Nikon D3300 is $499 - how can mirrorless compete?

Started Jan 7, 2014 | Discussions
PerL Forum Pro • Posts: 14,024
46 AF-S lenses...

sean000 wrote:

maljo@inreach.com wrote:

a pretty well spec'd camera and gives access to a huge system.

On a budget it would be hard to pick an EM1 over these cheap entry level DSLRs.

maljo

I shoot mostly with m4/3, and also with Nikon. The problem with the D3300 is that it won't even autofocus most of my Nikon lenses! I have four Nikon zoom lenses and primes that are "screwdriven" instead of having their own internal autofocus motor. Cameras like the D90, D7000, D7100, D300, D3, and up can drive the autofocus in these lenses; but D3xxx and D5xxx cannot.

What does this say about the D3300? It says that this is a consumer-level Nikon DSLR that is sort of a risky purchase for a budding Nikon shooter. Why? The reason I own many screwdriven Nikon lenses (designated as AF-D instead of AF-S in the Nikon world) is because AF-D lenses are often less expensive (and older) designs. Most Nikon primes used to be AF-D, but Nikon has at least released a number of AF-S primes to work with their entry level cameras. But a lot of less expensive lens options, like the 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D Nikkor (easily found for $600 to $800), will not be an option.

You just can't compare an entry level Nikon body, that is quite limited, with a flagship model like the EM1 (which autofocuses with all m4/3 and 4/3 lenses). You would compare the 3300 with entry level m4/3 cameras... which will autofocus with all m4/3 lenses.

Sean

There are currently 46 Nikon AF-S lenses from 10 to 800 mm and many third party lenses that works with the AF of the D3300.

zkz5
zkz5 Contributing Member • Posts: 665
Re: you guys seriosly need a workout
2

jagge wrote:

broody wrote:

zkz5 wrote:

How much does a fast, autofocus, 35mm-equivalent pancake lens weigh for the D3300?

come on how desperately weak are you guys??

a d3300 and a 35 mm prime is pretty compact, that is just to lame.

Jakob

Good point. Scratch MFT - I'll show the world what a big man I am by carrying an entry level DSLR over my shoulder.

By the way, what 35mm-equivalent fast AF primes are available for the D3300?

Ulric Veteran Member • Posts: 4,558
Re: you guys seriosly need a workout
1

jagge wrote:

a d3300 and a 35 mm prime is pretty compact, that is just to lame.

That is a matter of perspective. As FrankS009 noted in another thread, the Olympus 17/1.8 is relatively heavy at 120g.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3603191/52867153

Nikon 660 g, Olympus 445 g

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +13 more
Bob Tullis
Bob Tullis Forum Pro • Posts: 37,270
IF you need a workout - buy 3 f/2.8 DSLR zooms
1

Hey, it had to be said.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-T2
FrankS009
FrankS009 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,172
Re: you guys seriosly need a workout
1

The 17mm 1.8 is tough to tote around, especially in relation to the 20mm and 14mm lenses, and maybe the 12-32. I didn't move to m4/3rds to break my back.

F.

-- hide signature --

When no-one else is there, the camera becomes my means...to say to a wider audience, "Did you see that?" David duChemin

phazelag
phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,235
Its not about price Good nikon glass is heavy m43 lens are light sharp and affordable.
2

Its about size and weight.

-- hide signature --
 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Canon G9 X II Canon EOS M50 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM +2 more
phazelag
phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,235
Yes if the buyers are new and uneducated

maljo@inreach.com wrote:

Or do we just have a bumper crop of smart alecks this year?

Yes there are apples and pumpkins out there.

For a person who becomes interested in photography, there are many choices.

A buyer gets a lot of capability for a low price from an intro DSLR for the same weight.

Image quality wise there is nothing wrong with a D3300.

A $500 DSLR is practically disposable. My D3X has depreciated $1000 a year.

While I have an EM1 and an EM5, I think a lot of folks would pick the DSLR.

I'm just speculating, of course, but those of you who seem to know it all could just compare sales figures and see how MFT compares with DSLR.

maljo

Most people on here who own M43 are tired of heavy glass.  ITs not the bodies, its the glass.

-- hide signature --
 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Canon G9 X II Canon EOS M50 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM +2 more
sean000 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,356
Re: 46 AF-S lenses...
2

PerL wrote:

sean000 wrote:

maljo@inreach.com wrote:

a pretty well spec'd camera and gives access to a huge system.

On a budget it would be hard to pick an EM1 over these cheap entry level DSLRs.

maljo

I shoot mostly with m4/3, and also with Nikon. The problem with the D3300 is that it won't even autofocus most of my Nikon lenses! I have four Nikon zoom lenses and primes that are "screwdriven" instead of having their own internal autofocus motor. Cameras like the D90, D7000, D7100, D300, D3, and up can drive the autofocus in these lenses; but D3xxx and D5xxx cannot.

