# Wanting some opinions on a Nikon DSLR.



## Valvaren (Dec 17, 2011)

So i'm looking into getting a new camera in January and want to stick with a Nikon as that is what I have now and it is what I'm learning on.

I have about an 800 dollar budget and am looking for people to give me their experiences with cameras they have so I can get the best for what I want. I'm really into macro and I like the look of HDR so I want something that has good lenses or is just basically good with either of those.

There is a deal near me for a D5100, 18-55mm VR lens for $780. Now if that is a good deal i'm not sure but I read a review stating to not buy it with that lens and get a 35mm F1.8 lens.

Since my camera doesn't have the ability to swap lenses i'm not really familiar with what is better for what and plan on learning that as I get the hang of what I have now so i'm not sure if I should bother getting that lens or save the extra money for a better lens or even just buy a $800 dollar body with no lens.

Any help, tips, advice would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## JohnS. (Dec 17, 2011)

Get a D90. The D5100 lacks an internal focus motor so you'll have a wider range of lenses with the D90. Not sure how video compares between the 2 but an IFM alone would make me want the D90 over the D5100.

Just my $0.02.


----------



## KmH (Dec 17, 2011)

Unless you have a pretty hefty lens budget, most of those "wider range of lenses" amej8 is referrring to are not inexpensive. The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it.

Granted there are some lenses, like the Nikon AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 (*won't *auto focus on a D5100) that costs half what the AF-S 70-200 mm f/.8 VR II (*will* auto focus on a D5100) costs. But the AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 is still a $1200 lens ( the AF-S 70-200 mm f/2.8 VRII is $2400). But here the difference in cost is about _*way*_ more than just the auto focus motor.

In fact the D5100 image sensor and video pretty much beat snot out of the D90.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2011)

The D90 is "Jessica Simpson". She was hot...at one time...but she's been bypassed...the D5100 is uh....hmmm...lemme see...Kristen Stewart...yeah, I guess she'll do...


----------



## sbakewell1101 (Dec 17, 2011)

Ok, I will admit the D90 joke was funny.. but I have the d90 (recently upgraded to a d700) if you can swing the 7000 do that one, but I LOVE my d90, it has good iso, great functions and auto focuses with all the lenses that I need it to... definitely recommend the d90.


----------



## Sammie_Lou (Dec 17, 2011)

So who is the Britney Spears?? (i.e. was hot at one time...had a few bad moments but is still sticking around)


----------



## Patrice (Dec 17, 2011)

Sammie_Lou said:


> So who is the Britney Spears?? (i.e. was hot at one time...had a few bad moments but is still sticking around)




The village bicycle.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2011)

Britney Spears is not a camera body..she is a LENS!!! She is the Canon 10-22 EF-S...the one that simply breaks into two pieces when stressed...


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 17, 2011)

KmH said:


> Unless you have a pretty hefty lens budget, most of those "wider range of lenses" amej8 is referrring to are not inexpensive. The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it.
> 
> Granted there are some lenses, like the Nikon AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 (*won't *auto focus on a D5100) that costs half what the AF-S 70-200 mm f/.8 VR II (*will* auto focus on a D5100) costs. But the AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 is still a $1200 lens ( the AF-S 70-200 mm f/2.8 VRII is $2400). But here the difference in cost is about _*way*_ more than just the auto focus motor.
> 
> In fact the D5100 image sensor and video pretty much beat snot out of the D90.


This is a load of malarkey...

The 35-70 2.8 can be had around $300 vs the alternative around $2000.  The 80-200 2.8 can be had around $600 vs the alternative around $2400 .  The 50mm 1.8 can be had around $90 vs the alternative at $220.  Throw in the ability to fire off camera flashes remotely while retaining TTL, and the money really starts to add up.

Then add dual control wheels, exterior controls, fp sync, etc, etc, etc and the D90 pretty much beats the snot out of the D5100.


----------



## Dillard (Dec 17, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Unless you have a pretty hefty lens budget, most of those "wider range of lenses" amej8 is referrring to are not inexpensive. The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it.
> ...



I sir agree, point well made.


----------



## KmH (Dec 18, 2011)

Kerbouchard leaves out some information.

For instance, the $600 80-200 mm f/2.8's are all the much older, 2 generations back, push-pull to zoom, used lenses that cannot be bought new.

$1200 (new) is the approx price for the current 80-200 mm f/2.8 two-ring.

