Looking to buy, need user advice.

[homebrew2ny]

I am in the market for a quality camera. I am not opposed to a DSLR as long as it fits my needs. What I am mostly looking for is...

1. Build quality
2. Ease of use
3. Quality photo's (even in low light usage)
4. Fast shutter time. (I do not want any lag)
5. HD video 720 or 1080 is ok, but quality is a must.

These things are a necessity...

But I would also like wireless if available.

I have been to a few places test driving out some cameras, but would like to differ to the knowledge base here. It will primarily be used by my wife as a 'point and click' camera, but I want something a bit more than your average $200+/- digi-cam. I have no set budget but would like a 'best bang for the buck' type unit. Having said that, I am not a professional photographer and am not going to spend $10,000 either.

Anyway, anyone have any hands on advice as to where to narrow my look? Thanks in advance!

Thread was necroed... locked. -DrPizza

 

[biostud]

nikon d5100 has a good price/performance

I'm planning to get one myself + a good lens

see this thread

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2314983

As far as I understand, a good lens is as important as a good body.

And my budget is around $1000.

 

[homebrew2ny]

nikon d5100 has a good price/performance

I'm planning to get one myself + a good lens...

I actually looked at that one today, it was a very good unit, seemed to be a quality build and very good shutter speed. It was one of the few that caught my attention.

Thanks for the reply!


Curious though, is that much better than the D3200 with wifi?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I owned the D5100. I loved it so much I traded it in for a D7000. I still miss the articulating screen, though.

(EDIT) I guess I'll add some notes on what I wanted the D7000 for. The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000, but it lacks an in-body focus motor, so you must use lenses that auto-focus themselves. The D7000 also features direct external controls for settings like ISO and f stop, whereas on the D5100 you must bring up a configuration menu to change those values. Lastly, the D7000 has a built in flash commander for Nikon's CLS flash system.

The D5100 took excellent pictures. Definitely miss the articulating screen, too. I'd use my D7000 for video more if I had that.

 

[CuriousMike]

Does size of the camera enter your equation?

 

[homebrew2ny]

I owned the D5100. I loved it so much I traded it in for a D7000. I still miss the articulating screen, though.

(EDIT) I guess I'll add some notes on what I wanted the D7000 for. The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000, but it lacks an in-body focus motor, so you must use lenses that auto-focus themselves. The D7000 also features direct external controls for settings like ISO and f stop, whereas on the D5100 you must bring up a configuration menu to change those values. Lastly, the D7000 has a built in flash commander for Nikon's CLS flash system.

The D5100 took excellent pictures. Definitely miss the articulating screen, too. I'd use my D7000 for video more if I had that.

Good info, thanks.

 

[homebrew2ny]

Does size of the camera enter your equation?

It does, but if I need to get a kit like a D5100/D3200 to get what I want then it will work. However, if there is something smaller, more compact, that is as good and feature rich I would be all ears!

 

[homebrew2ny]

Curious though, is the D5100 much better than the D3200 with wifi?

They look fairly similar, priced similar, but the D3200 has wifi...

 

[MrSquished]

It does, but if I need to get a kit like a D5100/D3200 to get what I want then it will work. However, if there is something smaller, more compact, that is as good and feature rich I would be all ears!

look at micro 4/3.

panasonic GH3 - similar in size to a smaller DSLR with similar ergonomics, but light, and each lens will be half the size and weight of the equivalent APS-C or FF lens, which is where bulk and weight really add up. amazing video capabilities.

olympus OM-D E-M5 - smaller than the GH3 and lighter, really makes the MFT kit as compact as it can get while still offering pro or near pro level features. good video (720 or 1080p) but the GH3 is in a league of its own for video. stills is close, but the OM-D is superior especially if you shoot jpegs, the oly jpeg engine is at the top of its game.

 

[homebrew2ny]

look at micro 4/3.

panasonic GH3 - similar in size to a smaller DSLR with similar ergonomics, but light, and each lens will be half the size and weight of the equivalent APS-C or FF lens, which is where bulk and weight really add up. amazing video capabilities.

olympus OM-D E-M5 - smaller than the GH3 and lighter, really makes the MFT kit as compact as it can get while still offering pro or near pro level features. good video (720 or 1080p) but the GH3 is in a league of its own for video. stills is close, but the OM-D is superior especially if you shoot jpegs, the oly jpeg engine is at the top of its game.

Thanks, I will take a look at them!

 

[iGas]

Thanks, I will take a look at them!

IMHO, comfort/ergonomic is the uttermost important, specially for a woman with small hands. Perhaps it would make sense to hold off till the Canon Rebel SL1 come out for comparison, because it is a full blown APS-C camera that is the same size as the GH3

 

[biostud]

I found this comparison between the d3200 and d5100

http://www.digitalrev.com/article/nikon-d3200-vs-nikon-d5100/MjExMzkzMTU_A

 

[CuriousMike]

IMHO, comfort/ergonomic is the uttermost important, specially for a woman with small hands.

"Primarily used by my wife" = she better be part of the research equation.

She may not want a biggish DSLR like the D5100; she may be more inclined to a 4/3rds sized camera. Or smaller.

If this is something she would be bringing along for the kids, she likely doesn't want another bag to carry.

The Sony RX100 might be more in-line with what she's looking for ( but maybe not what you want. )

 

[CuriousMike]

3. Quality photo's (even in low light usage)
4. Fast shutter time. (I do not want any lag)

These things are a necessity...

It will primarily be used by my wife as a 'point and click' camera

DSLR's won't give you magical low-light photos unless you spend time learning how to use them.
If you put it in auto mode, point it at something in low light, either
a) you'll get a blurry photo. You didn't give the camera a hint that you wanted a fast shutter speed and have it boost ISO
b) you'll get a flash-face photo.

What I'm saying is this: Don't expect your new $500->$1000 sweet toy to do what you want without understanding a few basics. Whatever you get likely will do what you're thinking it will -- with awesome results. But only if you spend time to learn it.

 

[cantholdanymore]

DSLR's won't give you magical low-light photos unless you spend time learning how to use them.
If you put it in auto mode, point it at something in low light, either
a) you'll get a blurry photo. You didn't give the camera a hint that you wanted a fast shutter speed and have it boost ISO
b) you'll get a flash-face photo.

What I'm saying is this: Don't expect your new $500->$1000 sweet toy to do what you want without understanding a few basics. Whatever you get likely will do what you're thinking it will -- with awesome results. But only if you spend time to learn it.

This should be an sticky

 

[vi edit]

Sony RX100. The shutter speed and autofocus on it is *VERY* fast. Low light photos are great, good video quality, very small with excellent build quality. I'm still learning all the functions and customization on mine. It's not a replacement for a DSLR and a bag full of lenses, but it's pretty damn nice for a pocket P&S.

 

[Syborg1211]

As others have suggested, the RX100 is a great option. I actually believe that a high end P&S is the best first step to someone who might be interested in photography.

I started on a Canon S90 and was impressed by the jump in quality from a lower end P&S. Eventually I got a DSLR chasing a similar bump in quality and was more or less a little disappointed for the reasons CuriousMike described. I had to learn how to use the camera out of Auto mode to really harness the full capabilities of the DSLR over a P&S.

The S90 I had didn't just go into a drawer to never be used again. There are many situations where an interchangeable lens camera is just not practical to bring along. The S90 still got a lot of mileage as my pocket cam. So much so that I just upgraded to the RX100 and am pretty happy with it. The S90 and RX100 also have more manual modes that you can play with.

Now for the discussion about ergonomics, smaller is not better in the world of photography, IMO. Smaller cameras are limited in what they can do in terms of button layout and shear number of buttons. Larger DSLRs have more buttons that can be allocated to specific settings like aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. On the smaller cameras, you have to go digging into menus to change certain settings. This reason alone was why I upgraded from a D5100 to a D7000. The second command dial is invaluable for changing settings quickly on the fly. Whoever suggested the Canon SL1 was probably not considering this point. The SL1 has the fewest buttons of any DSLR and expects you to go into menus to change settings. This camera seems more targetted at people who won't be using anything other than Auto mode.

When you're learning photography and manual modes on a DSLR, most likely you're going to be taking a ton of shots of the same subject with varying settings to really grasp the effect each setting has on the photo. You'll quickly realize how annoying it is to have to go several clicks into menus to change the ISO for every snap. It'll also slow down the learning process.

