which Nikon DSLR?!

[Whitecat]

If you're only just "musing" at the moment then any advice you may get may be moot by the time you buy... Nikon is on a roughly 2 year product cycle with DSLRs, and they've just updated the very top end and the very bottom end so all the midrange stuff is going to see updates within the next 6-12 months or so.

That said, do you have old Nikon lenses you need to use? That will limit your choices of available bodies, and you'll be looking at a minimum spend of around £800 just for the body to get something current that works. That said you could go used and find something older that works and is in your price range, such as a D80.

If you're starting from scratch, for still photos, in your price range, the D5100 is probably the best of the bunch at the moment in terms of bang-for-buck.

The D3200 has better video capability (which you deem unimportant so no big deal), comparable/maybe ever so slightly better image quality at lower ISOs, a higher-res sensor (useful for cropping) but lacks some more "enthusiast" features and doesn't quite produce the same clean high-ISO shots that the D5100 seems to be able to pull out of the bag in low light. The articulated screen on the D5100 is pretty nifty as well, I've used it more often than I thought I would.

Neither of those two bodies will fully function with older lenses - no AF on anything but 'G' series lenses and no metering on anything other than 'D' or 'G' lenses, to my knowledge.

[AlphaDingo]

Virtually ANY nikon lens will work on virtually ANY body. Whitecat is correct that some feature won't work however. Is a D7000 in your price range? I had one before I got my d700 and it's great!

[nick-the-sax]

hey thanks so much for the replies!

funny the D80 should be mentioned - i've been eyeing the D90 as it seems quite sturdy (the F3 is built like a tank, so i guess i've been spoiled so far). any opinions on how this compares with the D3200 or D5100 you mentioned, Whitecat?

I have only one lense which i do love, so would like to carry on using it, but it's a fully manual one (my gear thus far is fully manual, save for aperture priority...). but i don't mind starting from scratch. i guess the main issue i have is getting as good a quality sensor as possible / the best balance of component parts, if that makes any sense at all.

AlphaDingo, i'm sure i could make exceptions for a good camera, it's just knowing what to look for! problem is, I'm not strictly a beginner photographer, just all my experience has been on film.

(digital seems so much more complex than film! lol!)

[nick-the-sax]

OK peeps,

I've done a bit of research (well, quite a lot!) and I have narrowed it down to two cameras: D90 and D7000, which seem to get a lot of attention. any preference to image quality / ease of use (despite the resolution difference of the two)?

since people like both of these cameras, i'm wondering if i can use my old lenses with these? i have a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 (fully manual) which i absolutely love and would like to be able to use with the new camera.

thanks again

Nick

[Manfrensengensen]

None of my old F2 lenses will work on my D3s. You'll need new lenses or it will damage your dslr.

[Whitecat]

Originally Posted by Manfrensengensen

None of my old F2 lenses will work on my D3s. You'll need new lenses or it will damage your dslr.

They won't "damage" it. Physically the F-mount is virtually unchanged since the 1960s.

They just won't allow metering, so you'd have to guess...

[carlheinz]

I think the old Nikkor lenses work with the D90.I don't know if you will need some adapter or not but this footage was all shot with 24mm 1.4 Nikkor lens and a D90.

Ambient Analogue 001 - YouTube

[nick-the-sax]

it's official.

the D7000 will work and METER (most important!) with almost any lense (ai and after), so ideally will go for this one. if not, then i'll be getting a D90 (price!).

any experience with either / both of these?

[pandjonb]

Originally Posted by nick-the-sax

it's official.

the D7000 will work and METER (most important!) with almost any lense (ai and after), so ideally will go for this one. if not, then i'll be getting a D90 (price!).

any experience with either / both of these?

Just slightly off topic. I've a Sony NEX7. Great little camera for the price.

[nicksu]

I want a D7000. If you want FX, D700 would be nice.

[tapermark2006]

Canon makes the better cameras. There's a reason more photographers use them. I would never get a Nikon. Just sayin. Proud owner of Canon XF105 and Canon Mark 5.

[.:On The Rock:.]

Originally Posted by tapermark2006

Canon makes the better cameras. There's a reason more photographers use them. I would never get a Nikon. Just sayin. Proud owner of Canon XF105 and Canon Mark 5.

Really? I believe that more people use Canon is that they are cheaper. I find that Nikon's colour representation is much more accurate than Canon. I've seen many more Professional photographers using Nikon.

[Yago]

Originally Posted by tapermark2006

Canon makes the better cameras.

Well as Canon user I find that comment to be somewhat incorrect .
Canon have fallen behind in the "sensor" wars IMHO , they will most likely catch up / overtake , but for now Nikon is at the top .

[Whitecat]

Confirmation bias is a powerful thing!

[MarkSmith]

Originally Posted by tapermark2006

Canon makes the better cameras.

No.

Nick, if the sticking point between the D90 and the D7000 is the price, just save up for a bit and get yourself a D7000.

[Den]

Nikon vs Canon is like PC vs Mac discussion.

Nikon has better noise problem solved.(Nikon 1 point)

Nikon has bigger viewfinder (Nikon 1 point)

Nikon noise is like film noise. Canon noise is with different colors dots.(Nikon 1 point)

Nikons are always on repair while Canon works without problems in photo agency if you take % on all. (Canon 1 point)

Nikon have dominant yellows and greens, while Canon has magenta dominant photos.(Canon 1 point)

They are really different. Each model year after year creates difference between these two companies.

Times before, you could create high quality photo with any medium format film camera. Today it is not the case anymore. You will need to spend a lot of thousands $ for decent quality photo.

Canon has better quality video. (Canon 1 point) 5D Mark III has the edge over Nikon D 800. (Full Frame)

Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800 - Hands-on - YouTube

However I really don't know what to buy, still.

