Looking at an entry level DSLR

B

bowmanm3

n00b
Joined
Mar 27, 2010
Messages
49
I am looking to buy an entry-level DSLR for my wife, this is the one I was looking at:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nikon+-...ategoryId=pcmcat180400050000&id=1218107268800

My question is, what is the range of the lens that comes with the camera(if anyone knows). Best buy has a deal for the camera with the lens above plus a 55-200mm VR lens for $649, and I was wondering if it was worth it to spend the extra $200.

If it's worth it I have no problem spending the extra money. Also if anyone has any other camera suggestions that is in that price range($600-650), let me know!

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
I'm a big fan of Nikon. I shoot with a Nikon D90 myself. I saw that Bestbuy also has the D5000 for a about $80 more. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nikon+-...lack/9311755.p?id=1218082646627&skuId=9311755

Personally, I would go for the D5000 over the D3000. It's got a higher Megapixel count and better features. Notibly, Movie Mode, Live View and the ability to Bracket. While I don't think Movie Mode is a killer feature, I do find Live View to be very useful when trying to frame photos when you can't look through the viewfinder. It also allows for Bracketing and has a higher range of ISO settings. All in all, it's just a slightly more capable camera for $80 more.

As for a lens, both kits come with the same 18-55mm zoom. Glass is where you can spend the bulk of your camera money on. You can easily spend thousands on a good "fast" f2.8 zoom.

I haven't been able to afford one of those yet, however. That said, I've had good luck with the 18-105 VR2 Nikor lens and the 18-200 VR2 Nikor lens. I tend to use the 18-105 more though. I find 18-55 to be just too limiting of a range for general use.

Even these two lenses are fairly expensive though. The 18-105 is $400 and the 18-200 is over $800.

I'm fairly certain, that living with a single 18-55mm won't be a great experience though. You'll want both the 18-55 and the 55-200 or a single lens with a pretty large zoom range.

Edit: Btw, check out http://dpreview.com as well. They'll have some good feature comparisons and reviews of many DSLR cameras.
 
Personally I would go with a Pentax DSLR.

You will get more features, higher megapixel count, and shake reduction in the camera body (Nikon shake reduction is built into certain lenses).

I curently have the older K10D and it is still an awesome camera... want to use Pentax or aftermarket glass made for Pentax cameras that is around 50 years old.. no problem. Nikon or Canon.. no way.. ain't gonna happen.

For entry level, I would probably go with the K-r or K-x. The K-r is the newer "entry level" by pentax and is going to have better high ISO quality than the K-x.. but you can get a K-x kit with 18-55 and 55-300 for $629 shipped.

K-x kit with 18-55 and 55-300:
http://cgi.ebay.com/PENTAX-K-x-KX-D...877147?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item3f0c37191b

K-r kit with 18-55
http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Pentax-K-r-...421625?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item1c1d863f79

If you want to see a comparison of the different pentax cameras, go to pentaxforums.com and look around.

edit... forget the K-x if you can wing $679.. You can get the K-r with 18-55 and 55-200 for $679 from www.bhphotovideo.com... only $50 more than they sell the k-r 18-55 kit for.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/734891-REG/Pentax_14650_K_r_Digital_SLR_Camera.html

If you signup for a free account at pentaxforums.com and use the link for B&H photo, you can get a free upgraded account on the pentaxforums.com site.

Compare it with the Nikon D90 kit and you will most likely go with the Pentax kit.
 
Last edited:
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Personally, I wouldn't go with any brand other than Nikon or Canon especially if you think you will want to upgrade to something nicer in the future. Personally I would look at getting a D3000 or D31000 with a 18-70, 18-135, or 35 f1.8. I found the 18-55 to be very disappointing and would definitely think about getting something a little nicer to start out with.
 
Thanks for all the info guys! I have gotten lots of recomendations for Nikon from friends that use them, so I am now looking at the D5000 among a few others. I am not an expert by any means, so I had another question.

