Price Comparison (as of 9/26/11): D3100 is $529 (big drop from $600) at Amazon and the D5100 is $759
Update 5/09/2011: D5100 was announced at the beginning of April. See what’s new and some of my thoughts at this post: Nikon D5100 DSLR – What’s New and Impressions
The new D3100 really shakes up Nikon’s lineup of lower priced DSLRs. In my previous comparison between the D90, D5000 and D3000 I had a hard time recommending the D3000 and the extra money was well spent on the D5000. The D3100 changes this recommendation.
Major revisions to the D3100:
- New 14MP CMOS sensor – big improvement over the D3000′s ancient CCD sensor
- 1080p24 video – nonexistent on the D3000 and better than the D5000 and D90
- Autofocus while recording a movie – a first on any Nikon DSLR, before you had to lock focus before recording and tweak it manually
- Live view mode – brought over with the video features
- Automatic chromatic aberration correction – This is big, fixes fringing in your pictures before they are saved, previously only on the D90 and D5000
- Customizable function button
The D5000 is essentially obsolete now. The D3100 and D5000 have comparable sensors now and the inclusion of better video capability makes the decision between the D3100 and D5000 simple; until the D5000 is updated just get the D3100.
A lot of features from the D90 have been pushed down to the lower price points and the one thing that really sets the two consumer segments apart is the inclusion of an AF motor on D90. If you are going to use lenses without built in AF motors then the D90 (or it’s soon to be announced replacement) is still your only choice. If I was just starting out though, I wouldn’t hesitate to get the D3100 which beats the D5000 in bang for your buck.
You can get the Nikon D3100 from Amazon at a very competitive price.
How can you say that the D5000 is so much better than the D3100 when you haven’t had it in your hands. No one should buy a DSLR for video. What makes the D3100 better than the D5000? Bigger screen, 2 more mega pixels, better video and dedicated shooting button….. That is not enough to say that it is a better choice. Those things are minimal. It is slower than the D5000 which is huge for may people. How well does it perform in low light? This is the biggest for me.
++1
I guess someone should tell Chase Jarvis that nobody should use a DSLR to shoot video: http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/2010/09/nikon-d7000/. For that 1/1000 chance that I do want to shoot video, I’d rather get it for free on my DSLR than buy and lug around another camera.
If the drop from 4fps to 3fps is a deal breaker than by all means get the D5000. If high fps is important to you as a shooter than I’d be surprised the D5000 qualifies as adequate. If I shot sports then the D300/D7000 would be the lowest thing I’d consider. This article is meant for people who would have trouble deciphering the major differences between models in Nikon’s consumer DSLR range.
High ISO noise will be on par or better than the D5000 because of the inclusion of the new Expeed2 chip and new sensor. The low light performance gained from moving to a CMOS sensor from a CCD sensor is significant. This was the case with my upgrade from the D70 to D90.
If I was buying my first DSLR, had a budget under $1000 and was trying to decide between the old D5000 and new D3100, I would choose the D3100. My opinion, nothing more. The D3000 was a woefully inadequate release and the D3100 corrects that. The D7000 moves the D90 position towards the D300 and the eventual D5000 upgrade will move that position towards the D90. In other words, we’re getting more for our money after each generation of cameras.
thank you andrew, i wasnt sure between those 2 camaras even reading a lot of reviews on the net. I have decided buying the 3100 just after reading your comments. AND the model 3100 only weights 500 g !!!!
regards
I for one am going to go for the D5000. The 2mp doesn´t matter one bit for me. And the decreased speed for multishot is a setback. (D5000 4fps continously, D3100 3fps continously, conclusion: D5000 33% faster). On the contrary to what Andrew described I heard the D3100 doesn´t perform quite as well as the D5000 when it comes to shooting in poor lighting conditions, im not sure on what foot to stand when it comes to this question.
The lower weight is definately no good thing when it comes to DSLR. And the movie thing really shouldn´t persuade anyone to buy a DSLR.
Also i have come to like theese tilt screens.
Na, for me it´s the D5000.
My choice is a little dificult between the d3100,d300,d5000. Video is not so important to me as quality pics and speed i also intend to use probably two lenses as my first chouce will be 24-105 as fast as i can afford please comment openly as i only want to purchase 1 time only and i am progressing from print film thanks
I have a Panasonic Lumix Z28 and it takes outstanding photos. I am into Landscape (Nature) photography.. Seascapes, light houses, sun sets, Mountain Ranges, flowers, rainbow’s. The Lumix with it’s Lyca lens has exceeded my expectations. I have also heard the difference between the TOP Dog bridge camera (Point and shoot) and the least of the SLR’s is the difference between night and day. Is that really true??? I bought a refurbished Nikon D3000 from Adorama in early Spring to use in the Texas Hill Country. It has been a TOTAL WASTE it shuts off after 3 seconds.. and the pictures are weird. Not true to color at all yellowish even. I asume this “camera” is NOT Truly representative of Nikon??? I expect more from an SLR than what this “camera” has given me!!! I know Canon and Nikon produce good quality. So either I have it on a wrong setting, or this “camera” is FLAWED!?! I am planning a big trip in the Spring up the Callifornia and Oregon Coast and to Mount Rainier and back down thru Colorado. I hope to have a GOOD and FUNCTIONAL SLR by January that delivers the photos that I have seen other’s display- the quality. Now here is the deal- I have planned to make a donation of a camera to this person I know , I was planning to buy them a digital point and shoot valued at roughly 300-350 dollars. But maybe I should get this camera (my Nikon D3000) inspected and repaired and give that to her, and buy me either a Nikon D3100 or D5000…
Should I repair and keep my D3000, or Buy one of the above mentioned cameras?? (I already planned to bestow a new camera on this other person) so that affords me a unique opportunity to correct my S-T-U-P-I-D MISTAKE this Spring of buying a Refurbshed SLR from a Third Rate camera store. I must never do THAT again!!
What is the difference between a CMOS and ccd sensor?? (The difference between night and day??)
Will a fully functional Nikon S3100 0r D5000 take substancially BETTER photos than the much celebrated Panasonic Lumix Z28?? (It is the King of the Point and Shoot to be sure!!) (At least in my opinion)
I had contiplated either buying the NEW repplacement for my existing Panasonic Lumix or the Nikon SLR…
The D3100 and D5000 have a CMOS Sensor don’t they . (So does the NEW Panasonic Lumic, but the sensor is still smaller than even the Nikon D3000 regardless.
What I require of my NEXT camera is Super CRISP Clear, beautiful photos that captures the outdoor scenes I take with GREAT detail and DEEP RICH C-O-L-O-R!!!
So which should I choose:
a.)Nikon D3100, B.) Nikon D5000, C.) Panasonic Lumix
Rodger Goolsby
Dallas, TEXAS
Fiercewaverider@aol.com
(If anyone has an e-mail address that they would be wiling to share. I could send over some of these photos that I took down in the TEXAS Hill Country with my disappointing new refurbished Nikon D3000 and perhaps you might know if it is just on a wrong setting?)
Hi,
I would like to particulalry comment on the difference between CCD and CMOS sensor.
CCD sensors, when fabricated properly will give much superior image quality than CMOS. This is the reason that CCD is used in some of the exclusive models of high end DSLRs manufactured by Mamiya. CCD sensors are used for superior image quality. CMOS (also know known APS) are meant for the secondary usage where image quality is secondary like mobile phones, security cams, webcams, etc.
Do you know the technology used in Hubble Telescope?
I am not saying D3000 is a superior camera just because it comes with a CCD sensor. Beacause the sensor, even though CCD, is not optimized enough to give good performence in low light conditions at higher ISOs.
