First Dslr!

[Blade of Grass]

In my opinion, the  Nikon D7xxx is the best non-full frame DSLR money can buy. However, if you're completely new, the 5200 might be more apt though you will enjoy the D7xxx features when learning the ropes. It is the only Nikon though that has a bit worse build quality than it's price suggests. It's not flimsy or anything, but it sure isn't as tanky as anything from D600 and up. If you do get one, you have the option of adding a battery pack later, which increases FPS in series mode and doubles the battery capacity, plus it adds a very strong magnesium body piece on the bottom, which is it's weakest link. You also gain another shutter release button and aperture/ shutter dial for when you're taking vertical photos (tilted 90 degs) Like so:

 

 

The D7100 also has the best autofocus and screen of any Nikon camera, even beats the D4 in low light focusing. This is a bit because it's simply the newest camera from them though :P

How would the D7100 beat the D4 in auto focusing when they use the same auto focus system?

[CaptRex635]

How would the D7100 beat the D4 in auto focusing when they use the same auto focus system?

The D4 is older than the D7100; in low light situations such as a very dark room, the D7100 will perform better. I think that's what he was saying.

[Blade of Grass]

The D4 is older than the D7100; in low light situations such as a very dark room, the D7100 will perform better. I think that's what he was saying.

I don't think that's possible. They use the EXACT same system. Also, one camera is 6 times the price of the other, so why would it perform less? :wut:

[CaptRex635]

I don't think that's possible. They use the EXACT same system. Also, one camera is 6 times the price of the other, so why would it perform less? :wut:

Its the same focusing system but one does better in low light situations. That means that it has less noise in the image at very high ISO's

[Blade of Grass]

Its the same focusing system but one does better in low light situations. That means that it has less noise in the image at very high ISO's

The D4 definitely has lower noise at high ISO than the D7100.

The D4 is Nikon's top of the line $6000 professional camera.

[SirReallySam]

I have the D3100 and therefore I assume the D3200 is better than that... 

[That Norwegian Guy]

I don't think that's possible. They use the EXACT same system. Also, one camera is 6 times the price of the other, so why would it perform less? :wut:

 

The autofocus is the same but the updated electronics of the D7100 shows marginal improvements in focus speeds. It probably is a voltage thing.

[PCBjon]

What ever camera you get your gonna be very pleased its amazing the quality of theses new cameras have I brough my gf a d3200 and I compared it to my old Nikon d2x and it blew the 'pro' cam out of the water amazing iso capabilities.

[Timmyfox]

Let me remind you all that a better camera does not make you a better photographer. If anything, buying the most expensive camera to get you started will most likely decrease the quality of your photos!

 

So, to summarize the Rami's requirements...

> Not a photographer

> Will be using to take casual photos like vacations and family photos.

 

The D7000 or D7100 should be way out of your leage. It's a hobbyist/enthusiast grade camera and a higher end DSLR will certainly not benefit you at all. The sensor is the same size as the entry-level ones you mentioned, so image quality should be roughly the same - what makes this more high end is purely the features (which only really benefits photographers who know how to utilize these to more easily take more professional photos).

 

 

My recommendation is to go with a cheapish entry-level DSLR like the D3200/D5100, 550D/600D/650D or even the 1100D. Alternatively a good compact will be significantly more portable and still give you good enough image quality.

 

A personal recommendation would be to take a look at Sony's NEX line; They are a step up in image quality from your average compact but still retains a very slim size. The image quality they produce is spec-wise on par with any mid-range DSLR for sure and they are very user friendly. The NEX-F3 or 5R is certainly worth considering if you ask me.

 

----------------

 

So to put it briefly, if you don't plan on doing anything more than things like family photos and getting into photography - Either get a decent compact or 1100D. Alternatively you can follow my recommendation and look up the NEX-F3 (or other "Mirrorless SLR"-cameras at that price point). Going with something more expensive will do you little good.

 

If you however do plan on eventually getting into photography more, do consider something like the D3200 (alt. D5100) or if Canon, 550D, 600D or 650D (higher number means newer model, although the 550D or 600D should be priced lower and should fill your needs)

 

----------------

 

Fun fact: Sony actually OEM's the sensors in most of Nikon's DSLR's

[EricX2]

My first DSLR is the Nikon D5200 (which is the newer version of the D5100 and comparable to the D3200 but has the more advanced autofocus like the D7000) and I love it. I have a few lenses, the 35mm f1.8 is my main one I use. I also have the kit lens which is the 18-55mm and a 55-300mm that I just got.

 

Get whichever body you can afford and spend money on the lenses.

 

Here are some of my pictures: 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kramer7969

[Rami]

Let me remind you all that a better camera does not make you a better photographer. If anything, buying the most expensive camera to get you started will most likely decrease the quality of your photos!

 

So, to summarize the Rami's requirements...

> Not a photographer

> Will be using to take casual photos like vacations and family photos.

 

The D7000 or D7100 should be way out of your leage. It's a hobbyist/enthusiast grade camera and a higher end DSLR will certainly not benefit you at all. The sensor is the same size as the entry-level ones you mentioned, so image quality should be roughly the same - what makes this more high end is purely the features (which only really benefits photographers who know how to utilize these to more easily take more professional photos).

 

 

My recommendation is to go with a cheapish entry-level DSLR like the D3200/D5100, 550D/600D/650D or even the 1100D. Alternatively a good compact will be significantly more portable and still give you good enough image quality.

 

A personal recommendation would be to take a look at Sony's NEX line; They are a step up in image quality from your average compact but still retains a very slim size. The image quality they produce is spec-wise on par with any mid-range DSLR for sure and they are very user friendly. The NEX-F3 or 5R is certainly worth considering if you ask me.

 

----------------

 

So to put it briefly, if you don't plan on doing anything more than things like family photos and getting into photography - Either get a decent compact or 1100D. Alternatively you can follow my recommendation and look up the NEX-F3 (or other "Mirrorless SLR"-cameras at that price point). Going with something more expensive will do you little good.

 

If you however do plan on eventually getting into photography more, do consider something like the D3200 (alt. D5100) or if Canon, 550D, 600D or 650D (higher number means newer model, although the 550D or 600D should be priced lower and should fill your needs)

 

----------------

 

Fun fact: Sony actually OEM's the sensors in most of Nikon's DSLR's

This is a reply I wanted to get, so how helpful do you think a focusing meter is, which is missing on the D5100?

[Timmyfox]

Do you mean a focus motor?

I wouldn't say it's particularly necessary for you - autofocusing is still automatic with supported lenses.

If you're ever gonna need to manually focus, just use the viewfinder and get it looking as in-focus as you can!

 

As for supported lenses, any "AF-S" lenses will work.