[MarkSmith]

Originally Posted by Den

Today it is not the case anymore. You will need to spend a lot of thousands $ for decent quality photo.

What? If this is your mindset and that's why you are choosing between a D800 and a 5D Mark III...PLEASE save your money because you are way off base. A good photographer can create gorgeous photos with a $200 point and shoot.

[Den]

Originally Posted by MarkSmith

What? If this is your mindset and that's why you are choosing between a D800 and a 5D Mark III...PLEASE save your money because you are way off base. A good photographer can create gorgeous photos with a $200 point and shoot.

Yes 200$ but film camera.. I am talking about that digital hi quality photos are far more expensive than film photos with same technical photo quality.

[nick-the-sax]

well, i've gone with the D90 and couldn't be happier - didn't need all the features of the 7000, really, and the D90 is really a solid performer.

and i can see what Den is getting at. makes sense, since film has a quality that digital is trying to reproduce at cost. eh, they both have their fortes. either way, great taking part in both worlds :D

[sleepmode]

Originally Posted by nick-the-sax

well, i've gone with the D90 and couldn't be happier - didn't need all the features of the 7000, really, and the D90 is really a solid performer.

Congrates. I have a D7000 and I think it was the right move for you to get the D90. Save for some really good glass and maybe later upgrade the camera.

[Yago]

Originally Posted by sleepmode

Save for some really good glass and maybe later upgrade the camera.

This is good advice !
I did just that , and upgraded my body last year to a 550d , but my (two) lenses are worth 3 times the body !
Good glass is so very important .

[nick-the-sax]

Yep. Right now just using an old 50mm ai-converted nikkor. Totally manual and no metering so next thing on the photo list is gonna be a lens! Still I do love the results I'm getting...
- I guess good glass is good glass whichever way you look at it! May try 35mm focal length and see hie that works out.

Thanks for the advice again, I gotta say, tech hunting is a lot of fun and quite intense too, e

[ben_allison]

Having spent plenty of time with both, sell your Nikon kit and move to Canon. The features and design (physical body and menus) are far superior. Shooting on Canon is a joy. Nikon hurts. Not to mention tha Canon's sensors are typically superior (while to be fair, optics are roughly equivalent for both).

If you're taking pics for enjoyment, you will enjoy yourself much, much more with Canon.

[kafka]

Originally Posted by nick-the-sax

the D7000 will work and METER (most important!) with almost any lense (ai and after), so ideally will go for this one. if not, then i'll be getting a D90 (price!).

Originally Posted by tapermark2006

Canon makes the better cameras. There's a reason more photographers use them. I would never get a Nikon. Just sayin. Proud owner of Canon XF105 and Canon Mark 5.

I've had a D90 for a few years and like it a lot. It's been a durable and reliable camera. A pro photographer friend of mine uses Canon, and said most of the other pros he knows do also. He said he felt that Canon glass was superior. However, he also said that you really won't run into any important technical differences in similarly priced models between the two manufacturers in the prosumer lines, and that it's more important to get a camera that you're comfortable with.

Having learned on a manual film camera, I mostly leave it on aperture priority and autofocus, and then fine-tweak the focus and exposure before I hit the shutter. I liked the D90 well enough for that process, so I went with the Nikon. At the time, the competing Canon had a few more features and cost a little more.

[Yago]

Originally Posted by ben_allison

Not to mention tha Canon's sensors are typically superior

As far as I can tell Nikon is ahead in the sensor department , they are get more pixels on the sensor and still achieving the same ISO/noise performance .
The sensor race does swing back and forth and no doubt will change again , possibly when Canon launch the replacement to the 7d .

Agree on the glass being of comparable performance , Canon used to have an edge in the top-line useful focal-lengths that sell to a good budget .
IE the 70-200 F4 L non IS is a classic lens for the price . I think that Nikon have seen this error and are now bringing out lenses to compete with those like I mentioned .

I do hear that Canon has the better user interface , and haven't read anything to the contrary .
Now if that's the case ... IDK .
It doesn't really matter IMHO , Canon or Nikon , they are both great camera systems , and 99.9% of the time , I should imagine the restrictions are the user rather than camera !

Either will take great pictures , I know I am happy with Canon system as I am sure you will be happy with the Nikon .

Enjoy the camera and don't forget to post some of your pictures in the "Found Pictures" thread in Open Talk section of GS !

[nick-the-sax]

well the main reason i went for Nikon is that i already had the F3 and a lens that i really like (yes it's only a 50mm but it does great things for me!). and i find the user interface pretty easy too, so no probs there. maybe if i'd tried Canon properly then i'd prefer it, but i don't have any lasting memories of what i have tried (equivalent) so i'm happy here

never knew there was a photo place on here... yep i'll post some up soon then!

[complex]

TBH out of Nikon or Cannon, i would go Nikon for picture quality and ISO, and Cannon for film quality. look at some of the tests on YouTube you can clearly see this in the tests.

Also i thought the D5100 was better for video than the D3100 because D3100 can only do 720p where as the D5100 can do full 1080p.

[Whitecat]

Originally Posted by complex

TBH out of Nikon or Cannon, i would go Nikon for picture quality and ISO, and Cannon for film quality. look at some of the tests on YouTube you can clearly see this in the tests.

Also i thought the D5100 was better for video than the D3100 because D3100 can only do 720p where as the D5100 can do full 1080p.

The D3200 is better yet than the D5100 thanks to having a little more control over what's going on, even if the operation isn't exactly simple...

[complex]

In this review it seams as the D5100 kills the 3100 with its extra features

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D5100-vs-Nikon_D3100