However, today, in the day where most of the people get wowed by 3200 ISO, 1080 HD and LiveView, CMOS can be the only solution to thier desires.
Imagine a good quality DSLR with no video capability, ISO not more than 800, no live view but excellent image quality, I guess there will be hardly any takers even from semi-serious, semi-professional group, forget the people moving to DSLR from poin-and-shoot.
Extraordinary features in a CMOS based DSLR comes at the cost of Image Quality whereas for CCD the greater image quality comes at the cost of unavailbility of eye-catching features like Video, higher ISOs.
Do we know that the best DSLRs produced by Mamiya and Leica are CCD based and often come with a maximum ISO range of 800. Although these are all $10K models but will these attract common people even if the prices were $1K?
Is the Nikon P100 as good a “Bridge Camera” as the Panasonic Lumiz Z28 or Z35??
I’m having D5000 right now, and if you ask me to change it with the new D3100, I would say 100% no, cos the D5000 are faster at continuous shoot, 4 fps compare to D3100 – 3fps, man, that’s a whole different level to me.
Try to do some research on more professional DSLR, watch their specs, believe me, they have more fps.
And one more thing that’s important to me, using D5000, you can rotate the LCD too, enable you to take photo from extreme angle (high or low), it really really helps.
This post is meant for people who are brand new to DSLR’s and are trying to decide between Nikon’s lower priced cameras. For someone just starting out the difference between 3 and 4 FPS is negligible. I’d be willing to hear where that extra 1 FPS would be a game changer.
The rotating LCD adds no value to me. It adds some convenience in a few situations at the cost of increased fragility. If I had the D5000 the screen would be locked in place 99.9% of the time.
The 1080p video on the D3100 beats the D5000′s 720p and some people would value that more than 1 FPS and flip out LCD screen. The smaller size of the D3100 might be a plus for most people too.
So for someone starting out I still recommend the D3100 over the D5000. For someone already experienced with a DSLR I would recommend neither. I can’t use either camera because I now have lenses that do not have built in AF motors.
I recently purchased a new nikon d3100. I am very happy with my purchase and am still learning about all of its variouse functions. I am brand new to photography and am completely stoked about making this my new hobby. I have the original lens and bought a zoom with the package deal offerd. I have one question about lenses with this type of camera. Can I use a lense that is manual focus??? Or is there a way to do that with these lenses that I’m not understanding???
Rick,
You can actually use any Nikon lens on the D3100 as far as I know, even pre-AI stuff from the 60′s and 70′s. You obviously won’t have autofocus, but you also lose metering capability so you’ll have to manually set your exposure in the M mode. The exception is AF and AF-D lenses, like the 50mm f/1.8, where you will still get metering. Other lens brands with Nikon mounts should be fine too.
Thats great info Andrew, I’m happy to know this, it opens my options some. I was begining to believe that all of the auto everything on this camera was going to really limit my options. I am very new to dslr cameras and have alot to learn.
ok………i want to buy my first dslr,i don’t have any experience with dslr,leave the tehnical details,which do you recomend D3000,D3100 or D5000???
nikon D3100 ic veri veri good
nikon D3100 very very good
i have the d3100 and am very happy with it
Hello everyone,
I went through all the posts above, since I am also in a similar fix between d3100 and d5000! I am doing an extensive research prior to buying any of them, both online and offline, since I want to make this a one-time investment.
I am an amateur photographer, depending mainly on what-I-see over geeky jargons and specs while shooting. I mainly tend to shoot portraits and landscapes with some macro. For me low light shooting is an imperative requirement and probably that’s the reason why I am inclining to Nikon over Canon, because of the former’s better higher ISO performance. Video shooting is not at all a priority for me, since I strongly believe that is NOT the reason why one uses a SLR cam. SLR is for capturing the moment as-the-eyes-see-it. Fullstop. Well that’s my personal view.
Saying all these and going through the previous discussion, I think the main discriminator for either of the models are:
1. FPS bursts – As already someone has mentioned, I do not think this should matter too much for an entry level DSLR where the user expectedly wouldn’t be much of an action photographer.
2. Active D lightning – Not sure how much of a differentiator that is.If anyone can help me understand that?
3. CMOS chip photosensitive area – Here I think the image sensor is bit larger in d5000. Apart from better shallow depth photography and post processing in software, how important advantageous is that?
4. Effective pixels – Pixels are more in d3100, but again if you are not going to take a magnified print, that really wouldn’t matter. In that case I believe the good ol’ film prints still do a better job!
5. Pricing – As of date Dec 2010, d3100 is cheaper in my country India.
Finally, I reiterate the eternal fact, good photography depends more on the EYES of the two systems; user’s eye, ie, aesthetics and the camera’s eye, ie, the lens.
Any comments/replies/corrections would be highly appreciated :-)
Sutana,
Sounds like you’ve got it figured out. I’ll just add on to your points with some of my thoughts:
1. If speed really is important then you have to pay for it. This has always been the case when it comes to camera bodies.
2. I still don’t know if I like Active D lighting. I usually have it off and just pay attention to my composition and lighting.
3. The new CMOS sensor in the D3100 is practically the same as the D5000′s and D90′s. The noise on the old CCD sensors was very non-monochromatic and hard to correct. The noise on the CMOS sensor is monochromatic and much more pleasing. This is a huge plus and I’m no longer reluctant to shoot at ISO 1600 like I was on the D70.
4. Pixel count doesn’t really matter unless you are trying to print posters. Biggest I’ve ever printed is 8″ x 12″ and they look great.
5. The D5000 isn’t too old and it already needs a refresh. The D3100 is directly competing with its older brother and winning.
Video: While I don’t have much use for video on a DSLR either, it is a compelling feature for people looking to move on from a point and shoot. High end DSLRs like the Canon 7D are being used to shoot TV shows and movies. Considering this is now included on DSLR bodies for free I don’t see how it hurts.
And the person behind the camera matters more than the equipment. A good photographer can make good photos with a crappy camera. It is much harder for a crappy photographer to make good photos with a good camera. That’s probably why most of my shots are distinctly average.
Hello!, thanks for the comparison.
I bought a D3000 kit not knowing the huge difference between D3100 and D3000, and I am definitively disappointed.
I do not like the user interface, and I suspect the D3100 is as bad, though, so, I am not convinced it’s a good idea to upgrade
Eduardo,
The interface on most low end DSLR’s leave something to be desired. Buttons and dials have to be omitted because of their smaller size, but also to reduce perceived complexity. Someone starting out is mostly going to shoot the camera in AUTO and can get by accessing settings on the LCD. I assume that’s the aspect of the user interface you’re referring to?
Because I am new to the dslr cameras I am still wrestling with all the different settings for the aperature and shutter speeds, understanding the purpose for the changes still alludes me. I will eventually understand it all. I just dont want to be the typical point and shoot automatic guy.My nikon d3100 has alot of options that I would like to explore with my new hobby
Hello ,
Firstly although an amateur, I’m not new to photography, so i know more than the basics of it.
Secondly although this would be my first dslr I’ve used a bunch of ‘em so i don’t really need things like guidance modes e.t.c
Thirdly i’m not interested in faster fps or even video recording (if i would use it my handycam wouldn’t be lying around in the darkest corners of my cupboard). What i need is greater flexibility (e.g better flash options or braketing e.t.c)and shortcuts (e.g assignable buttons e.t.c). Along with these i need low high iso noise and good detailed pictures.
