First dSLR/SLT

Hi,

I've been researching dSLR/SLT cameras (will be a present from the better half). I have had some experience with manual control, and have no issue learning the technical aspects and am keen to do so. It will be used for stills and movies (70/30 at a guess) for holidays (landscape and wildlife), parties, weddings, sports and also (least) for some basic astrophotography.

I would be looking at starting with a 18-135 (or so) lens and adding a fast prime and a longer tele from there.....later on.

I have been into numerous camera stores and tried quite a few out, and have discovered that I really like the handling of the Nikon and Sony offerings, and also a couple of the Pentax units. I do not like the Canon's (in the price-range) at all. I have thus come up with the following based on what I've handled, what I've read and a modest budget of $500-600 (Australian). It would not have to be ordered until mid-December, so there is scope for some reduction in cost of each unit.

Nikon d3200

Nikon d5100

Nikon d5200 (probably beyond the price range)

Pentax K-30

Sony a57

Sony a58

Sony a65 (probably beyond the price range)

They all (apart from the two with comments) can be had for $450-600 with a single lens

The way I see it:

a57/a65 win for video and continuous shooting

d5100/k-30 win for image quality, especially at high ISO

d5100/a58 win on price

The EVF of the Sony's is superior to the very basic OVF on the Nikons

The OVF of the Pentax is better than the Nikons OVF

The Sony's have some extra features that I like and believe I would use.

Nikon has the most lenses available, although I would need the more expensive ones to AF

The Sony's can use old Minolta lenses, some of which I can find for a song - whilst these may not be brilliant, they will help me determine exactly which lenses I should be looking for.

The upshot is, I think the a57 and the d5100 are leading the race, just wanted to get some feedback from those with more experience and knowledge on the matter and hopefully get some pearls of wisdom.

Thanks very much in advance,

Brad

For the Nikon do not get hung up about the lens. There is a huge range that will work on the d5100 with AF (AF-S). You just can't use the realy old ones. Yes you may find some cheaper old ones but how many lens are you going to get. The new lens also have IS so they have that advantage too.

I went looking for a new DSLR about 3 months ago, so my experiences may be of interest.

I liked the look of Nikons, and had read a fair bit. One of my relations is also a Nikon man. The choices were 3200, 5100 or 5200, with various lens deals, and my intention was to pick up additional lenses over time. I have a fair experience of both film and digital cameras and I am familiar with optics and computer systems, so that helped. Amateur photographer.

There weren't too many 5200s around in the camera stores at that time, and the price was a bit high. The 5100 was on run-out including 18-55mm and 55-200mm lenses. The 3200 had a higher pixel count, only the 18-55mm lens and was $100 cheaper, so it was a bit of a toss-up.

I ended up with the 3200, and later added a 10-20mm wide-angle lens and a 50mm prime. So far I have been happy with the purchase, and haven't found much missing when compared to the 5100. Having 24 MPixels is an advantage, in my opinion. Total cost of the gear so far has been about AUD$1700, but this a retirement hobby/travel camera, so the budget is fairly open.

I plan to get another camera in due course, and would go for something like a 5300 or 7100 with 18-140mm zoom, to round-out my collection.

It takes a while to come to grips with all the features of even the entry-level 3200, and it's an ideal way to start. Don't forget the Reference Manual on the CD supplied; longer than the User Manual, but more logically arranged.

Couple bits of advice:

1. Both Sony and Nikon will give excellent lens selection -- more than you'll need for a long time. The major difference is Nikon will win on esoteric lenses. Tilt-shift and similar are really only there on Canon and Nikon. Sony will win for low-light lenses. IBIS means you can have wide aperture with image stabilization, which is impossible to get in Canon/Nikon.
2. Sony will be a much better beginner camera. The automatic modes work really well (they don't work as well on the Nikon; you have to know how to use the camera). EVF lets you review images more quickly and reliably, and avoid mistakes (you see things like poor white balance or improper exposure when shooting)
3. I don't see a clear winner for continuous shooting. 4fps is plenty for most uses, and OVF creams EVF for continuous shooting. With EVF, you have a short blackout for each shot. For high-speed, it's a bit awkward.
4. For movie mode, I'd pick the Nikon over the Sony. Nikon has audio level controls. Sony doesn't. This is essential for high-quality recordings. Sony has a greater crop factor, and no optical image stabilization in movie mode. Sony wins in that it has autofocus while filming, but I've never seen a pro film use autofocus while filming. It's distracting to watch in the video.

