you, I will buy 2nd D90 or D3000.. ;D. I assure you will regret if you go for D5100. You will know the reasons..later. If i have choice, i shift to Canon instead of Nikon. Reasons: Much cheaper to own more photography equipments, including lenses etc. Currently i throw my D5100 and kit lens into the store, and never use them again. I prefer using D3000 with 50mm f/1.8

GO ahead, go bother the Canon guys. You'll be just as wrong there. If you think that Canon is cheaper, then maybe you need to open your eyes a bit. There are lenses, flashes, etc on both sides of the fence that are cheaper than their counterparts. Need an image-stabilized 70-300 lens? Go Nikon. Want a super sharp 70-200 lens? Canon's f/4 is a sweet, cheap option. Flashes? Nikon is cheaper, though not by much anymore. If you're not going to use that D5100, send it my way. I'll let someone who can appreciate it use it.

Shokinen hit the nail on the head. You're the self-described noob, and it SHOWS. Everybody can tell, even other newcomers. Learn to listen more than you talk. Learn to ask more than you answer. And learn what you're talking about before yammering nonsensically.

[sk66]

Originally Posted by ccting

I wander why you replace your D3 with D4?? I wander why you are not getting D5100 instead of D7000 LOL.. I believe the latest is the best (on paper) .. ;D

I'm not going to try to answer all of your questions...Os gave a fair appraisal (even if it seemed a little harsh).

To answer the ease of use question...depends on what you know, and your style I would think. For me the pro bodies work better; I've been using them longer. Can't compare the D5100 to the other in ISO performance, the others win. As does the D3/D700. But the D5100 is equal to the D7000.

I replaced my D3 with the D4 because my D3 drowned in a river and the insurance is paying for it. To be honest, I haven't even received the D4 and I'm having a little "buyers remorse" because I probably could have (almost) gotten 2 D3s's for the money and they would be about equal to the D4 for my needs...Hell, they are all well beyond "my needs"; I do ok with the D7000. And I will be keeping the D7000 because it can do some things the D4 can't.

[velvet4269]

I have 3 lenses for my Oly that serve me well: my 14-45mm kit lens (for wide angle), my 70-300mm telephoto (which hardly gets any use), and my baby: a Sigma f/2.8 105mm ex dg macro lens that's seen so much use, the black lens housing has faded gray in most areas (it very, VERY rarely comes off my camera, and I've found it makes for a pretty good general-purpose lens).

I know quality glass is going to set me back, which is why I'm in the "research & save" phase right now. It took me months to decide on my Oly back when I bought it - but if I'd had a bigger budget, I'd have probably bought the Nikon D40x. No buyers remorse, and my Oly's served me VERY well over the years, but it's time to move up.

You've all given me some food for thought, and a lot of the suggestions were along the lines I was already eyeballing. Like I said, the new d800 looks pretty, but I really don't need that much camera. Of course, the D4 would be nice too, but that's definitely out of any budget I could fathom. I'm eyeing the D300s, but I want to go play with one in the store for a while before pulling the trigger. I'm also trying to decide if I should go "new" or "used/refurbished". I know to stick to sites like B&H, Keh, and Adorama for used and/or refurbished equipment, but again, I'm still a ways from making a final decision.

[Shokinen]

At least you know a bit where you are going, what focal lenght you like, and this will help you in your final decision.

The D300s is a semi-pro body, with a few plus over the D7000. It has a bigger buffer (usefull if you use burst in RAW), un-compressed RAW, and a more advanced focus system. The D7000 has a newer sensor, 16MP over 12MP and a bit better in low-light (+1 ISO stop). Something to keep in mind too, the D300s only have P S A M mode. May be all you need but could be something to think about if other members of your family will use it.

The only thing is this category (D300s) is kinda due for a replacement if you follow the trends. There is nothing confirmed yet, but a few rumors are running around so it might be interesting to wait a bit and see if there will be a replacement and what it will offer.

You also have to think about changing your lenses (there may be an adapter but this is a field I'm not comfortable providing advices). The Nikon 105 f/2.8 macro is an awsome lens. You have the Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 for wide angle (next lens on my list) whish is also a very respectable lens. Combine with either a general zoom such as the 16-85m f/3.5-5.6 or a prime such as th 35/50mm f/1.8 (depending on your style) and you will have a solid kit.

