I’ve been wanting a DSLR camera for quite a long time. I’m never sure if my Nikon CoolPix L1 will have the battery power to use. (It seems I have to replace the batteries every other time I use it.) And it’s just not as capable as I’d like it to me.
I have a collection of 35 mm SLRs comprising a Nikon FM2 and FM3a, an Olympus OM-1N and OM-4, a Cannon AE-1 Program, and a Pentax K-1000. Of course the common wisdom is to pick a brand and stick with it; but I like the cameras for different reasons. My first SLR was an AE-1 Program. I find it kind of clunky now, but it’s a good camera. The K-1000 is beautiful for its simplicity. The OM-1N is small and perfect. The FM2 is like the OM-1N, but better – though it’s larger. The OM-4 was my second SLR, and I like some of its features. The FM3a has all of the features I want.
For DSLRs, my best fiend likes his Canon, though I don’t recall which model it is. I keep forgetting. I’m leaning toward Nikon, myself. I have a Nikon D3300 in my shopping cart.
I’m not ‘a photographer’. That is, I don’t seek out things to photograph. However, when I take pictures I try to take care in my compositions – even in ‘snapshots’ I try to compost the shot if I’m able. My friend used his Canon to shoot a short film. We’ve spoken about upcoming projects, and it looks like his next one may be shot on super-16 film. (I have an Aaton LTR-54.) Everything my friend does is done to further his filmmaking. I, on the other hand, have a full-time job, a mortgage, and my One True Love is flying. I just don’t have the time to devote to full-time filmmaking. So my DSLR should have good video capabilities, but it’s not going to be something I’ll use in that pursuit. I want a DSLR that has more capability than I use, but isn’t a ‘professional’ one.
What do you think of the D3300? The price is right. Any DSLR will be better than my CoolPix pocket camera. The one thing it looks like it lacks is a pop-up flash. If not the D3300, what other Nikon DSLR would you suggest for my needs?
We had been using the point and shoots for several years now - on the theory that they were throwaways when they went bad and cheap enough to “keep up”.
I picked up a Canon Rebel T5i for the wife for christmas - its seriously nice and as easy as a point and click if you want it to be.
Any of the Nikon 3XXX will suit your needs. The 3300 does have a pop up flash, it’s right there above the “NIKON” name, it’s just been closed. I have a D3100 and it works really well for what I wanted. The one thing I really liked about the 3100 is that you can switch between single shot, continuous shot and timer.
If you have some of your old Nikon lenses around you can probably still use them. They may not have full function but you could still use them. I have an older micro lens that will not auto focus but I still use it.
I’ve only ever used the video to shoot my kid’s soccer game, mine only has the ability to go for about 10 minutes, not sure about the 3300.
I’ve had Nikons for a number of years. My wife had an AE1, and we bought a couple of N70 bodies back in the 90s and shot a LOT of film through them. I bought a D100 some years ago and all of the old auto-focus lenses work fine with it. My DIL has a Canon and I really like the optics on it, enough so that if I got serious about photography again, I would consider changing over to Canon. As Mr. Head says, any of those 3000 line rigs would be good for amateur+ use, especially if you already have Nikon-compatible lenses.
As a sidekick camera, I highly recommend the Canon ‘S’ series. I have an S95 that is really a remarkable camera.
Note that the Nikon D3xxx (and D5xxx series) can’t autofocus with older AF type autofocus lenses, but only the current AFS ones. They also don’t do any light metering with old manual focus lenses, so anything more action-oriented than macro or astrophotography will be a problem.
Also, I have a Nikon D7100 and it sucks for video, as you can’t change any settings (aperture, shutter, sensitivity) manually during filming and the autofocus is slow and noisy in video mode.
Mrs. Gap uses a Canon DSLR of some kind or another. I’m an old film photograher, trained by a pro in my long ago yute. Mrs. Gap’s Canon has more knobs and controls than the Space Shuttle and is about as easy to learn to use. She used to ask me about why photos didn’t come out right, but for someone trained in shutter speeds, aperatures and Gossen Luna Pro light meters it wasn’t possible for me to help her. I suspect best thing a person who’s new to DSLR usage can do is take a course at the local Community College and spend a week with the instruction book. If you’re already familiar with digital photography this may not be required. Photography seems VERY different now than when I learned.