Fourthly keeping these demands in mind which camera is better for me Nikon D3100 or Nikon D5000 (these are the only two cameras which fit my budget). I would highly appreciate any comments/suggestions/corrections e.t.c
Thankyou
im planning to buy a dslr and im choosing from d3100 or d5000. im not really into the video but more the the picture quality, please help me decide. and how much would d5000 cost compared to the d3100? im 16years old and this is gonna be my first dslr, i hope you could help me with the advices that u may offer. and by the way, i know nothing yet about dslr’s, i have been researching though.
Not a fan of that 3100… But I recently got my Nikon D5000 kit lens and after a month of using it. I thought of getting the D90 instead. I haven’t actually tried to use a D90 but with it’s other features that a D5000 doesn’t have, I think it is okay for an upgrade. I am planning to sell my D5000, do you think it’s worth it?
Very good points and all of them touch on what I’m thinking. I’ll be doing a lot of interior shooting so to me the lens is more important, I do though want a camera that shoot really sharp photos. For me each shot is thought befor hand because I use them in my Camera Ready Ads. My questions. I was 100% behind the D5000, and now I’m not so sure. If i’m going to spend the $500+ I want to be 100% sure. HELP!!
I have recently been given an opportunity to purchase a DSLR camera, but price is a huge factor in my decision. I can’t afford to make a mistake with my purchase. I currently have a Sony DSC-H5 Super Steadyshot (7.2 mp, 12x zoom) and while it takes some decent p/s photographs and video, I desire something more. A couple years ago I took a digital photography class because I thought if I knew how to use the manual settings, I could unlock the depth of the camera. Ha! I quickly found out that the camera wasn’t quite what the class was meant for, yet I was able to use and learn the manual settings, composition, etc. I also learned that I was not satisfied with the level of manual settings…I wanted to go deeper. Over the past 2 years I look at, touch, drool over DSLR’s whenever I see one and yet, no matter how many times I read a review, I become more and more confused or disappointed. When I have just enough money to buy something, I read that it doesn’t take good action shots. My daughter is a dancer and I want to catch her in the air….good quality, clear, focused and usually with bursts. I also want to capture my children’s faces clearly and learn to take decent candid shots where maybe, just maybe, one a year can be used to capture their growth. Obviously, I am a beginner DSLR user. I know a bit about Aperture, Shutter Speed, ISO, White balance, Composition, etc.
Also, is it true that you should NEVER buy a camera for video? I heard one or both suffer. You can’t get a good clear photo and expect to have good quality video…and vice versa. True?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!!! BTW- I really only have about $700 to spend.
Thanks!!!!
Lorri,
Sounds like you are ready to step up from your Sony. I was running into the same limitations with a Canon point and shoot in 2005 when I decided to buy a Nikon D70. Compared to when I bought you can get way more camera for about half the price.
With a $700 budget you are looking at the Nikon D3100, Nikon D5000, Canon Ti1, Sony A330 or Olympus E-620. If I had to choose I would narrow it down to the Nikon D3100 and Canon Ti1 and overall I like the D3100 better for $50 less. The D3100 is $600 at Amazon right now.
For kids in general a DSLR is great. The quick autofocus and nearly nonexistent shutter lag when taking each shot really helps. For your daughter’s dancing you’ll have the option of cranking up the ISO to help speed up the shutter and freeze action without flash. As long as you aren’t in really really low light you should be able to maintain a high enough shutter. Whenever my family gets together I’m the designated kid photographer.
If you go with the Nikon, keep the 35mm f/1.8 in mind. It is a very good lens for the money and the f/1.8 aperture lets you get in even more light and control depth of field.
Video on the DSLR is a pretty new development and it’s been implemented without sacrificing the photo capabilities of the camera. Once they added live view it was pretty easy to add video. On point and shoots I wouldn’t say video compromised photo capability, the photo capability is poor to begin with.
Let me know if you have any questions, more than happy to help.
Andrew,
Thanks for your informative reply. Wow..what an experience I have had since I posted the other day. After a week of scouring various stores and reading reviews, I decided to go into a local camera shop to see what deals they had going on and to see if I could actually hold a camera without a theft sensor on it. Well, let me say I have had a sour experience.
Hubby and I went into Inkleys (Ritz Camera) where a nice salesman helped answer my questions. They no longer sell Canon’s at that store, so we decided on the Nikon D3000, mainly due to it’s $499 price and even though we knew Walmart had the same one for $399, we figured buying one from a reputable camera store would be best. The salesman ended up taking the one I was testing and went into the back room. I immediately told my husband that I was hoping he wasn’t giving me that one. When the salesman returned carrying a Nikon box my husband asked and he said they didn’t have any in stock and this was the last one. My red flag went up, but I stuffed it down because I didn’t want to seem fickle. Once I was home and removed the contents, everything seemed in order…except for a funny looking ziplock bag with a USB cord inside. I then went over the contents in the manual and realized the only thing “missing” was the piece that fits in where an external flash would mount. I called to report it missing and they said I could come in and get one…if he could find it. Later on, after taking about 7 photos, I tried to upload them to my Mac and found the USB cord was not even the right one. It was a mini USB and not the one that came with (or fits in) the Nikon D3000. Needless to say, I was a bit irked. Again, I stuffed it inside because my husband just wants me to be happy after 3 years of drooling over every DSLR I saw. I didn’t want to disappoint him.
About 3 AM my eyes popped open and I remembered what my digital photography teacher once told us. I somehow remembered his lecture on checking shutter clicks (actuations). I researched what I needed (at 3 am) and downloaded the software. In the morning I found a proper USB cable and was able to retrieve my photos off the Nikon. The last photo I took showed as 618 photo actuations.
So hubby and I went to the camera store to get the little plastic piece and a new USB cable and to talk to the manager about the 618 shutter clicks so far. He seemed pretty concerned that it had so many already and offered me either a 10% discount on the used camera or a new camera from a local store (about 45 min away). We chose the new camera and left to go do other shopping. We never got a call back, so we decided to stop in about 4 hours later. The manager couldn’t get ahold of anyone at the other store nor the person who was bringing it to his store. We waited another hour and I started to get very irritated. I seriously thought my first DSLR experience was going to be this fantastic, perfect moment and they completely soured the experience. My husband had to go to work so we asked for a full refund.
So….as I wait for the bank to return the $598 transaction to our card, I have a few days to make a better decision and to ask another question. I know you suggested I go for the D3100 because it fit my $700 budget, but tell me what your opinion is on the Canon Rebel XS (can’t find the XSi anywhere). If I was planning on settling on the $399 Walmart Canon XS (due to price and it being my first DSLR) before I entered Inkleys and subsequently purchased the Nikon D3000 (which I did like..alot!), in your expertise….is it worth the extra $150-250 dollars to buy the Nikon D3100? I’m willing to buy the D3100…I found it at Best Buy and Sam’s Club for $599.
Also, are there specific dates to look for Nikon rebates? If they are coming soon I may just wait to see what deal I can get.
Sorry if it’s all jumbled. Thanks for all your help!
Did that make any sense? I sure hope so!
Hi Andrew,
Really good article you’ve got here. I was going to opt for the Nikon D3000 when I read this. I should tell you, I’m a complete photography n00b.
If you compare the D3000 with the D3100, which is likely to produce better images?
And as Lorri asked, is it worth the extra $150 to go for the D3100?
Sid,
I think the D3100 is worth the extra money. The D3000 uses an old CCD sensor and the D3100 uses a CMOS sensor similar to the one in the D5000/D90. The D3100 will perform better at higher ISO’s even with 4 extra megapixels. The built in chromatic abberation correction (purple fringing) will also help image quality which is missing on the D3000. You also get live view and 1080p video and the controls have been improved.
The D3100 inherited a lot of features from the D90 while the D3000 is just a slight upgrade from the D40/D50/D60 line.
Lorri,
Sorry to hear about your experience at your local Ritz Camera dealer. There use to be good mom and pop shops out there, but with the move to digital I think they’re slowly dying out. Chains like Ritz can’t compete on price because of their volume, but should hopefully try and make it up with better customer service. Doesn’t seem like that’s the case in your situation.
I’d much rather buy a camera at a large retailer like Best Buy, Sam’s Club, Costco, Amazon or Walmart because of price and their fairly good return policies.
See my response to Sid above this comment on the D3000 vs D3100. I do think the D3100 is worth the extra money. If it was a difference of $250 then it might be a different conclusion for someone just starting out.
The Canon XS is an option if you can get it for $400 as it is a good camera. You always have to balance newer technology and price. The XS is already 2.5 years old and its price reflects that. None of these cameras are really better or worse than each other, it’s just a matter of how much technology you want to buy. If you spend less now then it might make an upgrade in 2 or 3 years less painful. If you’re going to hold onto the camera for at least 4 years I’d say spend a little extra.
Since you’ve already had the D3000 in your hands and you know you like it, the D3100 is probably a safe choice.
I need to know which camera people who shoot fast action sports…ice hockey, bmx racing, etc., would prefer…the D3100 or the D5000? I am leaning towards the 5000…can’t really afford the 7000! Anyone got experience shooting in these venues that can help?
Elaine,
The D3100 and D5000 are practically the same except the D5000 has one extra frame per second at 4 FPS. That can be helpful as long as you can get your shutter faster than 1/200 second. That’s going to be dependent on your lighting and lens. Pros are using expensive glass like the Nikon/Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 or some exotic prime to gather lots of light. Luckily there are lower cost alternatives like the Sigma and Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 or the discontinued Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 (I see some copies on eBay right now).
Just so we’re on the same page about apertures; aperture is described by an f-stop, f/2.8 for example. The lower the number the larger the opening in the lens to collect more light. f/1.4 is considered very fast because you get more light and can maintain a faster shutter speed. f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, and f/22 are the standard full stops. Each step up will halve the shutter speed.
The Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens won’t have enough reach unless the action is right up in your face (getting close in on the opposite boards would be out of the question). The Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6 (or 55-300) would give you more reach, but is going to be too slow as you start to zoom in. In an indoor rink I’d estimate that shooting at ISO 1600 with f/2.8 gets you 1/250 second. f/4 would drop that to 1/125 and f/5.6 would drop it to 1/60. That’s a very big difference if you’re trying to catch a player coming down the ice or a rider going off a jump.
I’ve shot a group of friends playing broomball at a local rink with my 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 and I was struggling. Even with ISO between 1600-3200 my shots were underexposed if I tried forcing the shutter to 1/250. I could have lowered it, but then motion blur would have started kicking in. I don’t think I even bothered sharing those photos with anyone.
Low light action (pretty much everything not in sunlight) is just one of those things that’s flat out hard. Pros can throw thousands of dollars into their gear, but we don’t really have that luxury. The D5000 would be up to the job, but it would make a big difference if you could swing one of the constant f/2.8 lenses.
Here are the two lenses I mentioned. The Sigma seems to have better autofocus capability and the Tamron has slightly better image quality.
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon
Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Lens with Built in Motor for Nikon
I am new to SLR world. Presently i am using sony cd mavica 500. This camera is really good. I am planning to buy new SLR. I have read comparisions between d5000 and d3100. d3100 have hd movie recording feature. But When we compare picture quality which one is best? I am looking for a good picture quality.
Nurul,
If you took the same picture with both cameras and the same lens you wouldn’t see any noticeable difference. They are very similar cameras except for a few small things like the 1080p video on the D3100 or the flip out screen on the D5000. The D3100 is smaller and lighter which will be more like your Sony. Picture quality will be very good compared to point and shoots and their smaller sensors. Shooting at a higher ISO will be much better as well.
Thanks for your reply Andrew. I think there are some differences between these two cameras like d5000 have 19 auto exposure scene modes where as d3100 have only 6. And also d3100 have automatic image sensor cleaning. what is this? Generally i capture landscapes, portraits and some in house moments like my sons activities etc. Which one do you suggest. At his time this is one time investment for me.
Nurul,
The scene modes are useless for the most part and I recommend new shooters avoid them so don’t worry about those. You’ll want to use the Program (P), Aperture priority (A) and Shutter priority (S) modes nearly all the time. 90% of the time I’m in P.
The sensor cleaning uses ultrasonic vibrations to help keep dust off the sensor. If something gets on the sensor while changing lenses you can lock up the mirror and use a hand blower (no compressed air!) to blow it out.
Shooting indoors can be helped with a wide aperture lens like the 35mm f/1.8, cranking up the ISO, using flash or a combination of each to help get a balance subject and ambient exposure. The popup flash works, but the ability to bounce or diffuse the light really helps. The SB-400 allows bouncing and the SB-600 would allow bouncing and diffusion. You could even make your own diffuser to put on the popup flash.
The D3100 has a slight lead in my book and it is a little cheaper (here in the US). It’s a good camera that will last you many years.
Hello Andrew,
Thanks for your help…I think I am leaning toward the d5000 just for the increased speed and I don’t really care about the video, wish they would make a camera that is JUST a camera!! I have been struggling with the lens issue as well as I know I need the lower f but I also think the 200 isn’t close enough so I was leaning towards the Nikon 70-300 mm VR which I think is f 4-5.6. Do you think I would be better off with the lower f lens with less zoom capability?
Elaine
Elaine,
I would lean towards a lower minimum f-stop over additional zoom. You also have to factor in the DX crop factor where that 70-200mm becomes a 105-300mm in 35mm terms. That gives you a bit more reach. If you still aren’t close enough then you do have the option of cropping a bit. I’d rather have to crop a photo a little than throw it away because my subject is blurry.
Hi, so ive been interested in photography since a very young age.
At the moment i have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38
Its just a digital camera with the look of an SLR, dont get me wrong i love it (at times. It fails miserably with low lighting.) but i want to move higher and really get into it.
Im currently studying graphic design and i use photography a lot in my projects.
So i dont stick to one style i want a camera that will enable me to explore the posibilities and effects that i can create.
Ive beel currently looking at the Nikon d3100, d5000.
I also looked at the Canon 500d.
Ive explored right through the internet to see if theres any answer as to which is better, Ive been in shops and all i got was “The Nikon d3100 is the same as the Canon 500d” I mean, im a first time buyer and the guy did nothing to help me.
Id like to stick to these cameras as so far i have been told they are the most ideal ones to get.
I was just wondering if someone can please please help me and just give me a straight answer as to which is better? IM GOING CRAZY HERE
:) thanks
Andrew,
Thank you for all your help. We recently purchased the Nikon D3100 and I’m very happy! I bought it for 649.99 and then went in to a local shop here to purchase the lowepro 200 bag I wanted. I even asked if they would/could honor the lens rebate even though I didn’t purchase the camera from them. They accepted!! I purchased the 55-200 zoom lens from them and a bag. I would have done the 55-300 but that extra 100 didn’t seem to make that big of a difference. So I’m set for awhile. Now just to take some photos and classes! :) thanks again!!
Lorri
Lorri,
Very cool! Enjoy shooting.
Ashley,
The guys at your local shops were right, there really isn’t much difference between the lower end Nikons and Canons. If I was just starting out in the DSLR arena there are a few things that would make me lean towards Nikon: the 35mm f/1.8 and a slightly better flash system. I’ve also preferred the build quality and materials of the Nikons I’ve held. The 35mm reproduces the focal length of the classic 50mm f/1.8 after you include crop factor (focal lengths are still stated in 35mm terms but these sensors are smaller which introduces a 1.5x crop factor). The 50mm becomes a 75mm which is just a tad too long for everyday use.
