Afternoon all. mrs rocket is a keen photographer and I would like to get her a DSLR for Xmas.
Just wondered if the 5100 is worth the extra over the 3100? Not too fussed about the fold-out screen tbh but is the 5100 a better choice for an improving amateur?
Cheers
Don't dismiss fold out screens, they're very handy imo. No experience of either camera though, you might want to budget for something other than the kit lens - you can get a nice 50mm prime for not much which imo is much more rewarding to use than any kit lens.
I've got a D3100, it's my first DSLR, I really like it. i'm saving my pennies for the 50mm lense
If they both have manual buttons you won't go far wrong with either.
Fold out screen has enabled me to get loads of pictures I never would have otherwise. It was a key consideration when I was shopping. Don't use it often of course, but every now and then it means shot vs no shot.
D3100 has no Fold out screen?
Normally i use the viewfinder but fold-out lets you take shots from the floor and from well above your head.
What is the price diff? D3100 has live view right?
price diff was about 180 quid. D3100 has live view
You could get a second lens for that price..
16.2 v 14.2 megapixel and full HD (1080p) video recording on the D5100.
The 5100 has the new sony sensor. The dynamic range difference is huge. It would be an easy choice for me.
i've the 3100 - great starter DSLR, buy this one if shes not used a DSLR before. very easy to use and doesnt loose much on spec, other than the screen, on the 5100. Theres a big marketing play on the 'built in' guide, but TBH it isnt up to much - it just points you in the right direction, but doesnt 'instruct' you on how to do any thing like a traditional manual would - eg taking shots like blured water, i know i need a slower shutter speed but forget how to change the setting, the guide just says 'reduce the shutter speed' pretty useless.
However If she is more experianced I'd go for the 5100.
Must it be a Nikon?
Canon 550D or Pentax K-r are both well thought of or pay a bit more and go for the Pentax K-5
The last one has the same Sony 16 mp sensor as the 5100, weather proofed and metal bodied with excellent high iso range, also got 90 quid cashback until end of Dec
I have the D3100 so might be biased. The swivel screen isn't a biggie for me as I prefer to have my eye to the viewfinder 99% of the time, but I can see it might be handy sometimes. The range of the d3100 is fantastic for low light shooting, and the VR lenses help with this, the D5100 would add another stop and a bit, but with a wall to lean on, mine will shoot in full night anyway without flash.
Both will do 1080 movies but more options on the 5100. However, both are great for making mini clips like watching your mate fall off a bike, but completely useless for stuff like recording the kids Christmas shows as the clip is limited to 10 minutes on both. If you want a camcorder for this stuff, the Nikons don't help.
Since the price difference is still pretty big, I don't think the D5100 is worth it as a first DSLR unless you're minted. As others have said, the non Nikon/Canons can give you a fantastic camera too for a bit less. My film camera was Pentax, but the K-r was a lot dearer last year so I jumped in with the Nikon and love it.
I had a play on d3100 with 50mm prime lense. To be honest, camera is fine but it doesn't have shutter speed control which is a big shame. You can only counter that by bumping into higher ISO. Overall as a starter camera think D3100 is a step forward from your usual point and shoot cameras. Other thing is ... it doesn't have in built auto focus so you will depend on lense to have it.
Personally if I had to consider vfm wise, would go for used D90 or D70 in worst scenario. So much more to offer from those babies.
HTH.
p.s. I opted to Canon 7D.
I like the fold out screens because you can turn them around when not in use to protect them, I just bought a canon 600d two weeks ago, they are very similar to the D5100, I had trouble deciding between the two, came down the fact I had a canon slr from about 15 years ago and stayed with what I know, had a play with the nikon and was very nice, ps I got a really good deal at bignorman dot com, worth checking out, PJ.
I had a play on d3100 with 50mm prime lense. To be honest, camera is fine but it doesn't have shutter speed control which is a big shame.
Eh?
What's the S mode do then?
Other thing is ... it doesn't have in built auto focus so you will depend on lense to have it.
Ehhh?
I'm pretty sure it has auto-focus!
Do you mean it doesn't have a body focus motor so isn't compatible with old screw-drive lenses?
hmmm, not sure of that ! 
I read a couple of mag reviews yesterday that said there's almost nowt in it between a D5100 and EOS600, just personal preference in terms of certain functions. One review did also say that the Canon just seemed, for some mysterious reason, to produce slightly more appealing photos at the end of the day. They didn't offer a real explanation, but I think it's an interesting point.
Hmm...thanks for the replies fellas. Would the difference in price (£160-ish) be enough to buy another lens e.g. a macro?
mrs.rocket likes taking pictures of butterflies & bugs etc.
rocketman - Member
Hmm...thanks for the replies fellas. Would the difference in price (£160-ish) be enough to buy another lens e.g. a macro?mrs.rocket likes taking pictures of butterflies & bugs etc.