Sony takes a lot of risks, so their cameras tend to be either really good or really bad. The Sony a55 was a dog. The Sony a58 is excellent. I'm not sure what the a57 is like. Nikon cameras tend to be relatively uniform, and pretty good. They're much better than the bad Sony models, and a little bit worse than the good Sony models.

Thanks and an excellent point. I doubt i would be using more than 3 or 4. I guess i thought it may be easier to determine the right 3 or 4 by using some cheap old ones first.

Thanks again
Brad

Thanks for your valuable insight. Outgrowing the d3200 or wanting more features were the reasons i had it behind the d5100 and sony offerings. Just out of curiosity, how do you find the af performance and using the smaller vf for extended shooting?

Thanks again for your time
Brad

As far as Sony cameras go the A57 is probably one of the best ones. It has one of the best high ISO performances of the Sonys and while Nikon does tend to have better high ISO performance on most of it's cameras I don't think you'd have a problem with the A57. The A57 has been discontinued so that Sony could simplify their entry line by essentially combining the features of the A37 and A57 into the A58.

For continuous shooting there maybe a slight black out at 3fps, but I haven't really noticed much of one on my A77 at 8fps. I don't really think that it would be much different than the small blackout you get shooting with a DSLR. The A57 also has a 10fps mode that isn't always ideal but for the most part I just use 3 or 8 fps continuous shooting.

I think the main benefits of the EVF have been laid out. The one that was missed was focus peaking. It's useful when manually focusing as a visual aid whether shooting stills or video.

As pointed out Sony SLTs have in body image stabilization, so any lens you use will be stabilized whether you are using older Minolta lenses or third party lenses. The main drawback is that the older minolta lenses aren't as fast as the newer Sony AF motors and don't have modern lens coatings. However there are tons of Sony shooters who actually prefer the look of the older glass and they can be had cheaply. There are resources out there to help you sort out which are the better lenses.

For myself, I couldn't see going back to using an OVF after using an EVF. Shooting with one has just been too useful for me.

Thanks for the very detailed response! Ii had been looking at the specs of the a
57 And seeing 10fps (12 for 8mp crop) and 60fps video, but having the real-world feedback regarding these features is a bit of an eye-opener.
Also, as the camera will also be used by the better half (she will be using auto 90% of the time), your comments regarding the sony auto vs nikon are quite relevant.
I also see low light prime work as a key task of this camera, and hadn't given too much thought to the difference IBIS might make.
I've also read that the sony kit 18-55 is worse than the equivalent....I'm assuming the a57 and a58 would have the same one. Would the 118-135 be a better bet?
Any areas you find the a58 lacking?

Thanks again
Brad

thommo84 said:

The upshot is, I think the a57 and the d5100 are leading the race, just wanted to get some feedback from those with more experience and knowledge on the matter and hopefully get some pearls of wisdom.

Thanks very much in advance,

Brad

Click to expand...

Finally between A57 & D5100 it boils down to

1. EVF v/s OVF (My prefrence was EVF for Focus magnification and peaking, but it takes some time to adjust to EVF)

2. Lens lineup (Check which lenses are you planning if they are available in both either will work, but if you want "AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8G ED VR" then lens decides what body I pick ! )

3. SLT/SLR (Burst speed and screen blackouts are to be considered here)

thommo84 said:

Thanks for the very detailed response! Ii had been looking at the specs of the a
57 And seeing 10fps (12 for 8mp crop) and 60fps video, but having the real-world feedback regarding these features is a bit of an eye-opener.
Also, as the camera will also be used by the better half (she will be using auto 90% of the time), your comments regarding the sony auto vs nikon are quite relevant.
I also see low light prime work as a key task of this camera, and hadn't given too much thought to the difference IBIS might make.
I've also read that the sony kit 18-55 is worse than the equivalent....I'm assuming the a57 and a58 would have the same one. Would the 118-135 be a better bet?
Any areas you find the a58 lacking?

Thanks again
Brad

Click to expand...

Brad;

18-55 SAM II is newer kit lens (I find it very usefull). Here is BIF from this kit lens.



http://yndpics.blogspot.in/2013/11/birds-in-flight-with-18-55-kit-lens.html for more.

18-135 is also decent lens with fast focus.

A58 is slow burst speed but more Mpx for croping, Also new Hot-shoe is something you will need to keep in mind.

--
YNDE$@!

If you like EVF then Sony is an option. Although Sony provided sensors to Nikon the latter got more from them (as was the case with Canon that provided better IQ than Sony in compact cameras that used the same Sony sensor).

thommo84 said:

Thanks for your valuable insight. Outgrowing the D3200 or wanting more features were the reasons I had it behind the d5100 and sony offerings. Just out of curiosity, how do you find the AF performance and using the smaller VF for extended shooting?

Click to expand...

Auto-Focus seems fast to me. I don't do much action shooting, but I haven't heard bad reports of AF speed in that regard. Certainly, the various AF options work well (spot, adaptive etc.), and AF is very quiet; a very tiny "thunk" as it snaps on. I only had one AF failure; in low light with a low-contrast main subject, but they warn you about that.

The small VF is a weak point; no problem with lining up the shot (although it's only 95%), but the other display items (SS, Aperture +/- EC etc.) are a bit small. That's one reason that I'm considering a 7100 upgrade, but I think the wife might get a bit restless if I did it too soon. I might wait for the 7200 or whatever.

Other things missing are auto-exposure bracket and live histogram, but exposure is generally spot-on, and EC is easy to set. You get a mono histogram on replay.

Apart from those points, the camera works very well and produces excellent photos.

thommo84 said:

Thanks for the very detailed response! Ii had been looking at the specs of the a
57 And seeing 10fps (12 for 8mp crop) and 60fps video, but having the real-world feedback regarding these features is a bit of an eye-opener.
Also, as the camera will also be used by the better half (she will be using auto 90% of the time), your comments regarding the sony auto vs nikon are quite relevant.
I also see low light prime work as a key task of this camera, and hadn't given too much thought to the difference IBIS might make.
I've also read that the sony kit 18-55 is worse than the equivalent....I'm assuming the a57 and a58 would have the same one. Would the 118-135 be a better bet?
Any areas you find the a58 lacking?

Thanks again
Brad

Click to expand...

I often use 12fps to catch action, such as my dog leaping for a ball. Sometimes also use 40fps on my Panasonic for getting the optimum shot of that wave crashing over the rock.

For the A57 I have the two standard kit zooms. The 18-55 is quite adequate but I can see the difference in some pictures when the 35mm prime is fitted instead.

Still keeping the D3200, but just acquired a D7100. Turns out wife was amenable. "Honey, you can have the old camera".

thommo84 said:

The EVF of the Sony's is superior to the very basic OVF on the Nikons

The OVF of the Pentax is better than the Nikons OVF

Click to expand...

The K-30 has a pentaprism viewfinder instead of a cheaper pentamirror. It also has a 100% coverage viewfinder so it doesn't have the edges of the scene cropped. Magnification is also a factor, with some viewfinders giving you a better view of the scene.

Electronic viewfinders have the advantage of 100% coverage which is rare in dSLRs, and also tell you what the sensor sees instead of what the lens sees so you can check exposure. Some live view dSLRs let you see exposure, others not so much.

Thanks very much to you all for the useful feedback, I've just returned from a work trip and went to look at the shortlisted cameras again in-store with all of your comments fresh in my mind.

I really think the benefits that have been identified for the larger EVF over the Nikon's OVF is a game-changer for me.......I had to go up to the d7000 to get an acceptable "feel" (relative to the Sony EVF) from the OVF....and that is really not a fair comparison given the level the d7000 is/was pitched at. The Pentax K-30's OVF was very good as well, and I do remain keen on this model too.

Any doubts I had about the Sony cameras have been well and truly put to bed, and I think given the very low %age of shots that will be shot at high ISO, the light loss of the translucent mirror is a small price to pay for the added benefits/features at the price point - features that I will be using more than high ISO's.