How exactly does the autofocus work on the D5000? I realize that most of the time it is best to just use the manual focus, but sometimes I would like to be able to just snap a photo real quick and not have to worry about switching to a point and shoot or getting the focus just right. Is that feasible with the D5000? the specs are are kind of confusing to someone that doesnt know a ton about photography terms.
 
bowmanm3 said:
I am looking to buy an entry-level DSLR for my wife, this is the one I was looking at:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nikon+-...ategoryId=pcmcat180400050000&id=1218107268800

My question is, what is the range of the lens that comes with the camera(if anyone knows). Best buy has a deal for the camera with the lens above plus a 55-200mm VR lens for $649, and I was wondering if it was worth it to spend the extra $200.

If it's worth it I have no problem spending the extra money. Also if anyone has any other camera suggestions that is in that price range($600-650), let me know!

Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

I've got that D3000. If you are going to buy it from best buy, best to spring for the D5000.
I got it refurbished without a lens for $300 from B&HPhoto. I'd suggest doing that and getting the 35mm 1.8 prime lens for $200 and not bother with the kit lens. I bought the kit lens later on since it was cheap, but I'm not that impressed with it, save your money.

It's a pretty nice camera with the prime lens, with the kit lens the pictures weren't much better than a regular P&S
 
I almost always use autofocus. I would imagine that you or yoru wife would too. The camera will likely do a better job at focusing than you could. I know it will better than I can. You'll find the Nikons (I'm sure other brands too) allow you to play when where your camera focuses in on. Either way, it's a quick flick of a switch on the camera body to switch between manual and autofocus.

What you'll ending up wanting more of a manual setting is the camera itself. Automode, will do an ok job at creating an image, manual or variable program modes will give you more creative control. Automode basically meters the available light and automatically selects aperture and shutter speeds for you.

Manually chosing these settings will allow different abilities. a wider aperture (Smaller F stop number) will narrow your depth of field, bringing in your primary subject into sharp focus while keeping other objects (closer and further away) out of focus. Faster shutter speeds will freeze action in a photo, while longer speeds will blur. Picture freezing an airplanes prop in flight vs an obviously moving prop in the same photo.

So, autofocus most of the time. Auto mode when you want easy snapshots, etc, but more manual controls when you want to do something better.

Btw, I really recommend getting a DVD on your camera. I purchased a D90 specific DVD and found it helpful. It will walk you through basic photography (just as what I mentioned) as well as the basic, and some advanced features of your specific camera.
 
unrlmth said:
Personally, I wouldn't go with any brand other than Nikon or Canon especially if you think you will want to upgrade to something nicer in the future. Personally I would look at getting a D3000 or D31000 with a 18-70, 18-135, or 35 f1.8. I found the 18-55 to be very disappointing and would definitely think about getting something a little nicer to start out with.
Click to expand...

Ummmm.. wait.. what????

Have you even looked at the Pentax K-5? That camera, quality and feature wise, is better than cameras that cost a lot more than it. The same goes for their lower priced cameras.

Did you even see my statement about using older lenses on Nikon and Canon DSLRs? Have you ever tried to mount old Canon or Nikon glass on a Nikon or Canon DSLR? It doesn't work cause they changed the mounts too much. Even some lenses that will physically mount will not work on the newer cameras because of the difference in electronics.
 
cyclone3d said:
Ummmm.. wait.. what????

Have you even looked at the Pentax K-5? That camera, quality and feature wise, is better than cameras that cost a lot more than it. The same goes for their lower priced cameras.

Did you even see my statement about using older lenses on Nikon and Canon DSLRs? Have you ever tried to mount old Canon or Nikon glass on a Nikon or Canon DSLR? It doesn't work cause they changed the mounts too much. Even some lenses that will physically mount will not work on the newer cameras because of the difference in electronics.
Click to expand...

I mounted a lens from a 1960's Nikon F on my D3000, It wouldn't meter but I could adjust that by taking a few pictures, pretty awesome.

But Pentax are good cameras though.
 
bowmanm3 said:
Thanks for all the info guys! I have gotten lots of recomendations for Nikon from friends that use them, so I am now looking at the D5000 among a few others. I am not an expert by any means, so I had another question.

