Nikon D5100 is official ($799 Body/$899 Kit) - same sensor as D7000

[aphex]

http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/05/nikon-d5100-and-me-1-external-mic-coming-april-21st-we-go-hands/

Looking pretty good there, hits almost all the points I was looking for. Now time to decide between this or the T3i. I think the T3i still has the leg up on video quality w/ 60fps in 720p, but the Nikon can do continuous auto focus. That D7000 sensor sure is tempting though. Hrmph.

 

[AkumaX]

nice... D3100 + articulating screen and more!

 

[ZetaEpyon]

Hmm, I've been eying the D7000, but this looks pretty nice.
I have one lens that wouldn't autofocus (Nikkor 50mm 1.8), but a $400 difference in body cost is pretty significant...

 

[996GT2]

Hmm, I've been eying the D7000, but this looks pretty nice.
I have one lens that wouldn't autofocus (Nikkor 50mm 1.8), but a $400 difference in body cost is pretty significant...

Not a huge loss, the 35mm f/1.8 G is better on DX anyway

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

extremely happy i've been holding off on a purchase for the past 6 months.
this is the one for me.

 

[Krioni]

Hmm, I've been eying the D7000, but this looks pretty nice.
I have one lens that wouldn't autofocus (Nikkor 50mm 1.8), but a $400 difference in body cost is pretty significant...

Well, there are MANY other differences between this and the D7000. So, while the sensor may be *similar*, the cameras are quite different. This is not to say the D5100 isn't going to be an awesome camera, but I think it's wrong to see it as a D7000 without the internal focus motor. There are way more differences.

 

[nboy22]

Does this offer any advantages over the t2i? In my opinion the t2i seems to be a stronger package for the money, other than the flip-out screen which will keep the screen cleaner and keep it safe from scratches.

I just see the 16.2 megapixel sensor, which is smaller than t2i's 18 mp sensor. I see the Video modes are lacking a little bit compared to the t2i too, which can do 720P at 60 fps.

It might just be me, but it seems like the t2i kits are a stronger deal for the money at $800 for the 18-55mm kit.

 

[Sid59]

Does this offer any advantages over the t2i? In my opinion the t2i seems to be a stronger package for the money, other than the flip-out screen which will keep the screen cleaner and keep it safe from scratches.

I just see the 16.2 megapixel sensor, which is smaller than t2i's 18 mp sensor. I see the Video modes are lacking a little bit compared to the t2i too, which can do 720P at 60 fps.

It might just be me, but it seems like the t2i kits are a stronger deal for the money at $800 for the 18-55mm kit.

You're shopping based on MP and video but not on the laurels of IQ, ergonomics, lens selection, etc.

Canon and Nikon always leap frog each other and this is no exception. T2i did battle with the D5000. The updated T3i and now the updated D5100 would be a fair comparison.

 

[Sid59]

Well, there are MANY other differences between this and the D7000. So, while the sensor may be *similar*, the cameras are quite different. This is not to say the D5100 isn't going to be an awesome camera, but I think it's wrong to see it as a D7000 without the internal focus motor. There are way more differences.

I don't have the complete differences but off hand.
D7000 has
TOP LCD for settings info
AF screw for non AF- lenses.
metering for older AIS lenses.
dedicated ISO button
dedicated Quality button
dedicated white balance button
two SD card slots
bracketing
AF points, i THINK 39 vs D5100 11
Frame rate 6 v 4
probably more but that alone would push people up a the d7000

 

[Smoove910]

D7000 has partial weather-sealing too (if you are an outdoorsy nut like myself) and a partial magnesium body.

 

[Kelvrick]

D7000 also has two control wheels as well as micro af adjustment for lenses.

 

[nboy22]

You're shopping based on MP and video but not on the laurels of IQ, ergonomics, lens selection, etc.

Canon and Nikon always leap frog each other and this is no exception. T2i did battle with the D5000. The updated T3i and now the updated D5100 would be a fair comparison.

I personally think most cameras are comfortable in terms of ergonomics. If I spend almost a thousand dollars on a camera, I expect ergonomics to be great, no matter what company. Of course companies will always leap frog each other just like ATI/Nvidia.

in terms of lens selection I'm pretty sure that both companies have so many lenses for so many different types of scenarios that there's no point in bringing it up. Maybe you can tell me what special lenses the Nikon has that the Canon doesn't?

I'm just saying on paper the Canon t2i looks to be a better deal, so I'm surprised the starting price on a Nikon kit is $100 more than the Canon t2i. Can you point anything out in specific that the Nikon has that the Canon doesn't. Anything REALLY significant in your opinion? I'm just curious.

 

[AkumaX]

Comparison against T3i would be more accurate

 

[Sid59]

I personally think most cameras are comfortable in terms of ergonomics. If I spend almost a thousand dollars on a camera, I expect ergonomics to be great, no matter what company. Of course companies will always leap frog each other just like ATI/Nvidia.

in terms of lens selection I'm pretty sure that both companies have so many lenses for so many different types of scenarios that there's no point in bringing it up. Maybe you can tell me what special lenses the Nikon has that the Canon doesn't?

I'm just saying on paper the Canon t2i looks to be a better deal, so I'm surprised the starting price on a Nikon kit is $100 more than the Canon t2i. Can you point anything out in specific that the Nikon has that the Canon doesn't. Anything REALLY significant in your opinion? I'm just curious.

None, in the end, like I orginally said, of all non-measurable metrics (ergnomics, lens selection) there isn't anything really significant and people will say for less money, i'll get 2 more MP and better video. Just opening up conversation =D

In fact, i've had 1 coworker and 3 friends ask me what was better for them Nikon or Canon. Each time i said, put two models you think are equal and and feel what's better in your hand, do you like the menus? All 4 didn't have existing lenses into one system or another.
2 chose canon rebel exi and 2 chose nikon d3100 and the other a D5000. I told them truthfully, in the end, you hit the "take the picture button" and enjoy what you made. We aren't at the level to distinguish IQ between the two brands.

 

[nboy22]

None, in the end, like I orginally said, of all non-measurable metrics (ergnomics, lens selection) there isn't anything really significant and people will say for less money, i'll get 2 more MP and better video. Just opening up conversation =D

In fact, i've had 1 coworker and 3 friends ask me what was better for them Nikon or Canon. Each time i said, put two models you think are equal and and feel what's better in your hand, do you like the menus? All 4 didn't have existing lenses into one system or another.
2 chose canon rebel exi and 2 chose nikon d3100 and the other a D5000. I told them truthfully, in the end, you hit the "take the picture button" and enjoy what you made. We aren't at the level to distinguish IQ between the two brands.

Makes sense, I thought originally you were saying that there is better lenses on a certain brand, or at least some sort of specialized lenses. I'm a bit newer to the photography field so I like to gather opinions on things, thanks for your input!

 

[twistedlogic]

Can you point anything out in specific that the Nikon has that the Canon doesn't. Anything REALLY significant in your opinion? I'm just curious.

The D5100 and D7000 are using the latest Sony 16mp sensor found in the newest Nikons, Pentaxs, and Sony DSL-Rs that are getting rave reviews for Dynamic Range, High-ISO noise levels, and unbelievable ability to recover shadow areas without too much noise, some say even better lift than the current FF sensors.

 

[nboy22]

The D5100 and D7000 are using the latest Sony 16mp sensor found in the newest Nikons, Pentaxs, and Sony DSL-Rs that are getting rave reviews for Dynamic Range, High-ISO noise levels, and unbelievable ability to recover shadow areas without too much noise, some say even better lift than the current FF sensors.

Nice, I'd like to see some sample pics of the high-ISO noise levels, I always feel bad taking pictures on my t2i at ISO 6400 because they seem pretty grainy in low light.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

You're shopping based on MP and video but not on the laurels of IQ, ergonomics, lens selection, etc.

Canon and Nikon always leap frog each other and this is no exception. T2i did battle with the D5000. The updated T3i and now the updated D5100 would be a fair comparison.

The T1i battled with the D5000. The T2i uses the 7D sensor which is still in the T3i. It's one hell of a sensor which is why the D7000 and D5100 were introduced and even then the 18MP Canon sensor is still damn good.

Makes sense, I thought originally you were saying that there is better lenses on a certain brand, or at least some sort of specialized lenses. I'm a bit newer to the photography field so I like to gather opinions on things, thanks for your input!

Honestly, even enthusiasts like me can't say I'd be disappointed if I went Nikon instead. If you have some SPECIFIC need like the need for a Nikon 200-400mm lens, then sure, maybe this is the right solution.

I always heralded Canon for having 5x 70-200 solutions. The two F4 lenses and now the three f/2.8 lenses. That's a huge selection, but at the end of the day the f4 lenses only gives me a mediocre step up from my 55-250 EF-S lens. While that's an option, I KNOW I will always eye the f/2.8 white lenses. Sure Nikon might not have an intermediate step, but given that my end goal is the 70-200 f/2.8 lens, do I really lose out by not having two cheaper lenses on Nikon's lineup? Probably not.

