# As a beginner...Nikon D5100 !!



## mri44 (Oct 24, 2012)

I have no idea about DSLR camera. I used compact camera. I would not spend much time in photography. I am thinking of buying Nikon D5100 with 18-55mm and 35mm lenses. I want to take photos mainly when I go out with my friends or family or any indoor occasion. I am expecting some comments that may be help me to determine whether I am on the right track or not.


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 24, 2012)

Sounds good to me.

Add the 55-200mm f/4-5.6 and the SB-400 (flash), a 52mm polarization and 3 stop ND filter, and some spare batteries etc, and thats my equipment.


----------



## ISO (Oct 24, 2012)

I'd get a flash for indoor use, you can use the built in flash but with an external one you can bounce the light off the walls/ceiling for super soft lighting.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 24, 2012)

Yes, the D5100 is for you!!!


----------



## SCraig (Oct 24, 2012)

mri44 said:


> I have no idea about DSLR camera. I used compact camera. *I would not spend much time in photography.* I am thinking of buying Nikon D5100 with 18-55mm and 35mm lenses. I want to take photos mainly when I go out with my friends or family or any indoor occasion. I am expecting some comments that may be help me to determine whether I am on the right track or not.



In my opinion, if you aren't going to spend much time in photography, if you aren't going to take the time to learn how to use your camera properly and understand the benefits of a DSLR, then you will probably spend a lot of time complaining about how big it is, how difficult to get good photographs, how it is necessary to change lenses all the time, and so on and so on.  While the D5100 is an excellent camera, my recommendation given that statement in your original post is that you stick with a point-and-shoot or a bridge camera.  You will find them much more forgiving and convenient even though you will not have some of the functionality of a DSLR.

Just my personal opinion.


----------



## Fred Berg (Oct 24, 2012)

I think you'd be better off with something like a Fujifilm X10, a Canon G1X or G15, or a sony RX100. With your criteria, I would choose one of these, and they are priced ranging from just a little cheaper to slightly more expensive than the Nikon (here in Germany anyway).


----------



## sm4him (Oct 24, 2012)

Huh. I gotta agree with SCraig here. 
Functionally, yes, the D5100 is a great camera for a complete beginner, because it's reasonably easy to learn but there is a LOT of room to improve before the camera would begin to limit you.
But in your case, by your own admission, you don't expect to spend much time on photography. That suggests to me you may not really be interested in the learning curve that is going to come with even an entry-level DSLR. Sure, you "could" just throw it into Auto and shoot, but why spend money on a DSLR to do that?

WHY do you WANT a DSLR? What is attractive to you about it? Are you going to be willing to lug around more than one lens and exchange them depending on what you're shooting at the time? Several have mentioned off-camera flash, but again, that would require a commitment to learning about off-camera flash and at least the basics about lighting in order to use it effectively.

If you don't want off-camera flash, and can't see yourself carrying around and using more than one lens, then a DSLR might not be for you. I suspect you are considering it simply because you think it will give you *better* pictures than what you are getting with your point and shoot. But if you don't take the time to learn how to use it, that may not be true.

Just based on the little bit of information you've given, I'd suggest a bridge camera, as SCraig said. Maybe one of the Canon Powershots like the G1X or the Nikon Coolpix P510--just a couple of "for instances," there are plenty of options out there.


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 24, 2012)

Ah yes, I missed that little sentence. If you just want a convenience camera, get a compact or a smartphone. They dont offer many of the features a "real" camera will offer you, but they wont ask you to know much about photography, either.

Its btw perfectly fine to use just one lens with a DSLR. Leica owners do that all the time with their Leica M (not a DSLR, but a system camera with exchangeable lenses). Only requirement is that you're happy with what this lens has to offer.

As a camera, the advantages of a DSLR (versus a system camera like Fuji X, Sony Alpha Nex, Nikon 1, Olympus OM-D and many others) are:
- can check framing without using electricity.
- has a mirror box with a lot of space for a powerful phase autofocus system, allowing to manage even action in low light better than any other type of camera [but the bigger more expensive DSLRs are still much better at this than the small entry level ones, and some system cameras start managing action not too awfully as well].