How exactly does the autofocus work on the D5000? I realize that most of the time it is best to just use the manual focus, but sometimes I would like to be able to just snap a photo real quick and not have to worry about switching to a point and shoot or getting the focus just right. Is that feasible with the D5000? the specs are are kind of confusing to someone that doesnt know a ton about photography terms.
Click to expand...

On the entry level Nikons like the d3000 and d5000 the autofocus motor is in the lens, so to use autofocus you need to buy cpu lenses with the built in motor. More expensive Nikons have the motor in the camera so you can use much older lenses and have this feature. If you've got a ton of old Nikon lenses lying around its worth getting the more expensive cameras, if not, it doesn't matter, switching between auto and manual is quick and easy. Look for VR (vibration reduction) too, a lot of fast lenses you won't need it and they don't come with it, but it's quite useful.
 
matteos said:
On the entry level Nikons like the d3000 and d5000 the autofocus motor is in the lens, so to use autofocus you need to buy cpu lenses with the built in motor. More expensive Nikons have the motor in the camera so you can use much older lenses and have this feature. If you've got a ton of old Nikon lenses lying around its worth getting the more expensive cameras, if not, it doesn't matter, switching between auto and manual is quick and easy. Look for VR (vibration reduction) too, a lot of fast lenses you won't need it and they don't come with it, but it's quite useful.
Click to expand...

I almost mentioned that! hehe. but, it sounds they will be starting from the ground up.

I'm not sure, but I think the D90 was the last of Nikon's Consumer DSLRs to have the autofocus motor built in. It's probably why a 3 year old camera is still up there in price.

Good point on the VR stuff too. I first got a 3rd party 18-200mm zoom without VR or any similar feature because they were readily available and about a third of the cost of the Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. I hated the lens. It was pure crap.
 
cyclone3d said:
Ummmm.. wait.. what????

Have you even looked at the Pentax K-5? That camera, quality and feature wise, is better than cameras that cost a lot more than it. The same goes for their lower priced cameras.

Did you even see my statement about using older lenses on Nikon and Canon DSLRs? Have you ever tried to mount old Canon or Nikon glass on a Nikon or Canon DSLR? It doesn't work cause they changed the mounts too much. Even some lenses that will physically mount will not work on the newer cameras because of the difference in electronics.
Click to expand...

Yea, I use 30+ year old lenses all the time which meter perfectly fine on my D300 and D700, and yes I am aware that they won't meter on the entry level cameras, but they will mount and can be used. Nikon has stayed with the F-mount since the 50's and it hasn't changed much over the years.

And while I'm sure Pentax has bodies that are competitive in price, quality and features, it lacks the popularity and widespread use of Canon and Nikon. If your looking to rent a lens, I bet it's going to be much harder to find a lens in the Pentax mount. Also the overall selection of lenses is much less, while Canon and Nikon have a pretty comprehensive selection. I've loaned lenses to family members at weddings and traded lenses with friends.

But honestly, none of that matters much if you are just going to be getting one or two cheap lenses.
 
griffinhart said:
I almost mentioned that! hehe. but, it sounds they will be starting from the ground up.

I'm not sure, but I think the D90 was the last of Nikon's Consumer DSLRs to have the autofocus motor built in. It's probably why a 3 year old camera is still up there in price.

Good point on the VR stuff too. I first got a 3rd party 18-200mm zoom without VR or any similar feature because they were readily available and about a third of the cost of the Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. I hated the lens. It was pure crap.
Click to expand...

The D7000 also has a motor in the body and many of the other features of the pro models.

Also Nikon has/is coming out with many very nice, cheap primes with the AF-S motor which allows for someone with an entry level body to experience higher image quality and fast lenses, without shelling out a grand or two.
 
Thanks for all the input! Well, I decided to go with the Nikon D5000 that came with the 18-55 VR lens. I was going to get the 55-200 VR lens as well but they were out of it, so I'm going to wait a bit and see if I can get a good deal on a slightly better lens sometime in the next month.
 
unrlmth said:
Yea, I use 30+ year old lenses all the time which meter perfectly fine on my D300 and D700, and yes I am aware that they won't meter on the entry level cameras, but they will mount and can be used. Nikon has stayed with the F-mount since the 50's and it hasn't changed much over the years.

And while I'm sure Pentax has bodies that are competitive in price, quality and features, it lacks the popularity and widespread use of Canon and Nikon. If your looking to rent a lens, I bet it's going to be much harder to find a lens in the Pentax mount. Also the overall selection of lenses is much less, while Canon and Nikon have a pretty comprehensive selection. I've loaned lenses to family members at weddings and traded lenses with friends.

But honestly, none of that matters much if you are just going to be getting one or two cheap lenses.
Click to expand...

So Canon is horrible for lens compatibilty and Nikon not so much. I haven't played much with Nikon stuff at all, but was under the impression that older lens compatilbility was prettty bad as well.

As for the selection of lenses for Pentax... there are multitudes of lenses. Pentax has a full lineup and aftermarket brands like Sigma and others are there as well.

Canon and Nikon may have a bigger current selection, but there really isn't anything really missing from the current Pentax selection.
 
cyclone3d said:
So Canon is horrible for lens compatibilty and Nikon not so much. I haven't played much with Nikon stuff at all, but was under the impression that older lens compatilbility was prettty bad as well.

As for the selection of lenses for Pentax... there are multitudes of lenses. Pentax has a full lineup and aftermarket brands like Sigma and others are there as well.

Canon and Nikon may have a bigger current selection, but there really isn't anything really missing from the current Pentax selection.
Click to expand...

I just took a quick look at Pentax's website, and it looks like there are no full frame camera and they are missing many lenses such as:

Fast WA like the 14-25 or 16-35
Fast primes. No 85 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 135 f2, 200 f2
Superteles, No 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8, 500 f4, 600 f4

And those are some of the most popular high end lenses for both Canon and Nikon.

And any Sigma lens wil also be available for Nikon and Canon as well.

And yes Nikon is much better than Canon with lens compatibility.
 
bowmanm3 said:
Thanks for all the input! Well, I decided to go with the Nikon D5000 that came with the 18-55 VR lens. I was going to get the 55-200 VR lens as well but they were out of it, so I'm going to wait a bit and see if I can get a good deal on a slightly better lens sometime in the next month.
Click to expand...

Congrats, it's a excellent camera and you will enjoy it.
 
Yea, my wife is out of town today and tomorrow and so I get to charge it up and play with it a little to get it ready for her. Which means my computer gets to have a photo shoot! I'll post some pics when I'm done. This will be my first time using an SLR since before digital cameras. Should be an interesting experience.
 
Good choice on the d5000 over the d3000. I have a friend that got a D60 as his first DSLR and ended up buying a D90 not long after because of feature differences. The differences between the D60 and D90 are pretty similar to the D3000 and D5000.
 
unrlmth said:
I just took a quick look at Pentax's website, and it looks like there are no full frame camera and they are missing many lenses such as:

Fast WA like the 14-25 or 16-35
Fast primes. No 85 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 135 f2, 200 f2
Superteles, No 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8, 500 f4, 600 f4

And those are some of the most popular high end lenses for both Canon and Nikon.

And any Sigma lens wil also be available for Nikon and Canon as well.

And yes Nikon is much better than Canon with lens compatibility.
Click to expand...

Yeah.. maybe Ricoh taking over the Camera division will see some changes such as full frame... but at the same time, APS-C is nice for using full frame lenses and getting effectively fast longer glass for cheaper.

I've got an old Sigma 135 1.8 which basically translates to 200 1.8 (202.5) with the crop factor.

There are a few different companies that make 85 1.4s that are pretty nice and not that expensive.

As for the not fast glass in general, newer Pentax cameras have crazy awesome high ISO quality. Nikon D300.. ISO 800 would not even be acceptable to me and doesn't really look any better than ISO 800 on my K10D. I just looked at this page for high ISO comparison.
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D700/noise.shtml

The D700 is about twice as expensive as the Pentax K-5, but the Pentax K-5 will kill it in high ISO performance.

I also kinda doubt that Pentax could currently justify making some of those lenses since their camera division is much smaller than Canon's or Nikon.

Maybe I am jusy partial to the underdog.. or maybe I just like feeling like I am getting a lot more for my money.
 
cyclone3d said:
I've got an old Sigma 135 1.8 which basically translates to 200 1.8 (202.5) with the crop factor.
Click to expand...