What does this say about the D3300? It says that this is a consumer-level Nikon DSLR that is sort of a risky purchase for a budding Nikon shooter. Why? The reason I own many screwdriven Nikon lenses (designated as AF-D instead of AF-S in the Nikon world) is because AF-D lenses are often less expensive (and older) designs. Most Nikon primes used to be AF-D, but Nikon has at least released a number of AF-S primes to work with their entry level cameras. But a lot of less expensive lens options, like the 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D Nikkor (easily found for $600 to $800), will not be an option.

You just can't compare an entry level Nikon body, that is quite limited, with a flagship model like the EM1 (which autofocuses with all m4/3 and 4/3 lenses). You would compare the 3300 with entry level m4/3 cameras... which will autofocus with all m4/3 lenses.

Sean

There are currently 46 Nikon AF-S lenses from 10 to 800 mm and many third party lenses that works with the AF of the D3300.

I didn't say there aren't options for the D3300 shooter, but it is important to note that not all Nikkors come in AF-S. While Nikon has released a number of inexpensive primes in AF-S in recent years (specifically targeting this class of camera), your options are still limited compared to buying a D7100, because there are Nikkors out there (especially if you're buying used lenses) that will not AF on this camera. There are some outstanding bargains in Nikon AF-D lenses, and you're going to want good glass for 24 MP. Of course there are other differences between a D3300 and a D7100 (the entry level cameras have smaller viewfinders, less advanced autofocus, and lack many advanced features and customization options)... I'm just pointing out that the camera is entry level. You aren't getting a camera with all of the features and performance of a D7100 or a high end model from Olympus or Panasonic.

Either way it's a silly thread. The camera body is only part of an investment in an entire camera system. You have to compare the lenses and accessories you see yourself buying, and weigh it all in with what you are willing to carry and what your needs are.

Sean

 sean000's gear list:sean000's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon D70 Nikon D200 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +14 more
rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 25,859
Re: 46 AF-S lenses...
1

It's an entry-level camera, I doubt anyone with lots of non-AFS lenses would get one. The arguments here are very confusing, to say the least, on both sides. Why comapre the D3300 to the EM1? Why these eternal systems' wars? Photographers just use what's best for them, be it a compact P&S or a full-fledged dslr or an MF system, depending on budget and interests.

BTW, I disagree with the OPer, m43 and other ML systems can compete with the entry-level dslrs, for various reasons.

-- hide signature --

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
sean000 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,356
Re: 46 AF-S lenses...
2

rhlpetrus wrote:

It's an entry-level camera, I doubt anyone with lots of non-AFS lenses would get one.

My point wsa that people buying the D3300 might find their options limited. It's probably their first DSLR and they want to expand their lens collection. The cheapest way to do that is to buy used lenses, and many of those used lenses are going to be AF-D. I watch our local Craigslist for camera gear, and I see Nikon 50mm f/1.8D primes for $65 and 35mm f/2.0D for $150. I looked into selling my 80-200mm f/2.8D (planning to purchase the 35-100mm f/2.8) and the going rate for a used one seems to be about $600. The older third-party lenses, like the excellent Tokina 12-24mm f/4, are also screwdriven.

I have actually considered getting one of these entry level Nikons to use as a landscape camera (the sensor is excellent after all) since manually focusing my screwdriven lenses won't be a huge deal for that type of photography. I'd be better off with a D7000/D7100 as an upgrade to my D200, but I'm more likely to just sell the rest of my Nikon gear. Maybe I'm just bitter that nobody wants my old screwdriven lenses because so many are shooting with these entry level Nikon bodies

The arguments here are very confusing, to say the least, on both sides. Why comapre the D3300 to the EM1? Why these eternal systems' wars? Photographers just use what's best for them, be it a compact P&S or a full-fledged dslr or an MF system, depending on budget and interests.

I think the people who make these arguments are either trolling or they are very inexperienced photographers who really aren't sure what they want or need in a camera system. Given the gear the OP owns, I'd say he is trolling. Most of us have enough experience, and have owned enough camera gear, to know that you really can't compare a D3300 to an EM1. I have a hard time understanding why someone would even compare a D3300 to an entry level m4/3 camera. The systems are so different in many ways... size and weight being the most obvious (although the inexperienced will compare on the weight of the body and kit zoom and think the difference is no so great). There are different lenses available at different sizes, weights, and price points; differences in features (including the OVF vs EVF... I'll take my E-M5's EVF over the small OVF of a D3300 class body any day); differences in depth of field (the greater depth of field of m4/3 would actually be easier for a novice to manage), etc.