There are far fewer less expensive AF lenses, than there are more expensive AF lenses.

And like I said the D5100 image sensor and video beat the shot out of the D90.

But no, I didn't list every difference in the features between the 2 cameras.

And I'll repeat - "The fact is, *most* of the lenses *likely to be in your price range* all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it."


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 18, 2011)

KmH said:


> The $600 80-200 mm f/2.8's are all the much older, 2 generations back, push-pull to zoom, used lenses.
> 
> $1200 (new) is the approx price for the current 80-200 mm f/2.8 two-ring.


Yes, and neither one of them will autofocus on the D5100.

FWIW, those push pull lenses still work just fine.  Like everybody is so fond of saying around here, the lenses will last forever.  Just because there is a newer model out there didn't make those older pro lenses stop taking pictures.  It just made them fantastic bargains and a whole lot of bang for the buck.


----------



## Sammie_Lou (Dec 18, 2011)

Derrel said:


> Britney Spears is not a camera body..she is a LENS!!! She is the Canon 10-22 EF-S...the one that simply breaks into two pieces when stressed...



I guess maybe she could also be a P&S - lasted a long time, but everybody's had her...and, while she still works after all these years, her technology is outdated and someone else can do it better.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Dec 18, 2011)

Derrel said:


> The D90 is "Jessica Simpson". She was hot...at one time...but she's been bypassed...the D5100 is uh....hmmm...lemme see...Kristen Stewart...yeah, I guess she'll do...



I'd still hit it.  (please don't ban me for life...)


----------



## KmH (Dec 18, 2011)

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side


----------



## Derrel (Dec 18, 2011)

KmH said:
			
		

> And like I said the D5100 image sensor and video beat the shot out of the D90.>>SNIP>>> And I'll repeat - "The fact is, *most* of the lenses *likely to be in your price range* all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it."



There is the crux of the matter for me: the D5100 has a newer, higher-resolution sensor, with better read electronics than the D90 has. The D90 was the first DSLR announced, by any maker, that shot video...the D5100 has newer, better, and more-refined video features. The lenses that a beginning or intermediate photographer will likely be able to afford are for the most part, going to be AF-S lenses which have a focusing motor built-in.

The majority of people who want an 80-200 f/2.8 two-ring zoom are simply NOT D5100 owners...and the 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D??? are you kidding??? The focal length range is ridiculous on a 1.5x crop-body Nikon...I know, I own one...shot a 35-70 on the Nikon D1,and frankly, the kit lenses offer better focal lengths...

Most of the people who buy their first or second d-slr are NOT going to give a rat's butt about old AF-D lenses designed 15 years ago...they want newer, smaller lenses that cost less, carry easier, and which have focal lengths that are appropriate for CROP-body cameras, and not film tanks like the F4 and F5.


----------



## Valvaren (Dec 19, 2011)

So I've been presented with lots of good information and advice but i'm still torn, I was all for the D90, then between the two again and now i'm sort of leaning back towards the D90. I've been told it is a high quality camera and I do like the idea of it having a built in focus motor but then again you seem to say most lens have focus motors themselves or I can buy ones with it.

I was told by a friend who has a bit of camera knowledge ( I don't talk to him often but decided to see what he had to say) and he recommended to get the D90, a body only and look into sigma lens to start off with.

Is the D90 better for what I want to do : Macro, HDR, Landscapes and street, or would I have a better advantage for those with a D5100, I'm not really worried about video quality as I have my P500 for that and I don't really take videos that often except for slowmo vids.

I really appreciate everyone's help and opinions i've been learning a lot


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 19, 2011)

And most photographers don't have DSLR's, so should we just tell everybody to buy a P&S because that's what most people do?

As far as the 35-70 2.8, I loved it on my D90.  Still have it and use it on my D700.  Yes, eventually, I will buy the newer 24-70 2.8, but I was able to pick up the 35-70 2.8 for around $300 off Craigslist and have gotten to use it for a few years now.  If I would have had to wait until I had the funds for the 24-70, I would have missed a lot of shots.

Actually, I love your guy's perception and attitude.  It only drives the price lower for those 'antiquated' AF-D lenses.



Derrel said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 19, 2011)

You are saying somebody should discount an entire line of lenses because they _might_ get confused by having two redundant mechanical switches?

