D5100 with kit lens is $700-750, that’s definitely the route I’d go in that price tier.
Or on the Canon side you can get a T3 for $500 or T2i for $650, each with a 18-55mm IS kit lens.
The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000/K5, which is a significant step up from anything from Canon in that range. For that matter, it’s a step up from the Canon 60D/7D too. It lacks a lot of the semi-pro features (second dial, weather sealing, in-body motor, electronic level, lots of other stuff) that those higher tier cameras can take, but the pictures are just about as good. D5100 is a significant step up in that class.
Also, wouldn’t recommend the T2 and T3 in general - the T2i/T3i are a significant step up.
On the other hand, a T3 has twice or more the sensor my first DSLR had, and I took plenty of good pictures with that, and it cost more than a T3. But, yes, points mostly taken.
I got a D5100 about a month ago. It’s really a nice upgrade from my D40 and D40x. The low light capabilities are quite impressive, and I love that it can do time lapse video. There are plenty of good reviews on the camera…I think Ken Rockwell’s is the one that sold me.
I just recently (late January) purchased a Nikon D5100 (I got an incredible deal on a refurbished model with kit lens) and I’ve been liking it so far.
The sensor in the 5100 is the same exact one as found in the professional 7000 model, so I feel like I really got the best camera for the price.
Telemark, you bring up a good point about the lens size for the micro 4/3rd system. I took a look at a 600mm equivalent. It’s about 120mm long. For the same equivalence for the Nikon F-mount, the lens would be noticeably larger. Space and weight are at a premium when I travel. I’ve added the Panasonic you mention to the short list.
Otara, I have only one Nikon lens now. It’s never a big problem for me to switch systems because I only keep 2 lenses. We’ll have to agree to disagree about the location of the image stabilization. I’ve owned a few cameras using either system and prefer in-body. I’ve gotten worse images with the Nikon and Canon bodies than the others using the long lenses.
blondebear and FalconFinder, how does the D5100 do in bright light with low ISO? What about banding on clear blue skies? Both were known issues with the D300S I had.
SeniorBeef, you’re making a lot of sense with the K5. I’ve had other quirky cameras and loved them. I still miss my Minolta 7D. I’m taking your points into consideration as well as the price. It’s about a grand at B&H and Adorama.
It’s funny you mention the number of focus points. I use only 1, the center one, yet every year they keep adding more and more of them. What are all the rest good for? I usually focus on the subject, half-hold the shutter release button then frame the shot.
Again, thanks everyone for your help. I’ll end up with a camera that I hadn’t thought of due to you.
I really don’t understand the point of a monstrous AF point count myself. I used to think it was for following action - more points allowing the camera to be able to figure out what the moving object in the scene was quickly - but then I read when shooting action a lot of people turn the camera down to use fewer focus points so that it’s quicker and more decisive. So I really don’t know.
Yeah mostly for moving targets.
It avoids having to do shoot and recompose, which can be enough to miss a shot in between doing the two actions. Also with apertures like 1.8, you can go out of focus slightly simply by recomposing as the DOF gets so small. Theres also AF expansion, which birders say works better for very fast targets in servo mode.
You can also set AF tracking, but I have to say while I can see it, in practise I havent used it for much. Some macro shooters underwater swear by it, ie they say they can lock on the eye of a subject then just take pictures as the composition works for them.
Otara
Forgot to mention one of the main drawbacks of the K5 - the video doesn’t have autofocus, and it uses m-jpeg compression which leads to big files, and the 1080p fps is an odd 25. The competitor cameras are better at video. Although DSLR autofocus can be iffy in general. I plan to get some old manual lenses with the really well designed manual focus rings to do video work. So it can work well for doing well planned, artistic movie shots, but not great as a camcorder replacement.
Thanks for the explanation of the many focus points. It’s just another feature I won’t be using.
If video’s the worst feature of the K5, I’ll be happy with it. I have never used a photo camera to do video and don’t plan to. Still photography is too interesting to me.
I haven’t actually used my new D5100 outdoors on a sunny day yet…have to get back to you on that.
[Hijacking this thread a bit even tho I have one from last month] Will one of the models being bandied about here work well for nature photography? What zoom lens would you recommend?
4/3rds uses a 2x crop system, meaning that the focal length of a 600mm equivelant would be 300mm. Which means just from the rear element to the front element would have to be 300mm, the overall lens longer.
Flickr has a camera finder feature that will show you pictures from a camera you’re interested in. There’s no equivelant lens finder, unfortunately - you either have to dig around in the EXIF to figure out what lens it is, or you can search for that lens and there are often groups dedicated to showing pictures of that lens.
Keep in mind that most pictures are post processed, so view a lot of stuff to get a feel for what’s the camera and what’s photoshop.
