dtorion1970 wrote:
Bjorn_L, thank you for your reply.
Very detailed opinion and similar to my quandary, in terms of what I believed to be the case between the named options. My question to you would then be, should I opt for the lesser quality Canon to begin with and have to watch my environmental conditions, get a slightly lesser performer with lesser cost. Or, opt for the higher “enthusiast/semi-pro level” system for a starting point. This will clear at least one system off the potential list.
My initial budget is around $1700.00 for the body and lenses and I’ll add another $800-$1000 for accessories I have decided to purchase. (Tripod, filters, external lighting cards and software) With your knowledge of Nikon do you have any suggestions on their lens lineup for entry level.
Again thank you for taking the time to reply
I can't tell you how to spend your money. I can tell you how I would spend mine and short version of how I got here.
I was originally shooting film Minolta SLRs mostly because it was what my dad used. So when the Minolta 7d (a DSLR) became available I bought one. It served me well for many years until I started hitting a few limitations of the Sony/Minolta lineup. So I decided it was time to get a Canon or a Nikon. I settled on a Canon based on some poor decision making. I knew and liked the ergonomics of the Canon 50d. The Canon 500d came out and seemed to be a newer camera with video and such and the same sensor so I pre-ordered one. I did not understand that consumer DSLRs have compromised ergonomics. They have relatively poor viewfinders, only 1 control wheel (which really slows you down), a smaller more awkward grip, and so on... basically a camera is more then a specification sheet. So after a few 1000 fairly nice photos I got rid of that camera and was trying to select between the Nikon d90 and the Canon 50d. In this case I handled them both extensively. The Canon had slightly better ergonomics, the Nikon had a better sensor. In the end I got the Nikon d90 in large part because of two issues with my previous Canon: how much noise I was getting as the ISO crept up, and how quickly I lost dynamic range (plus poorer then expected shadow and highlight detail). Much more comfortable and considerably more capable camera. Faster focus, better low light, just more flexible in how I used it. But I still made a mistake.... I forgot my boys had all signed up for sports teams (soccer mostly) which takes place in whatever the weather happens to be. So instead of the d90, I should have gotten the nearly identical Nikon d300 (which is weather sealed when used with a sealed lens). This time fortuntely it had been a little longer so my wife was not quite as grumpy.
I am not particularly loyal to any brand so I decided to look at other options not just the d300. I checked out the Nikon d300 and the then new d300s, the full-frame d700 plus the Canon 50d and 5dmk2 (the top of their lineup back then) and the Sony a700 and a850. Hardware wise, I preferred the Sony a850 but the lenses were still the sticking point there.... the Canon's really did not do what I wanted. The 5dmk2 had focus issues, the 50d had noisy images and not so impressive DR.
In the end I settled on the d700, which is like a d300 but with a larger sensor (full frame). I settled on it in large part because of the low light performance, the quality gain in portraits and similar images, plus the rest of the camera was really really nice (viewfinder, ergonomics, etc).
So having changed brands a few times I can say it is a pain in the butt. I would recommend that you instead at least try to settle on a system in advance and stay with it. Not so much out of brand loyalty but the cost of buying and then selling an entire setup is considerable and taking a bath on the switch means you will have to time your sale fairly carefully with your budget. I did my upgrades after I got a bonus at work so as to not take money directly out of the budget.
At the moment I am unconvinced by the Canon sensors. A camera is more then a sensor. The Canon lens lineup is just great. But I can not ignore the sensor entirely. So at the moment I would not personally spend MY money buying a Canon. The exception would be if I were a professional videographer. Also having used entry level cameras I am not really a fan of them. They are not as comfortable to hold. Their viewfinders are darker.
So were it my Monday and were I in your shoes, I'd get the d7100. If I wanted to save money, I'd get the d7000. If you want to look at entry level cameras with good lens upgrade options and decent sensor performanec the Nikon d3200 or Nikon 5200.
I completely understand those who look at the Pentax lineup. It is a great body and an "ok" lens lineup. Unlike other brands they have consumer level lenses which are sealed. Handy if it is dusty or rainy where you live. I am not personally tempted because I remember too well what it was like on the outside looking in when I hit issues which the Minolta/Sony did not fill. Also I have some concerns about their abilty to survive given a less then 1% market share. Older lenses would still be available, but it would feel even more restrictive to me since not only would I be missing some of the lenses I have come to enjoy but I would then know that there was no chance they would ever come. Even as is economies of scale favor the larger brands when it comes to new product development.
If I were more in to casual DSLR video, I would probably get either a Sony SLT camera (like the a58 or a77) or a Panasonic GH3. Both have slightly limited lenses and other accessories compared to Canon and Nikon, but enough for most things.
So back again on topic.... no, I do not think buying a low-end brand 'X' when you think you might end up on brand 'Z' is smart.
Starting point for a Nikon system.... the best value in an entry level standard (aka normal) zoom is the Nikon 18-105vr. It is not a perfect lens (the Nikon 15-85vr is my favorite here), but the 18-105 is the best buy in this range on any system. Nothing on Canon, Pentax, Sony, etc competes against this lens when you include both performance and price.
An external flash adds a lot to image quality. The Nikon sb400 is a small, handy travel flash with the ability to bounce light off the ceiling for a much better lighting solution then any popup-flash (which generally ruin photos with harsh shadows, poor color etc). Better would be a Nikon sb600 or sb700. They are larger but once you get used to them they do not seem awkward.
I would skip filters, and other odds and ends to start with unless you have a specific issue you are trying to solve for. Most filters just degrade the image.
After the basic standard lens, then what to get next depends on your shooting goals....
a wide angle for landscapes? My favorite two are the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 and the Nikon 10-24, but the Sigma 10-20 is a much better value...
a low light lens? it depends on what focal length you prefer. Most like a normal (meaning similar to the human eye for field of view) lens. The best value normal lens is the Nikon 35mm f1.8g, also an excellent low light lens..... a little wider, the Nikon 28mm f1.8 is nice... wider still I prefer the Sigmas at 20mm, 24mm and maybe at 28mm because although they are not as nice as the Nikons they are still pretty good and much cheaper, particularly if you buy used.
If you are in to portraits, or want to shoot a school play from the audience, then a Nikon 50mm f1.8g or 85mm f1.8g make a lot of sense.. The 1.8d versions are older and cheaper options. A better option if you feel like dropping some coin would be the Sigma 50mm or 85mm 1.4 lenses. Both are better then the corresponding Nikon 1.8g lenses for portraits, the Sigma 50mm is particularly good but I prefer the slightly longer one for blurrier backgrounds.
The small world = a macro lens. My favorite is the Sigma 150mm. The best value is the Tamron 90mm.
The above is because you asked about lenses, but I am not suggesting you buy too much going in. I'd suggest that you want to keep it simple to start with.
1-2 lenses
flash
camera
tripod
and "maybe" a low cost (3rd party) remote trigger so you can be in some of the photos.
Then you stop buying and start practising.