I would recommend the D3100 over the D5000. The D5000 can shoot 1 FPS faster but sounds like you don’t really need that.
Between the D3100 and the 500D (T1i) it really comes down to preference and which is more intuitive to use. Specification wise they are practically equivalent cameras. Were you able to hold and try out both cameras? Get any impressions on each?
Thanks for your replies Andrew. I have one more question. These two models i.e d3100 and d5000 doesn’t have built in auto focus motors right? we may need to buy focus motor lenses right? I am also thinking about d90. How about d90? i think d90 have built in auto focus motor and also it has superior picture quality than these two models.
Nurul,
You are correct on the D3100 and D5000 lacking a built in autofocus motor and the D90 including one. Autofocus on these bodies is limited to Nikon AF-S lenses and any third party lenses with a motor. If you have plans to get a lens without a motor then the D90 would be a better choice. The vast majority of people buying the lower end DSLR’s are never going to take the kit lens off, let alone spend enough money to get a lens that doesn’t have a motor.
I doubt you’d see much difference in picture quality. What you get with the D90 is the ability to get your picture and adjust settings a little faster. The D90, D5000 and D3100 are way too close in terms of price and features. The D7000 replaces the D90 and moves the top of the consumer DSLRs to $1200. The D5000 is due up for the next upgrade and I’d expect to see a D5100 kit priced around $900 to fill in the middle spot.
It’s just kind of strange that Nikon has 3 bodies crammed in a $400 range.
Andrew
Thanks for the reply. I think Nikon is manufacturing all AF-S lenses only (with motor). Are they manufacturing lenses with out motor? And also lenses with out motor are chepaer right?
Nurul,
Most newer lenses are being made with motors built in, but there are always exceptions like the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. Older AF lenses were originally designed for film. The Nikon 50mm f/1.8 doesn’t have a motor, but the DX replacement, 35mm f/1.8 AF-S, does. Lenses without the motor probably tend to be more expensive because they were designed for full frame FX or film cameras. Nikon’s DX lenses are designed for cheaper consumer DSLR bodies which need less glass and AF-S. Besides the 50mm f/1.8, all of Nikon’s cheapest lenses are DX and AF-S.
Hi
I didn’t read all comments. But I just wanna say, that I have the Nikon 3100, and my best friend has the Nikon 5000. And always I get feeling, that 3100 is a little bit better. Not because of it’s mine. I guess so because of quality of photos, and of course, because of video. There are so many things, which are similar, or which are better or worse. I think, that these two models aren’t able to compete between each other… This is just my own opinion.
Andrew
Thanks for the reply. We can use AF-S motor lenses with d90 also right. Other than more button controls on d90 do you think there will be big difference in picture quality? Somebody telling me that d90 is a professional camera. It stands on top of d5000 and d3100. what do you say?
Nurul,
Yes, the D90 can use AF-S lenses. From a picture quality standpoint there’s not much difference between the D90, D5000 or D3100. The D90 is old technology at this point and it is matched by the other two. I wouldn’t classify the D90 as a professional camera, but more as a serious consumer camera. The D7000 and D300 start getting you into the professional line up with better autofocus, metering and faster FPS.
Hi Andrew
I too am thinking between D5000 and D3100. I want the camera to take on holidays to Europe with us and hopefully get some better photo’s then our Fuji point and shoot.
I also would like to attempt to photograph the Aurora Borealis while i am over there. I understand that this needs Time lapse photos. i understand that the D5000 has this feature and the D3100 does not. Is it worth me buying the D3100 and then a D5000 body only to do the time lapse. or just buy the D5000…. Thanks for any thoughts you have .
Michael,
Pretty much you’ll be sticking the camera on a sturdy tripod, manually setting everything and taking a long exposure.
The intervalometer settings on the D5000 would let you set it to take x number of pictures with y number of seconds between each. This could be useful, but it’s not going to be much different than getting a wired shutter release and tripping the shutter yourself.
There’s just really not a whole lot of difference between the D3100 and D5000. I would probably buy whichever is cheaper and use the money saved to buy a nicer tripod. You’re going to need something sturdy enough (or have the ability to hang weights on it) to keep that camera steady for a long time.
If you are going to be traveling with the camera then the reduced size and weight of the D3100 might be nice.
And for those long exposures remember to turn VR (vibration reduction) on the lens OFF when shooting on a tripod. The lens will try to correct for shake even though there is none causing the picture to blur a little.
Thanks Andrew for your help and advice. I have to weigh up the need for the extended exposures. I believe the D3100 does not allow for that or are you able to use a remote on it. Im considering the 3100 as it is newer, however I like the moving screen and the extra scene modes to help my wife on the D5000. I guess it really does not matter which one I remember film slrs were the rage when I was in school and am sure some people are still making fantastic shots from 5_6 year old cameras with “old” tech inside.
Once again thanks for your help and advice
Hi,I currently own a Nikon D70s.Bought it used on Ebay. At a birthday party a few months back someone with butterfingers dropped it on the floor. Now it won’t take pictures correctly.I was looking to upgrade anyways. I have 4 kids and they are my main subjects when I take pics.I also take landscape pics as well. I love to take sunset and sunrise/sky pictures.Now my D70s worked fantastic for me.One of my problems with the D70s was that I couldn’t get it to take continuous photos while my kids were playing.I want a camera thats going to let me take crisp, clear, sharp pictures that can be printed as 8×10′s.The two I have been looking at is the D5000 and the D3100. I glanced through some of the posts here but don’t have enough time to read them all.Can someone who has owned either of these cameras please tell me the pros and cons of both. Feel free to email me at mollyr1@tds.net
I forgot to mention that I also take pictures of lightning storms and if it’s possible fireworks.I also take alot of pics close to nightfall. My camera didn’t do a real good job of this.I’m hoping an upgrade will fix this little problem. Yeah I know,I’m not asking for a lot am I :) Also my kids are in a lot of programs at school so a good long range lens (at a good price)recommendation would be nice as well. My D70 allowed me to take some pretty good pics of Hummingbirds too. Just blurry wings which you’re not gonna change I don’t think & I really don’t care about anyways. So to sum it up this is what I need:(1)A camera that takes crisp,sharp images. (2) has a pretty fast shutter speed. (3)takes good lowlight pics. (4)takes motion pics pretty well. I REALLY need to get a good camera before January 28 as their next program is on the 29th so if anyone can help then please do. Oh and my price range for a cam and the stock lens is about $600-$650. Willing to buy the bigger lens separate.Thanks everyone!
Hello. I am currently trying to make the same decision as everyone else who’s posted. I have read this entire thread so as to finally, desperately, try and make some decisive distinction between the 3100 and 5000 after reading review after review basically saying they are the same camera, with the only differences being that one has better video, the other has faster performance and an articulated lcd.
I am concerned with one thing and one thing only–overall photo quality. This site claims a noticeable difference in photo quality saying the 5000 has a full 10% better image quality, 1.4 fstops more dynamic range, and 10% more color depth: http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D3100-vs-Nikon_D5000
Would you please comment on this and offer your true, exact opinion of the photo quality comparison between these two cameras. I’ve read that they are about the same, but are they exactly the same, or is the claim I cited correct..
Also, can the kit 18-55 achieve high quality closeups? If not, is there an alternative under $250?
Thank you,
Michael
Michael,
The numbers at that site aren’t very meaningful. They are running pictures through some software and it spits out a number. Whoopdy doo.
The fact is these two cameras are extremely similar as far the sensor and image quality goes. Two photos taken at the same time with the same settings and the same lens would likely be indistinguishable. You could hunt around in Photoshop zoomed in at 400% for some difference, but what’s the point? Shrink them down for the web or even print at 8″ x 12″ and you wash away an minute difference that was there.