Regarding this - I have the Nikon D40 and D5100, and I find the menus and controls to be much better thought-out and easier to use than either my Sony RX-100 point-and-shoot or my Canon HF-G20 video camera. I have been very happy with both Nikons and when I replace the D40 it will be with another Nikon.
That said, taking video with them is not ideal, as already pointed out … which is why I ended up with the Canon for that. I find it much easier to do video with a camera that is specifically designed for it (just the ergonomics alone are a big factor for me), but YMMV.
You don’t have a single lens stockpile and you find them clunky. I suggest you look at the new Sony’s that do away with the mirror and delivers 24.3MP at 11 fps with an ISO of 25,600.
I want a DSLR because I like looking through a viewfinder more than looking at a screen. Also, I’m not a fan of autofocus.
I find the Canon AE-1 Program clunky. It didn’t seem so back in 1982, but it does now. The others – the Nikons, the Olympuses, and the Pentax – don’t seem clunky to me. I think it’s because the Canon makes whirring noises and seems to have a louder shutter click.
My D100 has the option of turning off AF. I like that because when contrast is absent or low, my go-to tele lens tends to “hunt” for a focus point, making it easy to miss a great shot.
I strongly agree with mind the gap on the notion of a class. I took one locally that was simply called “Understanding your DSLR”. I’d been using my camera for several years at that point, but the class opened up a whole new range of options for manually setting the camera up for specific shoots. I followed that up with a class for Photoshop Elements, Photoshop’s cheaper and pretty much equally powerful little brother. Using that program can dramatically change the look of your photos.
I’m shooting D5000 and D3200 right now. APS-C format (DX in Nikon talk)
The 24 mp of the 3200 is nice for landscapes, architecture, and product shots because of having so much info to work with in RAW. But even the 12 mp sensor of the D5000 in JPEG mode provides exceptional image quality. Provided you have good lenses and proper technique, of course.
The D5500 was just announced. 24.2, vari angle touch screen, new image processor. Around $1k or so with kit lens.
Autofocus nowadays is astonishingly good. Accurate, swift, adjustable…
If I were to start up brand new and full frame, I would likely opt towards Sony. Those are some nice cameras. I was surprised how small and light they are. Again, excellent lenses available for them.
Would like a to see a full frame offering from Pentax. Maybe something like a digital LX
/
If you want to use manual focus, then you either need somewhat upscale modern lenses or old manual focus lenses.
Cheaper modern lenses typically have extremely limited travel between minimum distance and infinity and the tiniest focus rings. Better Nikon lenses (and I’m sure some others, too) have much better focus rings and allow for continuous manual focus without first disengaging autofocus. If you then program a separate button to do autofocus (also known as “back button focus”) you get the best of both worlds.
Of course old manual focus lenses are really nice to work with. I’m not sure if any other modern cameras than Nikon’s are still compatible with lenses from the manual focus era. But in Nikon’s case, the cheaper DSLRs won’t do light metering with manual focus lenses that don’t have a CPU, so you’d need a D7xxx.
The D3xxx and D5xxx still work fine, but you have to use a separate light meter or use the histogram to set your exposure manually. However, unlike with the D7xxx, on these you can mount really old non-AI type manual focus lenses from before 1978 that would damage the D7xxx and up. (But these lenses typically aren’t great optically and have usually been converted to work with newer cameras at some point.)
If you’re not in a hurry, manual focus on a modern camera works well because the focus sensors still work and tell you when the focus is correct. The D7100 even tells you in which direction you need to turn the focus ring.
The thing about HD video is that it seems it’s a constant chase for the latest and greatest technology. Super-16 is a mature technology, and any camera from the past 50 years (some would require super-16 modification, though my Aaton is already in that format) can be used to make a film. And instead of buying a new HD video camera every couple of years, I can get an Aaton XTR Plus with a barney, 50 mm Zeiss f1.4 prime, two magazines, Aaton Origin C timecode unit, battery, and charger for $3,500 that won’t be superseded by anything better. Or for under $4,000 I can get an Arri BL4S 35 mm kit (less lenses).
Of course you then have the expense of film stock and processing. But at that stage, you’re not using your own money.