People need to remember that these are camera systems and not individual cameras. If you really do not know what you want in a camera system, then you may just have to find out by trying something. A kit like the Nikon D3300 is of course a safe bet, but I see people purchase cameras like this all the time and then leave them at home most of the time. That's perfectly fine if they plan to use them at home, or only at special events. Others will place a higher value on portability, which is what led me from a Nikon D200 to m4/3. I used to be perfectly fine carrying around a camera bag with a D200 and f/2.8 Nikon zooms, but then I had kids and my needs completely changed.

I have been very happy with my Nikon gear in the past, and I like to see Nikon do well. I also like to see Olympus and Panasonic do well. There is no written rule that says there can't be room for multiple manufacturers and multiple camera system formats in the market.

Sean

 sean000's gear list:sean000's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon D70 Nikon D200 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +14 more
Will Frost Regular Member • Posts: 255
Re: 46 AF-S lenses...

sean000 wrote:

rhlpetrus wrote:

It's an entry-level camera, I doubt anyone with lots of non-AFS lenses would get one.

My point wsa that people buying the D3300 might find their options limited. It's probably their first DSLR and they want to expand their lens collection. The cheapest way to do that is to buy used lenses, and many of those used lenses are going to be AF-D. I watch our local Craigslist for camera gear, and I see Nikon 50mm f/1.8D primes for $65 and 35mm f/2.0D for $150. I looked into selling my 80-200mm f/2.8D (planning to purchase the 35-100mm f/2.8) and the going rate for a used one seems to be about $600. The older third-party lenses, like the excellent Tokina 12-24mm f/4, are also screwdriven.

In fact, about five years ago, this is why I went with Olympus instead of Nikon - I figured out that the entry-level Nikon I could afford couldn't focus the AF-D lenses I could afford. End of story. That, and it couldn't meter the manual focus Nikkors I'd inherited. The Olympus I bought, could.

The story would have been completely different if I'd inherited Pentax lenses. I might not have ever bought into m43. It is a good fit for the reason Sean talks about here:

People need to remember that these are camera systems and not individual cameras. If you really do not know what you want in a camera system, then you may just have to find out by trying something. A kit like the Nikon D3300 is of course a safe bet, but I see people purchase cameras like this all the time and then leave them at home most of the time. That's perfectly fine if they plan to use them at home, or only at special events. Others will place a higher value on portability, which is what led me from a Nikon D200 to m4/3. I used to be perfectly fine carrying around a camera bag with a D200 and f/2.8 Nikon zooms, but then I had kids and my needs completely changed.

Kids. I first bought an E-520, and carried it everywhere.  I experimented with leaving it on the kitchen counter, ready to go at all times, but it was still big, heavy, and had no video. Replacing it with an E-PL1 was a no-brainer.

I have been very happy with my Nikon gear in the past, and I like to see Nikon do well. I also like to see Olympus and Panasonic do well. There is no written rule that says there can't be room for multiple manufacturers and multiple camera system formats in the market.

Sean

I would like to see Nikon do well too, but I have more hope for pretty much every other manufacturer to make the cameras, and most importantly, the lenses, I want. I could have been lured back to DSLRs, if someone made a pancake 24mm/f2, or even a 18mm/f2. But that was then. Now, my list of wants is very long, and my list of needs is very short. My needs are met with what I have. It would take a lot to satisfy my list of wants, to make me want to switch.

Will

Sean Nelson
Sean Nelson Forum Pro • Posts: 13,120
Re: 46 AF-S lenses...
2

sean000 wrote:

People need to remember that these are camera systems and not individual cameras.

It really surprises me to see so many people jumping around from one system to another based on the characteristics of a particular camera or sensor.   To me, the system is at least as important as the individual cameras.  Indeed, I pretty much discount the small differences I see see between the same generation of cameras from different systems and look instead to the broader and longer term trends.   The reason I got into M43 is not only because it met my needs (I was looking for something smaller and with excellent hybrid video capabilities), but because it is a broad and growing system and because Panasonic now has a pretty solid track record of making class-leasing hybrid cameras.

Cane Veteran Member • Posts: 6,900
Re: Easy! Panasonic G6
1

maljo@inreach.com wrote:

a pretty well spec'd camera and gives access to a huge system.

On a budget it would be hard to pick an EM1 over these cheap entry level DSLRs.

maljo

Why would you spend $500 for a low-end DSLR tied to a system with big, heavy lenses, when you could buy a G6 with vastly superior AF, video, an articulating screen, more customization, a much larger feature set, and that's capable of accepting wonderfully compact MFT lenses?

Would any of those objects you focusing on be moving?

Ulfric M Douglas Veteran Member • Posts: 4,828
Re: Nikon D3300 is $499 - how can mirrorless compete?
1

maljo@inreach.com wrote:

...

On a budget it would be hard to pick an EM1 ...

No sh Sherlock,

this thread still going?

What has "E-M1 is expensive" got to do with "Nikon something isn't expensive" ?

-- hide signature --

Cheksa wrote:
You're evil Ulfric.

intruder61 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,064
maljo@inreach.com......you lose.

No text.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads