# what are your thoughts on the Nikon D5100?



## KaO12343 (May 1, 2013)

hi there im an amiture photographer and in the next few days im getting a nikon d5100 and was just wondering what everyones thoughts are on it. i was thinking of the D3200 but changed my mind to the D5100 instead, do you think i made the right move to switching?  cheers


----------



## sharon167 (May 1, 2013)

I had the d3100 which I have passed to my teenage daughter and looked at d3200 and d5100 as a replacement. I bought the d5100 2 Months ago and love it. Not much weight difference between them but I wish I had bought this one in the first place.


----------



## CaptainNapalm (May 1, 2013)

I had the Nikon d5100 for a few months about a year ago.  Image wise, it produced amazing photos, however it didn't cut it for me once I got into photography more and it only took me a couple of months to upgrade to the d7000 which I am very happy with now and I assume I will be for at least a couple of years to come.


----------



## jrizal (May 1, 2013)

With the release of the D5200, the D5200 has become cheaper and is still is a solid performer. In case you don't know the sensor is the same as the one found in the D7000. The swivel LCD is an added bonus IMO. Only downside that I can think of is that it does not have a built-in focus motor like all Nikon entry-level models meaning you can autofocus on older lenses. And there are still decent and cheap older lenses out there such as the 50mm f1.8 AF-D prime lens.

Here's a link

Nikon D3200 vs D5100 - Our Analysis

edited D700 to D7000


----------



## Solarflare (May 3, 2013)

I think its close to a perfect camera. Photographically, I only miss one feature: Hight Speed Sync, i.e. the ability to use flash at faster speeds than the flash sync speed.

The main problem with Nikon DX is really the limited number of choices when it comes to glass. Fuji's X system proves that you can make great glass for an APS-C sized sensor. Unfortunately Nikon shows no sign of intending to change the situation for Nikon DX. They kind of want you to buy the FX system.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 3, 2013)

Solarflare said:


> I think its close to a perfect camera. Photographically, I only miss one feature: Hight Speed Sync, i.e. the ability to use flash at faster speeds than the flash sync speed.



It is very far from a "perfect" camera. No weather/dust proofing, slow burst rate, small buffer, aps-c sensor, lack of two command dials, etc. 

It's an entry level body. Does it take good photos? That depends on who's using it. It's far from perfect though.


----------



## yioties (May 3, 2013)

It's the perfect camera for the money you are going to spend to get it. I have it and absolutely love it.


----------



## CandySvoboda (May 3, 2013)

I have the 5100 and it honestly is a great camera.  However, I outgrew it in about a year.  I'm now looking at the 7100 or maybe the 800 (If I can scrape the cash together).  I'm not a pro by a long shot, but as an advanced hobbyist, I feel that I need more out of my camera.

It does take wonderful photos, and IMO, has wonderful low light performance (I shoot a lot of bands in local dim lit clubs).  As mentioned though, there is no weather proofing and it is a crop sensor, etc.  If that isn't an issue for you, then you should enjoy it very much


----------



## Ballistics (May 3, 2013)

Solarflare said:


> I think its close to a perfect camera. Photographically, I only miss one feature: Hight Speed Sync, i.e. the ability to use flash at faster speeds than the flash sync speed.
> 
> The main problem with Nikon DX is really the limited number of choices when it comes to glass. Fuji's X system proves that you can make great glass for an APS-C sized sensor. Unfortunately Nikon shows no sign of intending to change the situation for Nikon DX. They kind of want you to buy the FX system.



Just about all of this is false. 
Where do you get this info from?

D5100 lacks:

Pentaprism
Good AF system (1 cross type fp)
Focus motor
Weatherseal
Card slot (only 1)
FPS (4fps)
Max shutter speed (1/4000)
Battery life

DX cameras are NOT limited in lens choices. There are more choices for DX than there are in FX.


----------



## jrizal (May 3, 2013)

There is no such thing as a perfect camera PERIOD. Are there better models out there? Obviously there are. That said the D5100 is still a good performer in spite of the relatively recent release of the D5200 and D3200. Given its price nowadays, it is a good value. It had good reviews in the past and why should it have poor reviews now just because there newer and better models? I have an inkling that the OP has some sort of buyer's remorse given that newer models are around. New model envy perhaps? But be assured it is a good camera in its class.


----------



## Ballistics (May 3, 2013)

jrizal said:


> Given its price nowadays, it is a good value....  But be assured it is a good camera in its class.




Good is a very relative term. D5100 is essentially a waste of money these days.


----------



## yioties (May 3, 2013)

For someone starting out in photography as a hobby the D5100 is far from being a waste of money! 

Here in Toronto the D5100 with a kit lens is $600 including tax
the D5200 is 875
the D7000 is is almost 1100

I won't get into the rest of the cameras but for the money it can't be beat for a person starting out in photography as a hobby.

I paid for my D5100 new 575 including tax and bought a 50mm 1.8g used for 160 so my setup for just over $700 is far from being a waste of money!


----------



## CaptainNapalm (May 3, 2013)

There will always be a million different answers to such a question. To someone upgrading from an iPhone camera, the d5100 may be amazing. Those with a d800 will tell you it's garbage. At the end of the day,you yourself have to educate yourself enough on these cameras to make a decision.  Make a list of what you're looking for in a camera and what your needs are and buy the camera which best matches all your needs.  Be careful with this though, if you really get into the hobby your needs may quickly change over a short period of time, so if I were you pick the camera you would want now and buy the next model up just in case. So in your case I'd get the d7000 or d7100, can't go wrong with that. I wish I did that when I started.


----------



## yioties (May 3, 2013)

Some people like myself even if I had the money didn't want to spend the extra 500 for a D7000. I read up on all the Nikons up to the D7000 went to my local camera shop shot with all of them and liked the D5100 best. (D5200, D7100 weren't out yet) 
I still believe I made the best choice for my needs in a camera and can always upgrade keeping my existing camera as a second body.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 3, 2013)

D90 > D5100


----------



## yioties (May 3, 2013)

In almost every category the D5100 beats the D90.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 3, 2013)

yioties said:


> In almost every category the D5100 beats the D90.



Not in the usability category. 

Better viewfinder, more external controls, faster burst rate, better build quality, larger viewfinder coverage, CLS (big one for OCF work) etc. 

The ISO performance on the D5100 isn't even that much better. Less than a stop. 

If I were a Nikon shooter, I would take a D90 over a D5100 any day. It's worth it for CLS alone really.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 3, 2013)




----------



## Ballistics (May 3, 2013)

yioties said:


> For someone starting out in photography as a hobby the D5100 is far from being a waste of money!
> 
> Here in Toronto the D5100 with a kit lens is $600 including tax
> the D5200 is 875
> ...



That's because you don't know any better. 

Used Nikon Normal AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Autofocus Lens 2137B B&H
Nikon D7000 Digital SLR Camera Body 25468B

D7000 + 50mm 1.8D

$850-900 depending on your location.

For the extra $150... you could have had the D7000, the option of all D lenses, and a cheaper camera in the long run.


----------



## yioties (May 3, 2013)

The d7000 just as a body is $900 here in canada so I actually do know better and another 100 for the 50mm 1.8D and $75 to $100 if you want the kit lens so that actually almost $1100. 
So with that extra 400 i can get a 70-300mm Vr or a 85mm 1.8g too, so again I do know better.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 3, 2013)

yioties said:


> The d7000 just as a body is $900 here in canada so I actually do know better and another 100 for the 50mm 1.8D and $75 to $100 if you want the kit lens so that actually almost $1100.
> So with that extra 400 i can get a 70-300mm Vr or a 85mm 1.8g too, so again I do know better.



You probably think in camera HDR is a huge benefit right?


----------



## yioties (May 3, 2013)

No actually I don't (never used it and probably never will). Look I'm not saying that the 7k or the 71k aren't great cameras but for a new user like myself the D5100 is a great option. I am more than happy with it!
Saying that I don't know any better like Ballistic did though is very ignorant on his part.

Giving me American prices when I live in Canada isn't very smart!


----------



## Ballistics (May 3, 2013)

yioties said:


> The d7000 just as a body is $900 here in canada so I actually do know better and another 100 for the 50mm 1.8D and $75 to $100 if you want the kit lens so that actually almost $1100.
> So with that extra 400 i can get a 70-300mm Vr or a 85mm 1.8g too, so again I do know better.



No, no you don't lol. The price I linked is the same price for Canada dude. And you're not talking about the same kit lens. D5100 kit lens is 18-55. The D7000 kit lens is 18-105. 
The prices I just showed you are identical to both Canada and US.


----------



## Ballistics (May 3, 2013)

yioties said:


> No actually I don't (never used it and probably never will). Look I'm not saying that the 7k or the 71k aren't great cameras but for a new user like myself the D5100 is a great option.


And I'm telling you that it's not. Dollar for dollar, there are much better options. Even @ $700 



> Saying that I don't know any better like Ballistic did though is very ignorant on his part.
> 
> Giving me American prices when I live in Canada isn't very smart!



What's not smart is that you don't know that Canadian prices are identical to US prices lol. Select canada for shipping options.


----------



## yioties (May 3, 2013)

You guys take this stuff way too seriously. Just because I don't agree with your logic doesn't mean that I'm wrong or don't know any better! I actually don't shop electronics from the states. I prefer to pay a little more here in Toronto.


----------



## Solarflare (May 3, 2013)

CaptainNapalm said:


> There will always be a million different answers to such a question. To someone upgrading from an iPhone camera, the d5100 may be amazing. Those with a d800 will tell you it's garbage. At the end of the day,you yourself have to educate yourself enough on these cameras to make a decision.  Make a list of what you're looking for in a camera and what your needs are and buy the camera which best matches all your needs.  Be careful with this though, if you really get into the hobby your needs may quickly change over a short period of time, so if I were you pick the camera you would want now and buy the next model up just in case. So in your case I'd get the d7000 or d7100, can't go wrong with that. I wish I did that when I started.


But the iPhone is a LOT more lightweight and a lot more stealthy than the D5100. And Ken Rockwell keeps praising the colors he gets out of his iPhone 5. He doesnt really bash the D5100 for bad colors, either, though. Thats reserved for the D800, D4, Sony RX1, and others. The D600 recently got fixed by Nikon, though, according to Rockwell. So yeah, there are even people out there who claim that in some respects, even the iPhone 5 has advantages over DSLRs.

And the D800 is quite a bit heavier than the D5100, and has no flipscreen.

Neither of these cameras is really "crap", nor is the D5100. They all have a different deal. You can have an iPhone with you 100% of time, easily. Thats kind of a big thing if you want to be able to photograph 100% of the time. You can have a backpack with you all the time, easily, to carry around your D5100. I got recently mocked that people never saw me without a backpack. I guess you could carry around a D800E with you in such a backpack, too. Or get a Leica with your favorite focal lengths and put it into these front bags, like Ken Rockwell uses them.

Personally, I think the D5100 is in a real sweet spot. Its already quite heavy, but still tolerable in weight. And it has a flipscreen, very useful for unusual angles. As I already said - would it have HSS, and would there be tolerably priced wide angle choices for lenses available, I would say this is the perfect camera, cheap and useable for 99% of what you will ever need.

Okay, weathersealing and a second card slot would certainly be practical improvements. I have used the D5100 in rain a lot so far, and I havent had a case of data loss, yet. But it would be nice to have more official support. Also, even more battery life is always great, though the 600 or so shots I get out of the D5100 are really more than enough for me, plus I have a spare battery too.

And for special purposes, of course theres more. If you want to do manual focus, you certainly want a better viewfinder. If you want to do sports, well a better AF would be in order (even the best ones are still hardly good enough and will still miss a lot of times, though the success rate will be more like 90% while on the D5100 its more like 30%). If you want to do wildlife and are kind of short on money, an in camera motor for the less expensive AF lenses would be in order. If you need maximum image quality, well theres cameras for 40k for such demands, and you can go probably even more expensive with custom made stuff.

Theres always better. Its always a question what you need. Or want.


----------



## jrizal (May 3, 2013)

+1


----------



## apvm (May 3, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> D90 > D5100



+1


----------



## CaptainNapalm (May 3, 2013)

yioties said:


> Some people like myself even if I had the money didn't want to spend the extra 500 for a D7000. I read up on all the Nikons up to the D7000 went to my local camera shop shot with all of them and liked the D5100 best. (D5200, D7100 weren't out yet)
> I still believe I made the best choice for my needs in a camera and can always upgrade keeping my existing camera as a second body.



You genuinely preferred the feel and functionality of the 5100 over the 7000? I've never heard anyone say that.  One of the things that drove me to sell my d5100 was the lack of functions and horrible build quality.  I also have a nikon d80 from years ago and even that has substantially better feel and build quality than the nikon d5100.  For just an extra few hundred dollars you get a mountain of features in a d7000 that you lack in the d5100 which in my opinion is worth the upgrade when starting out, especially if you're like most who end up growing out of their camera quickly as they mature in the hobby.