This is why the D5000 is being retired soon, the bottom end of the Nikon line is too similar.
For close ups do you mean macro work or just portraits? For macro work and taking pictures of bugs and stuff, it’s not going to be great because it only has a 0.31x max reproduction rate. Real macro lenses will get you a 1.0x reproduction rate.
For portraits it will work reasonably well, but as you zoom in the higher aperture will stop you from being able to control depth of field. Most classic portrait lenses are prime f/1.8 lenses because you can shoot wide open and get smaller DOF. The 35mm f/1.8 would be a good low cost option for portraits.
I’d buy whichever one is cheaper because in the end the person behind the camera has more to do with taking good photos than the camera itself.
Molly,
Coming off the D70, the D3100 or D5000 will be a slight downgrade in terms of control. You lose the front index finger wheel and top LCD screen. Besides that though, these two cameras will perform better than the D70 on nearly all fronts.
Some of the things you mentioned about the D70 not doing well aren’t necessarily issues with the camera. Lenses play a huge role on your photos, especially in low light and when you need a really fast shutter. Both these situations are address with a larger minimum aperture (f/1.8 or f/2.8). That’s why most professional lenses are f/2.8 and they have the price tag to go with it.
1. The D3100 and D5000 will take sharp photos and can capture more detail than the D70.
2. The D90, D5000 and D3100 all have a minimum shutter of 1/4,000 sec. The D70 could do up to 1/8,000 sec. You either need a lot of light or a fast shutter to get to these speeds.
3. The newer Nikons will perform much better in low light than the D70. The new CMOS sensor presents noise in a monochromatic fashion. I remember on my D70 at ISO 1600 the noise showed up as hot colored pixels. I’m much happier with the noise on the D90 than the D70 and the same will be true for the D3100 and D5000.
4. Like #2, this is going to depend on light and your lens. If you crank your ISO all the way up and you’re still getting motion blur then either your lens is limiting you or you have to add flash.
If you are going to be taking photos of your kids from the audience then you will want one of the zooms. I’ve heard favorable things about the newer 55-300mm over the older 55-200mm.
And next time you try firework photos a tripod can make a huge difference. With a longer shutter like 1 second, you can capture more of the bursts and the long trails while keeping the camera steady.
Andrew,
Thanks for your reply. I have always wanted to get into photography, like many, and even bought a used nikon n80 and 50mm f1.8 a while back to learn on, but found it too inconvenient to try and learn by taking notes while changing settings one at a time and waiting for the pictures to be developed to see what setting affected what. Finally, I’m in a position to spend a little money at a time when one can get a decent digital camera for an afforable amount. I began my search for a dslr by trying to decide between canon and nikon (canon T1i/T2i, and nikon 3100/5000). But I’ve learned that personal bias plays a big part in the camera review world. I’ve found so many contradicting assessments it’s really impossible for a beginner like myself to believe anything. For example, I’ve read that canons are better in low light; I’ve read that nikons are better in low light. I’ve read that canons have better image quality; I’ve read that nikons have better image quality. For me I guess it will ultimately be based on the sample images I can find online. Honestly, from what I’ve seen so far of samples with supposedly identical conditions, canons seem to have better looking photos than nikons of the same level. And the $6-700 canons seem to have better features, such as a much higher res lcd which seems like a huge deal, and a live histogram which also seems important.
However, I, like you, just like the way a nikon feels in my hand. Even though they’re both made of plastic, the nikon feels more solid. From what I saw the nikons in RAW will offer as much detail as the canon T1/2i in JPEG. So I’ve more or less decided on nikon and I’ll just have to buy a big sd card.
Between the 3100 and the 5000, the size is almost as big a factor as image quality for me. I have large hands and the 3100 is tiny. The 5000 isnt much bigger but it is bigger. Also like yourself, I couldn’t really care less about the articulated lcd. I also don’t like the added risk of breaking, and would probably leave it fixed in the normal position 99.9% of the time. I really liked the way the d50 felt, but at the time it was available I didn’t have the bread.
I will take one more trip to the store today for a hands-on inspection, and look for some more 3100 and 5000 samples online. If you know any good sites please mention them.
Either way, I’m incredibly inredibly siked to begin learning. Cool site.
I want the BEST Image quality I can get for Mountains, ocean, outdoors- Landscape, Will Olympus E-620 do good on this, or Nikon D 5000 the same. That photo grading Snapsort claims for example that Panasonic Lumix has a rating of 27 for Image Quality and Nikon D90 has 74. And Olympus E-620 gets a 36 as opposed to Nikon D-5000 a 72… Is this really accurate. Wolf Camera when I enquire of buying an Olympus they try to stir me into a Nikon.. they claim Olympus is a wash out and push Nikon. Are only Nikon and Canon the best for Landcape and true to life colors. I want the Blues and Greens to be Intense. Will Olympus work in this regard and have okay image quality? Or is Nikon my only bet. How about Sony A-290??
Michael,
I think you’ve pretty much figured out the entire amateur DSLR market. Technology seems to create large polarizations. Nikon vs Canon. Microsoft vs Apple vs Linux. iPhone vs Android. If someone owns a device it is automatically the best.
For amateur DSLRs, the fact is they are practically the same. At a given price point, image quality and high ISO performance will be equal. None of the sensors or bodies are doing anything magical to create a “better” image. When I got started I fell into the pixel peeping trap instead of just focusing on taking better photos.
I also shot RAW when I got started with my D70 and finally learned how to shoot so that I didn’t need post-processing. I don’t think I’ve shot a frame of RAW in over 3 years. It’s a personal decision, I just didn’t have enough time for it in my workflow.
Great source of samples is Flickr. Photos get tagged with the camera and you just have to do a search:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=d3100
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=d5000
Andrew
Patti,
You’re the second person to point out scores from Snapsort and I have to say their numbers are meaningless. If you want a good conclusion about the Olympus E-620 try DPReview:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse620/page31.asp
Olympus uses Four Thirds sensors and lenses which is different then the CMOS sensor used in Nikon, Canon and Sony bodies. The sensor itself is slightly smaller with a 2.0x crop factor and puts it at a slight disadvantage when it comes to high ISO noise, but it seems to hold up against the competition quite well. I don’t have any hands on experience with Olympus DSLRs. The sensors are also different aspect ratios, Nikon is 3:2 and Olympus is 4:3. So for landscapes, Nikon will get you an 8″x12″ without any cropping.
Sony is fine, again not much experience, but go for the A500 over the A290. The A500 got a new CMOS sensor and will perform better than the A290′s CCD sensor. This is the same situation as the D3000 and D3100, don’t even bother with the D3000.
The E-620, A500, D90, D5000 and D3100 will be pretty close in terms of image quality. The biggest factor will be which one feels best in your hands. The D3100 is the smallest and lightest of the bunch (E-620 might be close) and is priced very well at $600 at Amazon. Not having a lot of experience with Olympus and Sony, all I can say is the D3100 is a pretty safe bet. You’d have to decide if any of the small difference between each body would make you go one way or another.
Hi Andrew
Thanks very much for your advice earlier.
I am wondering if i can bother you one last time?
I am considering puchasing my Dslr this week. I am considering either the Nikon D3100 or ( what do you think) the Pentax K-r or K-x or Sony A550? is it worth it.
they are both roughly the same price here in Australia .
As said before i want the camera to work in low light quite well and to work in snow, to take clear shots of landscapes and portraits.
In your Honest opinion what do you think is the better camera, or which do you think would suit my needs. I have been to the camera shops and they just try and push whatever special they have at the time.