You can't go wrong with either. For me it's more important that my friends shoot Canon because we can interchange lenses. My 7D setup with back button AF makes it easy that my 40D friend can pick it up anyday and start shooting. That and we can trade off lenses and flashes.

Nice, I'd like to see some sample pics of the high-ISO noise levels, I always feel bad taking pictures on my t2i at ISO 6400 because they seem pretty grainy in low light.

TBH ISO6400 is gonna suck on any APS-C camera. The 5D2 can churn out respectable ISO6400 quality but it's not something you want to use day to day if you can get away with it.

I took a screenshot of the D7000 vs 7D vs 60D vs Sony A55 from Dpreview. You can use their compare-tool to see:

http://cl.ly/110S0g1M032s1w2W2l2D

 

[nboy22]

The T1i battled with the D5000. The T2i uses the 7D sensor which is still in the T3i. It's one hell of a sensor which is why the D7000 and D5100 were introduced and even then the 18MP Canon sensor is still damn good.



Honestly, even enthusiasts like me can't say I'd be disappointed if I went Nikon instead. If you have some SPECIFIC need like the need for a Nikon 200-400mm lens, then sure, maybe this is the right solution.

I always heralded Canon for having 5x 70-200 solutions. The two F4 lenses and now the three f/2.8 lenses. That's a huge selection, but at the end of the day the f4 lenses only gives me a mediocre step up from my 55-250 EF-S lens. While that's an option, I KNOW I will always eye the f/2.8 white lenses. Sure Nikon might not have an intermediate step, but given that my end goal is the 70-200 f/2.8 lens, do I really lose out by not having two cheaper lenses on Nikon's lineup? Probably not.

You can't go wrong with either. For me it's more important that my friends shoot Canon because we can interchange lenses. My 7D setup with back button AF makes it easy that my 40D friend can pick it up anyday and start shooting. That and we can trade off lenses and flashes.



TBH ISO6400 is gonna suck on any APS-C camera. The 5D2 can churn out respectable ISO6400 quality but it's not something you want to use day to day if you can get away with it.

I took a screenshot of the D7000 vs 7D vs 60D vs Sony A55 from Dpreview. You can use their compare-tool to see:

http://cl.ly/110S0g1M032s1w2W2l2D

Thanks for the comparison, that is interesting seeing them all side by side!

 

[twistedlogic]

Nice, I'd like to see some sample pics of the high-ISO noise levels, I always feel bad taking pictures on my t2i at ISO 6400 because they seem pretty grainy in low light.

While not exactly high-ISO, here is the first example I saw of what this new Sony sensor can do. The image was pushed 10 stops.

 

[Sp12]

Obviously the 16.2 sensor in the Nikon is much nicer than that in the T2i (or 7D for that matter), but the D5100 isn't half as compelling as the D7000 in my opinion. When I used the D7000 it tracked at least as well as my old 1D3, and had better IQ (plus movie mode and whatnot) for less.

 

[AkumaX]

While not exactly high-ISO, here is the first example I saw of what this new Sony sensor can do. The image was pushed 10 stops.

haha, i remember that image - you could d/l the raw and PP it yourself!

 

[Krioni]

While not exactly high-ISO, here is the first example I saw of what this new Sony sensor can do. The image was pushed 10 stops.

That is insane!

 

[ZetaEpyon]

Well, there are MANY other differences between this and the D7000. So, while the sensor may be *similar*, the cameras are quite different. This is not to say the D5100 isn't going to be an awesome camera, but I think it's wrong to see it as a D7000 without the internal focus motor. There are way more differences.

Oh, absolutely, and I didn't intend to indicate that it was just a D7000 minus the focusing motor.

That said, I'm coming from a 5-year-old D70s, so either of them would pretty much stomp all over my existing camera in just about any feature area. From that perspective, it's at least enough to give me pause, since the lower body cost would leave me some room to upgrade my glass as well.

 

[Krioni]

Oh, absolutely, and I didn't intend to indicate that it was just a D7000 minus the focusing motor.

That said, I'm coming from a 5-year-old D70s, so either of them would pretty much stomp all over my existing camera in just about any feature area. From that perspective, it's at least enough to give me pause, since the lower body cost would leave me some room to upgrade my glass as well.

I understand... I upgraded from a Nikon D50 to the D7000