I have now come up with the A57 as my preferred choice......the a58 just seems to be more of an A37 upgrade than an a57 update......given what I've read and talking to the rep's in the stores. I was less clear about the A65, which is now close to the A57 in price.

I think I would also be quite happy with the K-30, and it is around 20% cheaper atm.......which made it quite difficult as well. At the end of the day, I think I'd be very happy with either camera........the main thing is learning how to use it properly

Once again, thanks for your feedback and taking the time to respond


Brad

thommo84 said:

Thanks very much to you all for the useful feedback, I've just returned from a work trip and went to look at the shortlisted cameras again in-store with all of your comments fresh in my mind.

I really think the benefits that have been identified for the larger EVF over the Nikon's OVF is a game-changer for me.......I had to go up to the d7000 to get an acceptable "feel" (relative to the Sony EVF) from the OVF....and that is really not a fair comparison given the level the d7000 is/was pitched at. The Pentax K-30's OVF was very good as well, and I do remain keen on this model too.

Any doubts I had about the Sony cameras have been well and truly put to bed, and I think given the very low %age of shots that will be shot at high ISO, the light loss of the translucent mirror is a small price to pay for the added benefits/features at the price point - features that I will be using more than high ISO's.

I have now come up with the A57 as my preferred choice......the a58 just seems to be more of an A37 upgrade than an a57 update......given what I've read and talking to the rep's in the stores. I was less clear about the A65, which is now close to the A57 in price.

I think I would also be quite happy with the K-30, and it is around 20% cheaper atm.......which made it quite difficult as well. At the end of the day, I think I'd be very happy with either camera........the main thing is learning how to use it properly

Once again, thanks for your feedback and taking the time to respond

Brad

Click to expand...

I have an A57 and think it's great. However, you will be very lucky to find a new one in store today. If the A65 is near the same price I would not hesitate going for the A65 even if the low-light noise is alleged to be marginally worse. I doubt you would notice any difference between either of these two models and a Canon or Nikon in terms of low light performance and the Sony system has many advantages.

The Pentax is also a great camera, I'm sure, but I would not be happy going back to a traditional SLR now if buying a new[ish] camera. Bear in mind that I also shoot a Nikon D5000 occasionally, so I'm familiar with the pros and cons of both types.

Whatever you get, you are correct, the biggest challenge and most satisfying aspect of using a camera, but way back from capturing the image, is getting to know the tool so as it becomes familiar to the extent of being an extension of your body and mind. Getting to know it inside-out as it were.

OVF. Scene Modes. Ergonomics. Lens choice. Battery life. ISO.

Your choice should depend on these.

Beyond this, Enjoy photography.

Always good to hear back from the OP once all the reading has been done. I hope your choice works out well; maybe future posts will include some sample shots.

As for getting used to the camera, you seem to have a good grasp of the technical aspects of exposure/ISO etc., but I find that it takes a while to put theory into practice. Even though there's only a handful of variables for each shot, it's easy to get it wrong if you are hurried.

In addition to the basic camera settings, the various other inputs take a while to get your head around (Image quality/JPEG preferences), and this was a new field for me after some years of mainly successful "Point and Shoot" photography with either film or bridge cameras.

The third aspect of digital photography is PP on the computer, and there's many hours of fun(?) to be had here. I see that some reviews of the A57 criticise the JPEG output, so perhaps you'll be doing some RAW work. I mostly work with JPEG, using Picasa.

Nearly forgot. You have to use the camera in intelligent and interesting ways. My main area of interest is landscape/holiday photography, which isn't too demanding in a technical sense, but needs a bit of thought to avoid boring photos. In preparation for our next holiday, the wife and I are getting around town and trying to get some decent shots of the places we know well. As a reality check, I take some "control" shots with a P&S camera; there's hell to pay if the $2000 camera doesn't produce the goods. -My son's Canon A430 did a better job in one instance yesterday, and that was cause for some "guru meditation".

Whatever you buy take your time to look for a good lens. Ubiquitous 18-55 mm are decent but you may find them limiting.

Sony has some good lenses (like 16-105 mm or 16-80 mm) but they cost quite a lot. Pentax has also some interesting lenses.