If so, you are right, if that is the level of photographer that the advice on this boards is centered around, then nobody should ever take my advice.  I guess my advice is not centered around the lowest common denominator.

Yes, the 35-70 and 80-200 push-pull are outdated.  You can also pick both of them up and still have room for a D90 for the same cost as the 24-70 2.8 AF-S.  They may be old, they may be 'outdated', but they provide a tremendous value.

This isn't a stab at you or KMH.  I just think/hope you are underestimating the people who are asking for advice on this forum.  Surely, somebody who will take the time to become part of an online photography forum can learn how/when/why to operate a few mechanical switches.  And personally, I don't care if you call me a tool.  Doesn't bother me a bit.  I learned in debates that when somebody resorts to insults, their argument has already fallen apart.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 19, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:
			
		

> SNIP>>>Actually, I love your guy's perception and attitude.  It only drives the price lower for those 'antiquated' AF-D lenses.



What a tool. Kerby, you're really full of it, suggesting to beginners that the handful of AF-D lenses they cannot afford are better choices than easily-affordable, more-modern, better lenses.

I own lots of AF-D lenses. They are fine, for people who have experience, like me. And the financial ability to buy expensive lenses that are no longer in the lens lineup. But the vast majority of newer AF-S lenses have better optics. And full-time manual focus override on lenses likely to need it. See, the "bad" thing about AF-D lenses and newbies is the lenses have A/M focus switches, mechanical ones, PLUS there is also the BODY's focusing switch. Kerby, you look quite foolish trying to make a case for setting newbies up with AF-D lenses that have slow, loud AF, and which require them to slide or twist a mechanical switch just to override or touch up focus. Would you also suggest setting up 16-year-old new driver up with a sports car with a 5-speed manual transmission on Day 1?

AF-D Nikkors are fine for a guy like me who has 30 years in the Nikon system. I'm intimately familiar with many AF- and AF-D Nikkor lenses. But, and this is the thing Kerby, newcomers to the system are an entirely different customer segment than people like you. Unfortyunately, you do not seem to understand how confusing the LENS-based A/M switch is in conjunction with the CAMERA-BASED focusing switch located to the left of the lens mount. You are recommending old, outdated technology to newcomers. Your advice in this case is mostly centered around your own, personal biases and experiences, and ignores the target customer. Your jabs at me, and KmH make me call you a tool because, frankly, you've been acting like one. When giving advice in-person or on-line, the advice giver needs to tailor his advice to the actual customer at hand---and that is something that KmH, and myself, are actually pretty good at, I think. You, OTOH, are sitting here making personal jabs, and trying to defend your own product buying history or choices. And that is not what this place needs...it needs advice geared to specific people and THEIR situations...not knee-jerks comments...

For the newcomer to the Nikon system, buying UP-TO-DATE, current, modern equipment that is not five,six,or seven generations removed from the present makes the most sense. Unless you're REALLLLY sure of what you need, don't go back to 1995 for your lenses..but instead, buy the NEW models that work seamlessly with TODAY's equipment.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 19, 2011)

Derrel said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


Kerbouchard said:


> You are saying somebody should discount an entire line of lenses because they _might_ get confused by having two redundant mechanical switches?
> 
> If so, you are right, if that is the level of photographer that the advice on this boards is centered around, then nobody should ever take my advice.  I guess my advice is not centered around the lowest common denominator.
> 
> ...



Well, this is confusing.  Seems like you deleted your post and then reposted it, so now my reply to your post is before your actual post...weird.

In any case, I haven't taken any stabs at you or KMH.  Simply giving you my opinion, and yes, it is based on the research and choices that I have made.  It's the only way I know how to give advice.

If budget is unlimited, I recomend a D3s, 24-70, 70-200, a few SB900's, a gitzo pod, an Elinchrom light setup, and heck, might as well throw in a 400mm 2.8.  Unfortunately, I've never seen somebody on here whose budget was unlimited, so I've never been able to give that advice.

Instead, I try to give advice on what will get the best results for the dollar, even if it does take a bit of knowledge and learning to achieve it.  Heck, there is a learning curve for anybodies first dslr/lens combo.

If you don't like my advice and think that anytime I disagree with you is a 'stab' at you, I would recommend the ignore feature.  I'm sure you know where it is.