Thanks again
Also does anyone have any dealings with the tamron 18-200mm f3.5 – 6.3 xr di II lens.
Is it a good lens. does it have image stabilising to help with low light noise.
Is this going to give just as good shots as the Nikon 18-55mm and 55-200mm lens (Genuine)
Michael,
If you want to consider Pentax, look at the K-r since it is a little newer. I can’t say much about the Sony, but all of these cameras will be fairly similar. If you can get your hands on each one then that might help you make a decision. Handling and ergonomics comes down to personal preference.
Going Nikon might get you two things: greater lens availability and better flash system. Third party lens manufacturer’s like Sigma, Tamron and Tokina always target Canon and Nikon, Sony and Pentax support could be hit and miss (the Tamron 18-270 VC I mention below isn’t available for Pentax). Nikon’s external flashes are excellent if that’s something you think you’ll ever need.
The 18-200mm “superzooms” do make trade offs in image and build quality for that flexibility. I really like my Nikon 18-200mm and use it as my walk around lens. The Tamron probably does the job as good as any other superzoom. The Tamron 18-270 VC (vibration compensation) has stabilization. Stabilization only helps with static subjects. You can shoot at a slower shutter speed to reduce the need for higher ISO’s, but if the subject is moving then stabilization won’t do a whole lot.
If you know you are going to be shooting low light action (or people) then the only good solution is a lens with a wider maximum aperture. That’s where a 35mm f/1.8 comes in handy.
Which entry level Nikon DSLR has got a rotating screen or Live view
Hi, I was reading the comments above and I still can’t decide which camera to choose. My choices are currently a Nikon D5000, Nikon D3100 and a Sony NEX-5D. Hope you can help. Thanks :)
If you want something small and light, D3100.
But if you are going to use a bigger lense than the 18-55 the D5000 is the one.
The ability of the screen being able to rotate is a real bonus and proves to be helpful.
I’ve got the D5000 and its perfect.
The Nikon D3100 is an excellent camera but is not too different to the Nikon D5000.
D5000 has a smaller screen BUT can be rotated so you can take perfect picture at difficult angles. D5000 has 4fps D3100 has 3fps.
D5000 has 720p recording D3100 has 1080p. Now I don’t about you but they both look exactly the same to me. The continious autofocus on D3100 is rubbish, the noise that the autofocus makes can be clearly heard and ruines the footage.
D3100 is smaller, to some this may be a good thing but for me I like my DSLR to be abit ruggid and have the feel of the camera for a better grip.
Most of the bigger lenses are too big for D3100 doesnt look professional.
Unless you are getting a very good deal with a lense go for D3100 otherwise D5000.
If you look on websites the Nikon D5000 is more expensive than D3100. :)
Jhoana,
I read a little about the Sony NEX-5 and I’m not sure I would recommend it. Image quality would be good, but things like ergonomics, durability, menu system, sluggishness and no built in flash seem to keep it back. The cheaper D3100 beats it in all those categories and isn’t a whole lot bigger. I think the lack of a viewfinder is an issue, especially when shooting in sunlight as the screen will be washed out. I would be weary slinging the Sony over my shoulder and going on a hike.
If you just want a fancy point and shoot the Sony would work, but you aren’t getting all the nice features of a DSLR. If you really want to get into photography I would recommend an actual DSLR. The D3100 and D5000 are very close in terms of features. I don’t like flip out screens and the smaller size and weight of the D3100 might fit your hands better.
Hi Andrew
I am new to DSLR and am using canon point and shoot. I have two daughters and I need to buy DSLR for so many magical moments. Which one should I go for specially beginner like me. I am leaning towards Nikon but confused about 3100 or 5000. Also guide me on extra lens i might need. like 50-200 or 70-300. How should I decide on that? Please advise.
thanks
Shailja
Shailja,
Coming straight from a Canon P&S I would probably suggest the D3100. It is very similar to the D5000 and is a little smaller and lighter.
There is a bit of a learning curve with a DSLR, but once you figure out the basics you’ll be able to get shots you might have missed with a point and shoot. Faster focus, almost zero shutter lag and faster continuous shooting give you a better chance of catching great moments as they are happening.
After the 18-55mm kit lens there are two other areas you’ll want to consider covering: a longer zoom and a fast prime for low light. Your main options for the zoom are the 55-200mm ($200), 55-300mm ($340) and the 70-300mm ($520). The 55-200mm will probably give you the best bang for your buck. It really depends how far away you’ll be when taking photos. Do your daughters play sports or do anything where you won’t be close?
The Nikon 35mm f/1.8 ($200) is the fast prime I was referring to. The f/1.8 maximum aperture lets in a lot more light than the 18-55′s f/3.5 maximum which goes up to f/5.6 as you zoom in. This gives you the ability to capture action in lower light without flash. It’s just a great little overall lens and you could get by shooting with it all day. It’s small and lightweight like the D3100.
If you have any other questions feel free to ask.
Hi Andrew
thanks for the wonderful update. My daughters are into dance and sports(like swimming/tennis) sometimes I have to take from far. which one will be better deal. do I have to buy more lenses in future too. I am leaning towards Nikon 3100 and 55-200mm. Should I go for both in long run? Do advice. what about canon counterpart for Nikon 3100.. I can’t wait to buy and start clicking.. look forward to hear from you..
thanks
Shail
i have the feeling that a newer model for advance ameteur (something like d5100) will be released? i can’t wait for it.
Rudolf,
That is the rumor considering the D5000 has been discontinued for so long. I think Nikon is expected to make new product announcements in the next week or two. Hopefully it creates more difference between the entry and mid amateur model levels.
Shail,
A zoom like the 55-200mm will do well for outdoor sports like swimming and tennis. For dance indoors your results will depend on the lighting. As light levels drop you need a lens that can collect more light or you increase your ISO to maintain an adequate shutter speed. If you are maxed on both then you might not be able to shoot fast enough to freeze action consistently.
If you can get close, the 35mm f/1.8 would help you gather more light and giving you a faster shutter speed at a given ISO setting. This might not give you enough reach if you’re 15 or 20 rows back in an auditorium. If the room is well lit then it might not be an issue. Light is one of the most important factors when it comes to photography.
The D3100 is in between the Canon T1i and T2i in terms of features, but cheaper than both. The Nikon 55-200mm is also significantly cheaper than the Canon version of the same lens. I tend to like the build quality and feel of Nikon’s bodies, but it really comes down to personal preference. Going to a store to get your hands on both would be helpful. They’re all very capable cameras, but one might just feel better in your hands or be more intuitive to use.
Thanks Andrew for the update. I really appreciate the way you write and with so much clarity. It really helped me.. I will explore hands on Nikon models. thanks again for the update on amazon deals too.
thanks
Shail
Hi Andrew,
I have a Nikon F50 with lens 35 – 80mm f4.0 – 5.6 and i dont use it anymore. tell me what best i can do with it.
Thanks.
Well for me the deciding factor was that I bought a gently used d5000 kit for only 499. I wanted to upgrade from my Nikon d40. It also came with a 4gb shc card, extra battery, and a bunch of other stuff. I think the d5000 is great and the hd video is surprisingly much better than what people have been saying. I don’t use it often, but it’s nice to have on hand when you want to capture a moment. Also, I prefer the manual focus of the auto focus of the d3100 for video because of the noise and jerkiness. The swivel screen is AWESOME!!!! It’s so useful for unique shots and video.
The d3100 is a great camera, but if you can find a (GENTLY) used or refurbished D5000 for the price I did, than get it.