P.s.: Drat, hit 645 posts ! CAN NEVER POST AGAIN NOW ! LOL !


----------



## sm4him (Oct 24, 2012)

sm4him said:


> ...Are you going to be willing to lug around more than one lens and exchange them depending on what you're shooting at the time? ...





Solarflare said:


> ...Its btw perfectly fine to use just one lens with a DSLR.  Leica owners do that all the time with their Leica M...



I never suggested otherwise. However, the OP states that they are considering the D5100 with TWO lenses, but yet they don't plan to spend much time on photography.  My question was very specific to the OP; do they really think they will USE this camera and the TWO lenses they mention? Because my guess is that if they buy this setup, the camera and both lenses will very likely end up gathering a lot of dust in a closet somewhere.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Oct 24, 2012)

My defense goes in favor of Scott. If you're not going to spend much time in photography, you're much better off to go with a real nice bridge or point and shoot.

There is no sense in buying a dSLR if you never have any intent in taking it out of auto mode.


----------



## MLeeK (Oct 24, 2012)

Purchasing a DSLR and not learning how to use it won't render those images great. It does the exact same thing that a point and shoot does if you don't learn how to use it. 
You can save yourself a whole lot of money by just buying a bridge point and shoot. You'll have the abilities of a DSLR, a huge range from wide to mega zoom and it's smaller overall for while you are out and about.l


----------



## ISO (Oct 24, 2012)

Bridge cameras are terrible, you get the downsides of both DSLRs AND compacts... small sensor in a huge and heavy package, and the zoom might be great but the quality is generally rubbish after zooming in half way.


----------



## SCraig (Oct 24, 2012)

ISO said:


> Bridge cameras are terrible, you get the downsides of both DSLRs AND compacts... small sensor in a huge and heavy package, and the zoom might be great but the quality is generally rubbish after zooming in half way.



I disagree.  Some of them truly are trash but there are also many that are very, very good.  I've seen some excellent images taken with a bridge and have even taken a few myself.  It's what I carry on most motorcycle trips because it takes up a lot less space than my DSLR gear does.


----------



## mri44 (Oct 28, 2012)

Thank you all for this constructive discussion. After reading some reviews, I got the idea that Nikon D5100 is a nice combination of good performance and convincing price right now. I thought I would spend some time with the DSLR to learn how to operate it properly after purchase. DSLR cameras really provide great photos that are significantly different from the point and shoot cameras. The image quality is the main factor that makes me decide to buy a DSLR.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Nov 12, 2012)

mri44 said:


> DSLR cameras really provide great photos that are significantly different from the point and shoot cameras. The image quality is the main factor that makes me decide to buy a DSLR.



I don't know if I can agree with that. The purpose of a dSLR is to control you atmosphere better. It also gives you versatility with multiple lens selection. I can show you several bridge cameras that capture just as good, and better images than some of your entry level dSLR's.

In fact, that is the complete purpose of a bridge camera. To give you the basic environmental control of a dSLR, while maintaining the compact design and easy usability of a point-and-shoot.

I said it initially, and I will say it again. You are wasting your money if you are going to buy ANY model dSLR, including intro models, and you aren't going to be doing much photography. At that point, you are pretty much buying the dSLR to say you have an awesome camera.

If I didn't do photography, the only camera I'd ever need is my iPhone.


----------



## MLeeK (Nov 12, 2012)

mri44 said:


> Thank you all for this constructive discussion. After reading some reviews, I got the idea that Nikon D5100 is a nice combination of good performance and convincing price right now. I thought I would spend some time with the DSLR to learn how to operate it properly after purchase. DSLR cameras really provide great photos that are significantly different from the point and shoot cameras. The image quality is the main factor that makes me decide to buy a DSLR.