Yes, smaller cameras are lighter weight and smaller in your hands, but if the camera is too small then all the buttons are mashed together and you'll probably end up needing to hold it with two hands anyways. If you're holding it with two hands, where does the size issue come into play in terms of ergonomics? Before anyone responds by saying smaller cameras are easier to transport around, remember that I am specifically talking about ergonomics when using the camera. Smaller cameras ARE easier to transport, as I stated earlier in this post...

I also agree with the other people saying that you need to find out what your wife wants to use. I bought our D5100 for my wife, but I ended up using it more because anything larger than a P&S is impractical for her. The S90/RX100 are ideal for a lot of wives. However, there are definitely a lot of women who take a keen interest in photography and DSLRs. So gauge what you think she'll use.

 

[homebrew2ny]

Thanks again everyone for your opinions and ideas, it has helped me significantly narrow down my selection and am mainly focusing on one or two units now. As I mentioned in the opening post, build quality, ease of use, fast shutter time, and HD video was a must. And taking my wants/needs in to account with the practical use of my wife, I am heavily leaning towards....

http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&searchType=search&storeId=10151&catalogId=10551&productId=8198552921666455161&XID=O:sony%20nex%20f3k:dg_nex_gglsrch&k_id=061b9d0b-e9ad-9fa9-234d-00007704ad92


It's no DSLR but after test driving it a few times now, I believe it will suit my wife and her needs very well. I have found it for below $400 new so in the end it is a rather inexpensive venture to gain a decent camera that by all accounts is much better than a traditional 'point and shoot' digi-cam.

On a side note, I may just get the D5100 for personal usage anyway

Thanks again!

 

[iGas]

As others have suggested, the RX100 is a great option. I actually believe that a high end P&S is the best first step to someone who might be interested in photography.

I started on a Canon S90 and was impressed by the jump in quality from a lower end P&S. Eventually I got a DSLR chasing a similar bump in quality and was more or less a little disappointed for the reasons CuriousMike described. I had to learn how to use the camera out of Auto mode to really harness the full capabilities of the DSLR over a P&S.

The S90 I had didn't just go into a drawer to never be used again. There are many situations where an interchangeable lens camera is just not practical to bring along. The S90 still got a lot of mileage as my pocket cam. So much so that I just upgraded to the RX100 and am pretty happy with it. The S90 and RX100 also have more manual modes that you can play with.

Now for the discussion about ergonomics, smaller is not better in the world of photography, IMO. Smaller cameras are limited in what they can do in terms of button layout and shear number of buttons. Larger DSLRs have more buttons that can be allocated to specific settings like aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. On the smaller cameras, you have to go digging into menus to change certain settings. This reason alone was why I upgraded from a D5100 to a D7000. The second command dial is invaluable for changing settings quickly on the fly. Whoever suggested the Canon SL1 was probably not considering this point. The SL1 has the fewest buttons of any DSLR and expects you to go into menus to change settings. This camera seems more targetted at people who won't be using anything other than Auto mode.

When you're learning photography and manual modes on a DSLR, most likely you're going to be taking a ton of shots of the same subject with varying settings to really grasp the effect each setting has on the photo. You'll quickly realize how annoying it is to have to go several clicks into menus to change the ISO for every snap. It'll also slow down the learning process.

Yes, smaller cameras are lighter weight and smaller in your hands, but if the camera is too small then all the buttons are mashed together and you'll probably end up needing to hold it with two hands anyways. If you're holding it with two hands, where does the size issue come into play in terms of ergonomics? Before anyone responds by saying smaller cameras are easier to transport around, remember that I am specifically talking about ergonomics when using the camera. Smaller cameras ARE easier to transport, as I stated earlier in this post...

I also agree with the other people saying that you need to find out what your wife wants to use. I bought our D5100 for my wife, but I ended up using it more because anything larger than a P&S is impractical for her. The S90/RX100 are ideal for a lot of wives. However, there are definitely a lot of women who take a keen interest in photography and DSLRs. So gauge what you think she'll use.

I have to agree that a good point and shoot camera is a perfectly fine camera to start out for beginner, however most if not all of them experience shutter lag which is annoying for portraits, and absolutely impossible to capture the moment of fast moving subject. I do not own the Rebel SL1, however I assume it have better controls than the S95 which I do own, and the shutter speed is more than adequate for most situations. I also own the 5D mkii and it can do much more than what the S95 can do, however on my recent trip I use the S95 just as much as my 5D mkii because it was smaller/easier to carry around.