----------



## sm4him (Dec 19, 2011)

My personal opinion is that you really aren't going to make a "wrong" choice if you go with either the D90 OR the D5100. I've had my D5100 for about 5 months now, and I love it!  I considered a D90, but for my very first DSLR I wanted NEW, and I would have had to buy the D90 used.
My sister has the D90, and I love it too.  Sometimes, I think I like hers a little better, because she DOES have one non-AF-S lens, and when I borrow it, I have to focus it manually on my D5100--I have vision issues and so don't really "trust" what I see as focused.
But then other times, I'm glad I picked the D5100...video, for instance.  It also just has a little bit heavier, 'professional' feel to it than the D5100.
But I've never regretted getting the D5100, and I really think either way you go, you will be happy with it.

As for which is "better" for macro, HDR, landscape, etc. I don't think one of them is better than the other for a particular type of photo. That all depends on which lenses you use.  
Get whichever camera you can get for the best value, and then spend whatever you can on the best lenses you can afford. THAT is what is going to really make the difference in your photos.


----------



## KmH (Dec 19, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> In any case, I haven't taken any stabs at you or KMH.


Sure you have. 



Kerbouchard said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Unless you have a pretty hefty lens budget, most of those "wider range of lenses" amej8 is referrring to are not inexpensive. The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it.
> ...


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Dec 20, 2011)

Have to say, I agree with you Derrel that you do give decent advice to the newbies, I always read your posts with intrigue. I only disagree with you on one point, that KMH gives decent advice to newbies.

I have once seen KMH give a newbie advice who wanted to buy a portrait lens on a budget, he advised him by telling him that he will need three lenses for portrait work. This is not useful advice at all. He also has a habit of coming across as highly patronising, I would like Kerby, deny this is a stab at you KMH. But it is most definitely a stab at you for giving misleading advice to people, which is dangerous in my opinion.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 20, 2011)

KmH said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > In any case, I haven't taken any stabs at you or KMH.
> ...



That wasn't a stab.  I felt your advice was exagerated and went on to explain why.

In any case, I'll say the same thing to you that I said to Derrel a few posts back, "If you don't like my advice and think that anytime I disagree with you is a 'stab' at you, I would recommend the ignore feature.  I'm sure you know where it is."


----------



## paul85224 (Dec 20, 2011)

I'd take a D90 over Britney Spears anyday.....


----------



## Valvaren (Dec 20, 2011)

Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.


----------



## Dillard (Dec 20, 2011)

Valvaren said:


> Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.



Glad you decided! I also shoot a d90 and LOVE it, and I'm sure you will too. Don't worry about stirring anything up on here, it happens quite regularly and its in the norm


----------



## TheFantasticG (Dec 20, 2011)

Valvaren said:


> Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.


 
The D90 is a fantastic camera. I used one for a hair over 26,000 images. Used it mainly for macro work. When you had plenty of light and didn't need to go over 800 ISO, it was fine. I soon ran into the problem the problem that the 12mp did not provide enough cropping abilities, so I eventually upgraded to the D7000.


----------



## JohnS. (Dec 21, 2011)

Valvaren said:


> Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.



Good choice! You can't go wrong with a D90. 

Every internet forum goes through this. Everyone has their own opinions and most threads asking for opinions usually leads into a lot of debate / arguing.


----------



## cnutco (Dec 21, 2011)

amej8 said:


> Get a D90. The D5100 lacks an internal focus motor so you'll have a wider range of lenses with the D90. Not sure how video compares between the 2 but an IFM alone would make me want the D90 over the D5100.
> 
> Just my $0.02.



+1

Love my D90!


----------



## djacobox372 (Dec 21, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Unless you have a pretty hefty lens budget, most of those "wider range of lenses" amej8 is referrring to are not inexpensive. The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it.
> ...



I'd suggest a tamron 17-50mm 2.8 or 28-75mm f2.8 instead of the 35-70mm nikon which has a horrible tendency to get condensation in the lens and haze up. I've owned all three, and the older nikon was the worst performer (even without the haze problem).

As for the 80-200mm, the AF-D version is around $500, and you can get an AFS version for around $900. 

The big savings with AF lenses is with short primes, which don't really benefit from AF-S.

All that said, the D5100 has noticeably better IQ then the D90, and much better video.


----------



## wolfdale13 (Dec 29, 2011)

i think you must save more money for D90, or buy the 2nd of D90. Why? because it's completely nice camera in the class and have motor on body, so you no need to spend more money to but AF-S lens, just AF is enough


----------