What are you looking to spend? Long lenses can get expensive quickly. For a relatively cheap, general purpose, mostly outdoor/lots of light lens, there are lots of cameras in the 70-300mm zoom range - equivelant to 105-450mm in 35mm, usually with 4.5-6 type apertures. That’s plenty long enough for most people. If you need longer than that, or faster, you’re looking at paying quite a lot of money. But Canon’s 70-300 is $450, Nikon’s is $600, Tamron (multiple mounts) is $200… and Pentax’s 55-300mm is $350, and from what I’ve heard, the best of the group optically. Part of the cost savings and optical performance there is from not having a stabilization system in the lens - but as mentioned up thread, that means an unstabilized viewfinder. The pictures are still stabilized, though.
Hijack away! SeniorBeef gave you the same answer I was writing when he beat me to the post. One thing I’d like to add is that with the newer dSLR’s you can bump the ISO up to a level where you can handhold these relatively inexpensive long lenses without lens shake blurring the image in less-than-perfect light. I’m surprised that so many cameras can produce almost identical images at ISO200 and ISO800. Oh, and if you really want a freaky close up macro lens, try adding a lens tube to one of these long lenses. You’ll be seeing fabric fibers from across the room!
The more I look at it, the more I’m convinced the K5 is my next camera. You’ve made a lot of good points. I’m surprised how the lenses cost so dramatically less than the similar Nikons and Canons with image stabilization. In the past I’ve not had problems with floaty viewfinders with image stabilized bodies, which is odd considering how easily I get seasick.
PS: The length spec on that 4/3rd’s lens is the collapsed length. It expands out to 300mm but compresses down to 120mm. Unlike the Cialis ads, I don’t travel with my long lens fully erect.
Ah, duh, didn’t think about the telescoping zoom.
Read the dpreview.com review of the K5 I linked to up thread. FWIW, it’s one of only 8 cameras to get one of their gold awards. Although I’m not quite sure how they assign them, since they rate them in numeric values in general categories, and other cameras have scored higher scores than some cameras on the gold list without making it.
But yeah - back at the beginning when the D7000 was $1200 and the K5 was $1600, it was a hard call. Now that the K5 has fallen in pricing after a year (and again, it’s going up $300 at the end of the month) and the D7000 increased because Nikon lost production facilities to flooding, the better camera is now cheaper. Still both great cameras though.
As far as lens cost - Pentax isn’t that much cheaper across the board - but in some places they are. A lot of the $400-500 Pentax primes are regarded as similar or better than some of the Canon/Nikon glass costing 50-100% more. But on a lot of lenses, Pentax is comparable in price/quality to the Canon and Nikon equivelants.
If you do grab the camera, I’d recommend getting the kit lens, it’s only an extra $90 or so if you order from B&H. Normally you can skip kit lenses, but in particular the Pentax 18-55 is regarded as the best optically of all of the 18-55 kit lenses, and more importantly, it’s weather sealed. Not all Pentax lenses are, and it’s good to have a cheap and rugged lens you can feel confident using in the roughest conditions.
My current plans are probably to get a Tamron 17-50 2.8 ($400, the old version - the new version they made for canon/nikon with IS is regarded as optically inferior), Pentax 55-300, and from there I’m going to see what focal lengths I use the most and get some nice primes in those areas.
I’m on B&H’s website right now setting up my order. K5+kit lens, the 55-300mm lens, and now onto the other bits and bobs.
Cool. Now don’t forget to be a snob and talk to other photographers about how your gear is too cool for them to even know about. 
Actually, Pentax is bigger in Europe (and Japan) from what I understand - it’s only the US where they’re barely existant. But yeah still only like 6% of the global DSLR market.
Check out pentaxforums.com
Also, consider the 35mm F/2.4mm prime, it’s only $170. It’s plastic, it’s not that fast for a prime, but the image quality is supposed to be fantastic - possibly the best price/image quality ratio lens of any type of any brand out there.
Ha ha! The only other photographers around here have starter Canons or Nikons, whichever was cheaper when they were buying, and use P mode. I’m just reviewing the order and realized I forgot the remote shutter release. Visa will be happy this month!
Oh, also, you can buy an extended warrantythat extends the manufacturer’s warranty from 1 year to 3 years, and it’s only $20. For that price, I have no idea why they don’t just throw it in. B&H is temporarily out of stock at the moment, but you can get the warranty card within 30 days. Included in the extra warranty is a one time cleaning/check up - you send in the camera, they make sure everything is up to factory specs, clean it out, and send it back. I forgot to mention that before. Crazy good deal - not sure why, for that little cost, it doesn’t just come with the camera standard. It’s weird that they can be out of stock on a warranty, but I guess it’s actually a physical warranty card they purchase from Pentax to resell. You could also grab a warranty card from another seller, just make sure it’s within 30 days and save any receipts.