The thing is that a DSLR DOESN'T provide a better image than a point and shoot. The camera doesn't do anything different. The person operating the camera does that. If you are buying a DSLR expecting better images than a bridge point and shoot you are going to be sorely disappointed. It requires an education to get that amazing image quality out of them. The camera doesn't do it. It's the same with the bridge cameras. The user can bring forth amazing images or the camera can create the average image.


----------



## mri44 (Nov 13, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> The thing is that a DSLR DOESN'T provide a better image than a point and shoot. The camera doesn't do anything different. The person operating the camera does that. If you are buying a DSLR expecting better images than a bridge point and shoot you are going to be sorely disappointed. It requires an education to get that amazing image quality out of them. The camera doesn't do it. It's the same with the bridge cameras. The user can bring forth amazing images or the camera can create the average image.



I agree with you. I thought I would spend enough time to know the camera well. By the way, Nikon D5200 has been announced already. But I think it would be expensive. DSLR camera has one problem from my point of view. I can't take it any where always because of its size. I am thinking of Sony RX100. But it is still expensive as a compact camera. I am waiting for the Christmas sale. But I am not sure which one I will buy. Still thinking....


----------



## Solarflare (Nov 13, 2012)

Um, DSLRs operate much faster, are much easier to use, allow much more powerful control over the photographic process ... and yes, they DO have better quality that (most) point and shoot. More color resolution, more dynamic range, more high ISO tolerance, faster autofocus, ability for shallow depth of field ... you name it, DSLRs have it. Thats what high quality optics and large sensors are all about.

There are a few exceptional p&s that get close or even reach the quality of system cameras, such as for sure the Fujifilm Finepix X100, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1, maybe with some wiggle room also the Canon Powershot G1 X, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100, the Panasonic LX7, and more of the higher quality ones - but your average p&s wont.


----------



## Mully (Nov 13, 2012)

I think the main question here is ....what are you going to do with the images after you photograph something ..... remember you can always step up to a "better" camera later.  I carry a Cannon PowerShot everywhere, it is 7.1 mp and i never miss a shot because I did not take my "real" camera with me.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Nov 15, 2012)

Solarflare said:
			
		

> Um, DSLRs operate much faster, are much easier to use, allow much more powerful control over the photographic process ... and yes, they DO have better quality that (most) point and shoot. More color resolution, more dynamic range, more high ISO tolerance, faster autofocus, ability for shallow depth of field ... you name it, DSLRs have it. Thats what high quality optics and large sensors are all about.
> 
> There are a few exceptional p&s that get close or even reach the quality of system cameras, such as for sure the Fujifilm Finepix X100, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1, maybe with some wiggle room also the Canon Powershot G1 X, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100, the Panasonic LX7, and more of the higher quality ones - but your average p&s wont.



Lmao, dude, this post has officially pushed me over the edge with your extremely overrated "facts" based solely on your freaking opinion and reading too many damn magazines.

The 5100 has an exceptional sensor, however, for you to act like dSLRs have an IQ advantage over bridge or p&s cameras is an extremely biased and opinionated statement.

Go ahead, I know your stupid ass is going to hop on snapsort or some other comparison website and post comparable links to dSLRs to p&s cameras.

However, be realistic. This isn't David Burnette behind the viewfinder we are talking about comparing cameras. We are talking about the average user, who has no idea how to use a dSLR, and has really no desire to spend a lot of time learning how to use it. Need I bring up the fact that to get some of the shots he desires, he's going to have to swap lenses, and purchase new ones. Whereas, with a good p&s or bridge (and for the amount he's going to spend on your d7000 mini, he will be able to buy one hell of a p&s or bridge), he can just turn on the damn camera and shoot. Not to mention, with his experience level, the images will come out better on the bridge or p&s as well.

So, please take your opinionated bs knowledge somewhere where people actually want to read it.

By the way, keith, I already know I'm going to get a warning for this, or any other mod that might be reading, so go right ahead.


----------