[dakwegmo]

I buy most of my stuff refurbished and have had very good luck with it, it's a great way to save money if you can live with a 90 day warranty. I also buy used from usedcameras.com and have been pleased with everything I've received from them.

[velvet4269]

Again, a lot of what's prompted this was my less-than-2-years-old-and-barely-used flash died, and I had to decide whether or not I really wanted to spend another $150+ on a new flash, or just toss the $$ aside for a new/upgraded camera. My E500 works great still, but I'm extremely limited in what I can do with it, and I'm finding I want to push myself beyond it's capabilities. If Olympus wasn't dropping their E-series altogether & focusing on micro-four-thirds, I'd probably go that route. I mean, I could always spend the $1700 on an E5, or buy a used/refurbished E3, but there's no real opportunity to move up.

I'm looking for something that's going to last me quite some time. Nobody else will be using the camera, and I'm primarily an Aperture-priority person anyway (venturing into manual mode from time to time). I consider video features to be a nice perk, but it's not something mandatory. Same with an articulating LCD. I'm old-fashioned & use the view-finder anyway, so Live View isn't even that much of a big draw for me. I would like something that can use my existing CF cards (which, I'll admit, was part of the draw of the d800), but SD cards are so cheap these days, even that's not much of a necessity.

Again, a lot of food for thought, and I'm certainly open to what other people have to say. I'm no where near pulling the trigger on the purchase yet (have a few other things to pay down first, and a couch that desperately needs replacing), so I'll be putting funds aside for at least a few months.

[inkista]

Ok, I'm still on the high of having just bought a Panasonic G3. But have you considered a micro four-thirds system and adapting your four-thirds lenses?

The OM-D/E-M5 is definitely a good mid-tier contender, based on the specs, and the one thing I'm really truly reveling in is how with the G3 I can automatically call up and dismiss liveview and 10x magnification in both my viewfinder and on the LCD to manually focus my adapted lenses to a fare-thee-well. And if you want to adapt manual focus lenses? Damn, is mirrorless compact the way to go. Nikon F can only use Nikon F for the most part, without messing with lens mounts. µ4/3, with the right adapter ring, can use just about everybody else's lenses. It's almost like having a universal mount. I got a simple EOS->&micro4/3 adapter, and I can use all the manual lenses I've adapted for Canon by stacking adapters.

I'd also say that I'm happily surprised at the high quality of the glass I've gotten for the camera so far. The 14-42 kit lens is ok, but the 20/1.7 is superb corner-to-corner--far more than I expected of such a short lens, and while it may be software correction, it's still mighty impressive. And my cheap Rokinon 7.5 fisheye is also impressing the hell out of me, being at least (or slightly better) than my Sigma 8mm which cost twice as much.

Obviously, though, if you're shooting a lot of fast action photography, then going the micro four-thirds route is out. While the E-M5 is speced as having a burst rate of 10fps, it's annoying as hell not being able to see what you're doing during burst mode, and while I was shooting some parkour performers in the park was the one time I was wishing for my dSLR gear, instead of the little G3.

I'd also agree that going with a D200/D300/D300s or D90/D7000 are probably your best bets, with used older gear being where the value sweet spot lies.

[velvet4269]

Hrm ... The d90 and the d7000 just popped up on my radar. I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between the d90 & the d300s (using dpreview's side-by-side comparison tool). Again, video really isn't a huge issue for me, since it's not my primary focus. I think what it's going to come down to is going into the stores and playing with the cameras to see what feels right in my hands; my concern is with the d90 and the d300s being older cameras, I'm not going to be able to find them to play with.

[OsmosisStudios]

The D90 and D300s use the same imaging system, so you likely wont. The D300s has a 100% viewfinder, higher FPS rate, better build (all metal vs metal/plastic), CF+SD card (instead of SD), better autofocus, and a few other things. The D300s is considered the "pro" DX model, the D90 is the "prosumer" model. Unless you need/want the things listed, you're probably better off with a D90 or, for roughly the same money, a D7000 (newer sensor, similar FPS, better (than the D90) autofocus, better (than the D90) build, 2xSD slots)