----------



## Ballistics (May 3, 2013)

CaptainNapalm said:


> yioties said:
> 
> 
> > Some people like myself even if I had the money didn't want to spend the extra 500 for a D7000. I read up on all the Nikons up to the D7000 went to my local camera shop shot with all of them and liked the D5100 best. (D5200, D7100 weren't out yet)
> ...



It's just a simple case of sour grapes.


----------



## greybeard (May 4, 2013)

I used a D5100 for about 8 months before getting my D7000 and image wise there is not much if any difference.  It is just a stripped down D7000.  Where the D7000 has a dedicated button and second wheel for many functions, you have to dive into the menu of the D5100 to do the same thing.  The D7000 does have a few functions like flash commander that aren't on the D5100 but most of the D7000 functions can be duplicated with the D5100, just not as easily.


----------



## StandingBear1983 (May 4, 2013)

I have also the D5100, and I'm happy with it you got nothing to worry about OP, though after 2 years of having it you kind of outgrow it naturally, but it will be always a great secondary video camera for me when i get the D800 soon. 

These days when the D7000 is going down in price very fast because of the coming of the new D7100, i would get the D7000 and not the D5100...its more bang for the buck these days...and it will not limit you after you learned all the basics, I say consider the D7000 at this time.


----------



## roxanadiaz057 (Jun 19, 2013)

You are taking D5100 is a nice choice. Following are the features of this camera :

CMOS Image Sensor
16.2 Megapixel Camera
Full HD Recording
3 inch Low-temperature Polysilicon TFT LCD Screen
ISO 100 - ISO 6400 Sensitivity
Focal Length: 18 - 55    These features are useful for clicking beautiful photos.So go for D5100


----------



## yioties (Jun 20, 2013)

When I outgrow the D5100 I will upgrade to a d600 and give my D5100 to my wife. I still believe it's a great camera for the money you are going to spend. For the price of a d7100 (body) you can get a d5100 with a kit lens a 50 or 35 1.8g and a 55-200 vr and still have money left over!


----------



## gregtallica (Jun 20, 2013)

greybeard said:


> I used a D5100 for about 8 months before getting my D7000 and image wise there is not much if any difference. It is just a stripped down D7000. Where the D7000 has a dedicated button and second wheel for many functions, you have to dive into the menu of the D5100 to do the same thing. The D7000 does have a few functions like flash commander that aren't on the D5100 but most of the D7000 functions can be duplicated with the D5100, just not as easily.



This is basically my experience. Girlfriend owns the D5100, used that for a long time. Upon getting the 7000, I can't, well, I prefer not to use the 5100. It's little in my hands, it's missing all the buttons that my fingers frequent. It's missing all the options that makes the D7000 a "big boy" camera. The 5100 to me now just feels like a toy designed to give teenage girls a tool they can be creative with.



That said, image wise it's a great camera. The images you can get from the camera are quite impressive. If you have the eye for the shot, you're not going to be limited in any way other than "convenience."


----------



## Tinderbox (UK) (Jun 20, 2013)

I did not realize that the D3200 and D5100 both only have 1 cross type auto focus point, when the D5200 has 9, quite a difference.

John.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 20, 2013)

yioties said:


> When I outgrow the D5100 I will upgrade to a d600 and give my D5100 to my wife. I still believe it's a great camera for the money you are going to spend. For the price of a d7100 (body) you can get a d5100 with a kit lens a 50 or 35 1.8g and a 55-200 vr and still have money left over!



What are you outgrowing exactly? These aren't sports bikes.

My D800 allows me to control my exposure easier than the D5100, and take better photos in the process. So in essence, the D5100 should be for the expert and the D800 should be the beginner camera.


----------



## yioties (Jun 20, 2013)

By the way i have outgrown 3 motorcycles so far. A Suzuki katana 600, a honda cbr 900, a R3 and now I'm riding a R1!


----------



## McRich (Jun 24, 2013)

I upgraded from D3000 to D5100.  It is a day and night different.
I can do tilt screen and it has a much higher ISO than D3000.  
D5100 has a remote control jack, D3000 doesn't have one
The image preview is much quicker than D3000.
It has auto bracketing, it only allows 3 exposures, but it is better than changing the shutter speed manually.
It can record video, but I don't use it


----------



## TonyMontanaSlot (Jun 24, 2013)

Outstanding performance/image quality. Handling and ergonomics could have been better. Great camera for the price!


greybeard said:


> That said, image wise it's a great camera. The images you can get from  the camera are quite impressive. If you have the eye for the shot,  you're not going to be limited in any way other than  "convenience."


Yes, sir!


----------