The apparent depth of field is at a given aperture is also affected by the smaller APS-C sensor size; because the circle of confusion is a function of the focal length and the film/sensor size, the smaller your sensor the the smaller your out-of-focus highlights (bokeh balls) are and the more DoF you get. This is why point & shoot cameras with 6X crop factors have such a hard time producing soft/blurry backgrounds and have so much depth of field and why full-frame cameras produce such pleasing background separation.

As a rule of thumb, you lose the equivalent of 2/3rds to 1 full aperture stop going from full frame to APS-C. Your 135/1.8 would behave more like a 200/2.5 in FF-equivalent terms on a Nikon 1.5X crop.

Anyway, there's a lot of Nikon love in this thread so I thought I'd toss some Canon's way. I think Canon made the right decision in abandoning the old-style screw-drive/aperture linkage lenses and going for an all-electronic system that's better/faster/quieter than any old style lenses. Considering that any decent photographer will tell you that having exceptional glass is much more important than having the latest camera body, I went with Canon for the superior lens selection. This is not to say that Canon bodies are lacking, just that there's some great lenses available. Also the feel of the bodies and layout of the controls just seemed more logical to me at the time, now that I've used them for so long, I couldn't imagine switching over.

As far as Pentax goes, my only experience with one is with my newspaper reporter sister-in-law's thoroughly abused & obsolete K100D so I'll reserve judgement until I have a chance to play with something newer and in working order. Theoretically there's some good tech behind them, its just the lack of funds or significant market share that is hurting their ability to execute something special. It'll be interesting to see where Ricoh takes the brand.

As to the OP's question about what to start with, if you have friends that use cameras in either system, go with whatever system they use so you can borrow/trade lenses and have a large collective selection of glass. Also, if getting a D3000 over a D5000 means you can afford a better kit lens, filters, etc. then I'd do that. Camera bodies are terrible for holding value while lenses and accessories are great. Once you gain a good understanding of what to look for, there's some great deals to be had in the used market.
 
Last edited:
There's a D3000 with 18-55mm floating around at Staples on clearance for $399. If you're able to find one at a store near you, this along with the 20% coupon is a deal that's hard to pass up when shopping for an entry level DSLR. Note if you only find a display model, you can often get an extra 5-10% off.
 
While I partly agree with being better off with buying a good lens over an more expensive camera, I find that there is still a minimum feature point on the camera. I've had friends buy the basic entry DSLRs only to replace it in short order with something more robust with better features.

One friend upgraded his D60 to a D90 within a few months because of the missing features on the D60. I'd rather pay $80 more for a body that will allow me to try more types of photography than to just feel like I have no choice but to replace the body sooner.
 
SilverMK3 said:
The apparent depth of field is at a given aperture is also affected by the smaller APS-C sensor size; because the circle of confusion is a function of the focal length and the film/sensor size, the smaller your sensor the the smaller your out-of-focus highlights (bokeh balls) are and the more DoF you get. This is why point & shoot cameras with 6X crop factors have such a hard time producing soft/blurry backgrounds and have so much depth of field and why full-frame cameras produce such pleasing background separation.

As a rule of thumb, you lose the equivalent of 2/3rds to 1 full aperture stop going from full frame to APS-C. Your 135/1.8 would behave more like a 200/2.5 in FF-equivalent terms on a Nikon 1.5X crop.
Click to expand...
Small sensor cameras have a hard time producing depth of field effects because the lens used is physically about 6-10mm of focal length and just cropped to produce equivalent focal lengths.
Full Frames would have a hard time producing depth of field effects with a 6mm lens as well.

And no, you don't lose any light with a crop sensor. The aperture doesn't change. This is because, again, crop really isn't the same as a multiplier. People treat it interchangeably, but it isn't. Take a full frame picture, crop the edges, and you get exactly the same as a crop sensor would produce with the same lens (and sensor, the size of each pixel changes because its obviously not identical between sensors). Crops change the field of view, not the lens. Your 135/1.8 is still a 135/2.8. It just has a smaller field of view on the crop body.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top