IMHO, all cameras have their pluses and minus and to me the lack of a few buttons and dials aren't going to make and break most shots/situation. I owned and use dozens of cameras and most of them are manual focus with no or little bells and whistle/buttons, and they all served me well.

The link below shows the capability of the S95.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2174197&highlight=indonesia

The link below shows the strength of a DSLR over that of point and shoot.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2300761&highlight=camera

Canon S95 point and shoot.

Canon 5D MkII DSLR full frame.

S95 (I would have missed this shot with the DSLR because the boy would be too timid with a large camera/lens.)

5D Mkii (PS wouldn't get this shot due to shutter lag.)

S95

5D Mkii

5D MkII (I racked the 70-200L out to max and sneaked in the shot, then crop after...I do not think a PS would have the capability to make this shot).

 

[iGas]

5D MkII with 580EX II (no way in hell a point and shoot flash have enough power to do fill flash in this situation).

5D MkII (I would have missed this shot with the PS camera due to shutter lag).

 

[iGas]

DSLR's won't give you magical low-light photos unless you spend time learning how to use them.
If you put it in auto mode, point it at something in low light, either
a) you'll get a blurry photo. You didn't give the camera a hint that you wanted a fast shutter speed and have it boost ISO
b) you'll get a flash-face photo.

What I'm saying is this: Don't expect your new $500->$1000 sweet toy to do what you want without understanding a few basics. Whatever you get likely will do what you're thinking it will -- with awesome results. But only if you spend time to learn it.

I agree that Auto mode tend to pop up the flash quicker than it is necessary. However, I do not agree entirely with the "blurry photo" in low light comment.

I just tested my 5D MkII in low light using the 24-105L, 50mm, 70-200L, and 100L lenses, and they all consistently drop down to the widest aperture (except for the 50mm that tend to drop down to f2 for most) when in poor lighting then it is automatically in crease shutter stop to +/-1/4 shutter speed over lens focal length to negate hand shakes even those most of the lenses that I tested have IS motor.

My self I haven't use Auto mode on a camera for 25+ years, but it seems as if the current Auto mode is more than capable at predicting for most situations for the unwashed.

 

[jidery]

Just get a NEX 5rk, or a NEX 6 if you want a view finder. There are many reasons to get the NEX over DSLR and M4/3

-APS C size sensor is the same as most DSLR's
-NEX has Phase Detection auto focus now
-NEX has some of the best sensors in the industry to this day, very few cameras have the same low light ISO performance.

So with NEX you are pretty much getting a DSLR that is smaller than most DSLR's, but performance is nearly identical.

Only problem with NEX is small lens selection (which is still pretty good, 20+ lenses with at least 5 more this year). Also video leaves a little to be desired, but is still nice.

Get NEX 5rk if you don't need the view finder or hot shoe.
Get the NEX 6 if you prefer expandability.

 

[CuriousMike]

However, I do not agree entirely with the "blurry photo" in low light comment.

I just tested my 5D MkII

My self I haven't use Auto mode on a camera for 25+ years,

I haven't used all brands of cameras; the brands I have used rarely have a 'default shutter speed' option set to ( say, 1/60th sec) as a default. If they have that option at all.

Your 5D is slightly beyond the scope of what we're talking about - it likely has the minimum shutter speed. Does that work in auto mode, or just P mode? Cameras vary with where that feature exists.

Your 25 years of experience goes slightly beyond the scope of someone looking for their first DSLR type camera.

 

[Syborg1211]

Your 25 years of experience goes slightly beyond the scope of someone looking for their first DSLR type camera.

Yup, this is what a lot of people have trouble keeping in mind when advising beginners. Once you know how to use any camera in manual mode, it's pretty trivial to pick up another brand camera and figure out what correlates to what. If you're just starting out and learning though, having those settings buried in menus will inhibit your learning experience, especially if you don't even know those options exist or what they do.

 

[jidery]

Yup, this is what a lot of people have trouble keeping in mind when advising beginners. Once you know how to use any camera in manual mode, it's pretty trivial to pick up another brand camera and figure out what correlates to what. If you're just starting out and learning though, having those settings buried in menus will inhibit your learning experience, especially if you don't even know those options exist or what they do.

Which is another reason NEX is a great option. The NEX doesn't have a complex menu system, its more of a hybrid between point and shoot and DSLR.