Pingback: Nikon D5100 DSLR – What’s New and Impressions | Geeky Weekly
Hi guys
I actually started out in the 1970s. with a poloroid and grew up to a Yashika 35MM with all of the fancy lenses. I’m just getting into the DSLR arena from my Elf 5.0.
I have two major requirements.
Number 1 is I want to be able to photograph old photographs. I am making a movie of the photographs I have of me and my deceased wife over the course of the past 62 years. Amazingly I have that much material. (31 photo albums starting all the way from when we were born.) Because some of the photographs are in books where they cannot be removed I can’t scan them and have opted to photograph and reprint them. I have swung from the Canon T2I to the Canon XS to the Nikon D3000. An article I read said anything over 8-10 megapixles is overkill and distorts the photos in the opposite direction – plus you have a hard time emailing them. Is that true? Requirement 2 is that I am trying to photograph a few jewelry pieces for insurance purposes. Would the Nikon D3000 allow me to take those kind of macro photographs without having to buy another lense?
I read the comments above and I am one of the guys that doesn’t care about taking video with this camera. I will eventually get a camcorder to make the movie and to film my new grandughter. So,,, if the D300 is not the answer can you recommend a camera that will do those two things well? Thanks for reading my question,
Hi! I browsed some of your posts about D3100 and D5000 but I’m still confused on what to buy. My first choice is actually D3100 but I like the revolving LCD screen of D5000. I’m not really into shooting videos and not really into which is faster in shooting. Since my budget is tight, I’m still choosing between the two. Can anyone help me? Which is really better for me who is a beginner and new to photography? Or can you suggest any other models of DSLR?
Will be glad if anyone can help me! Thanks a lot! :)
Hi Kat,
If you don’t really want to shoot video and budget is important then the D3100 is probably your best bet. The D5000 was just replaced by the D5100. You can still get the D5000, but you’ll be paying a slight premium for the swivel LCD over the D3100 for practically the same camera when it comes to still photography.
Note about the swivel LCD: it’s nice in some situations, but with a DSLR you really want to learn to use the viewfinder. With the LCD turned on, focus time is slowed down a lot and all that speed you are paying for is gone. I have live view on my D90 and I’ve used it a couple times over the past 3 years. It really eats up the battery too.
There are comparable models from Canon, Sony, Pentax and Olympus, but the cheaper ones are quite a bit older than the D3100. In terms of overall performance and value I think the D3100 is hard to beat right now.
Hi Andrew!
Thanks for that answer. It will surely help me in deciding!
By the way, someone told me that DSLRs are really hard to maintain, especially on the inside. He told me that the DSLR must be stored in cold places. Is that true? My parents suddenly burst out when they knew about this storage and maintenance thing. I’m from the Philippines. The weather here is not really good. Most of the time it’s sunny and very hot here. Do you think this would matter? And how do you maintain your camera?
Thanks again! :)
Kat,
There aren’t any specific things you need to do to maintain a DSLR. The professional DSLRs are weather sealed and can survive practically anything. The cheaper ones will stand up to some light rain, but aren’t completely weather sealed. Dust is your biggest enemy as it can get inside the body and on the sensor if you start swapping lenses which can be blown out with a hand blower. The most I do is keep the lens glass clean with a soft cloth. I would invest in a good little bag to carry your camera in just in case you get caught in nasty weather and to help protect it.
I guess I’m late joining this party but I figured I would jump in since I just went through an agonizing month trying to decide on an upgrade from my d40… I love everyone saying the d3100 has 2 more MP.. my lowly d40 at 6mp prints stunning 13×19 photos, however as my photography has evolved I occasionally need to crop an image and thats when the 6mp starts to hurt a little.. The most painful part for me is that I am cheap!!! My decision came down to the 5000,3100 and even a used 200 and 80(the 90 was still out of my price range)… I was very close to choosing the 200 simply because it does not have video, a good 10MP sensor is more than adequate for 95% of casual photography IMHO, the built in motor, 5 FPS and the better control layout… In the end I went with a new clearance 5000 for a few reasons one being the price, another is the 4 FPS(huge upgrade from 2.5 on my d40) which is useful trying to catch a fleeing bird and most of the technology is passed down from the 90 and 300… I bought the best camera I could afford as camera(mid $400).. I will never use it for video and will probably never use live view… My battery grip will go right onto this camera to increase the weight… The dxo score is higher for the 5000 also and as I await for it to be delivered My only hope is that it shoots as well as my d40…
Kris,
If you don’t need anything on the newest cameras, then it is more cost effective going with a discounted and discontinued model. That’s a pretty good deal for a good camera (probably about the same or less than your D40 a few years ago). When I went from the D70 to D90 I found that white balance and high ISO performance was improved. The old CCD sensors have a nasty hot noise character while the new CMOS sensors are more monochromatic, see the fifth picture down in this post:
http://geekyweekly.com/2008/d90-vs-d70-image-quality-and-pixel-peeping
Have fun shooting.
Hi Andrew Thanks for the link… I’m thinking roughly d40=d70 and d5000=d90 as far as sensors so I am hopeful to have great results, especially going from the ccd to cmos sensor. Cheers
Hi Andrew,
I desperately need your help, ASAP, since I have until tomorrow to return or not my Nikon to the store. I will bore you with my story!!! :) (don’t mind my writing and English since I am from Brazil, I live in the US.)
I am so happy that I found this link…I’ve been reading like someone reads the best book…well…I got all the info that is posted here from you and also the experiences from everybody else.
I always loved taking pictures… I have two very active kids and they are my pride and joy…so they will probably grow to hate it, because I take about a million pictures of them. About three years ago, my sister bought a Nikon D60…and I loved all the sharp and bright colors…every special occasion she would have to come to take the pictures with her camera…since my kids are 5 and 2…I’ve been trying to convince myself that a point and shoot are best for me, so I own my second Lumix (zs3)…which gives some good pictures but very pale faces most of the time. Since my second new born is getting big and now I have free hands to carry the bag with a dslr not the diaper bag anymore…I have decided to buy a NIKON, always wanted one, grew up hearing Nikons are the best. So off we go, since I am no photographer lots to learn yet but lots of love for this area…I wanted a entry level, D3100, brand new out there, good reviews…seems like the one…I bought it + the extra 55 – 200 mm lens…now my problem is the color (face) are very neutral, almost too PALE (comparing to the D60) I am sure I am not doing something right, but even on the automatic mode…I took about 1000 pictures of my children and things around the house and outside in about a week…since I am too ADD and very OCD I am maybe asking too much of a entry level…
SO my question to you is did you actually put your hands and tested one of those babes…did you experience the same I read another real life, down to earth review by a photographer and he also says he thinks the colors are a little (OFF)
I went to the store to check other possibilities and the D5000 is actually less expensive right now (80bucks) but I feel uncomfortable by the swivel screen, it just feels like a sensitive part prone to break anytime…it’s a older camera…bigger and heavier…I sure could make good use of the menu (tutorial thing on the 3100), the screen is smaller…less pixels…better pictures quality????????is it really better…is it as easy as the 3100….don’t care much about the video…it’s good to have…I wonder if I should get the D60 since I like the color so much, but I am sure isn’t as good as the 3100…please share your thoughts with me!!!
HELP HELP HELP…
loved all your comments.
Confused between Nikon 3100D and Canon 1100D. Okay I know the spec difference – one is full HD and the other half. But does that really matter? Further I’m used to Canons. Also I heard the 1100 D has a better low light performance than Nikon. DPreview, which is somewhat realiable rates 72/100 to Nikon and 69/100 to Canon. At the same price what would be a real life better buy?
Also, if im not buying a new one, then im gonna go for either nik d3000 or can 1000d. Again the same confusion. Some say canon lens are more easier to find and fits more.