You can get normal lenses that have a 'macro' function. But these will perhaps give you a 1:3 ratio or something similar, so not 'proper' macro (1:1). Something like this: http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/dclenses/17-70mmOS.htm, which would work OK as an all round lens & be not too bad at macro stuff. It is more than £300 though, so I'd go for a dedicated macro - even if it's something you save for & get at a future date .
If she likes taking pics of stuff like insects, she could probably do with a decent length macro; something like a 90mm or longer.
The Tamron 90mm macro consistently gets good reviews and is hard to beat for the price, but it does cost about £350.
OneStopDigital do it for about £260 if you don't mind buying from Hong Kong. Lots of happy customers online though. (People will moan at me now as you effectively aren't paying VAT, but they have a VAT guarantee, so if customs charge you, you send OneStopDigital the receipt & they refund you.
dokta - Member
I had a play on d3100 with 50mm prime lense. To be honest, camera is fine but it doesn't have shutter speed control which is a big shame. You can only counter that by bumping into higher ISO. Overall as a starter camera think D3100 is a step forward from your usual point and shoot cameras. Other thing is ... it doesn't have in built auto focus so you will depend on lense to have it.
Personally if I had to consider vfm wise, would go for used D90 or D70 in worst scenario. So much more to offer from those babies.
This is completely wrong.
The D3100 does have shutter speed control - as GrahamS points out, it's the S mode on the dial in the pic he posted above. The S in a box by the switch is single shot (as opposed to continuous shooting or self-timer).
The D3100 does have auto-focus. I think that dokta means it doesn't have it's own AF motor, so you have to get lenses that have AF motors built in. It's not a great issue, as there are tons of lenses with AF motors in them to choose from & you can always just manually focus a lens that doesn't have a motor in it.
While dokta's comment about the second hand D90 is worthwhile, it is quite a lot bigger. And 2nd hand prices are pretty lofty for the D90.
Ignore the 2nd hand D70 comment. It is an older camera than my D80 and the D3100 beats my D80 in sensor performance, so would absolutely slaughter a D70.
AIUI D3100, D5100, D7000 are essentially the same camera under the hood (same sensor & processor) with the performance limited/crippled in the lower models.
As the lens makes the biggest difference overall, a cheaper body and a better lens beats a more expensive body and cheap kit lens.
so not 'proper' macro (1:1)
That's not a huge issue for most people. All that's important is being able to get close up and a big picture.
molgrips - Member
so not 'proper' macro (1:1)
That's not a huge issue for most people. All that's important is being able to get close up and a big picture.
Yeah, but you'll get a bigger pic of the subject with a true macro lens.
I know a lot of people would perhaps prefer the versatility of a zoom lens that can do 'macro', over a dedicated macro lens, but thought it worth pointing out the difference, even if I have explained it in rather basic terms, as I don't fully get it myself.
An option for Macro on the cheap might be to get some close-up filters. These are basically magnifying glasses that attach to existing lenses (make sure you get the right size). A +2 and +4 filter gives macro-like abilities for a much cheaper price (say £30).
(The downside of filters is you have to get really close to the subject which will be a pain for butterflies)
Just reading about D5100 in latest PC Advisor Mag. - came out top in group test.
I was looking for DSLR recently, but ended up getting a Lumix G2 as it had consistently good reviews and seems to offer as much as a DSLR, but with less bulk. The price was also a consideration along with 5 year warranty at the time. Look on Amazon for reviews.
If you like taking close-ups I love the feature on the Lumix, when you use manual focus, that it enlarges a small area so you can be precise.
I think the fold out screen is important from talking to others, you might regret not going for this option.
The market now seems to be full of cameras that sit somewhere between a compact and an SLR. I'm guessing they're a great compromise, but I'm also guessing that's exactly what it is - a compromise. Despite their claims, surely it's still SLRs that win out on pure picture quality in a wide range of situations?
Despite their claims, surely it's still SLRs that win out on pure picture quality in a wide range of situations?
Down to sensor size and quality really. No fundamental reason why a non-SLR with a decent sensor (and lens) can't perform as well as an SLR.
It's important not to get hung up on picture quality. To get good pictures the photographer needs to recognise the shot and the camera needs to be able to capture it. High end compacts have the features to allow the photographer to control what it does. The finer points of detail and image quality are not THAT important really.
The only practical advantages of SLR over a high end compact are responsivness and the ability to change lenses. Which is also a curse, because typically the lens on a compact will be more versatile than the one you get on an SLR so you could find yourself wanting more lenses to be able to do what you want.
molgrips - Member
It's important not to get hung up on picture quality. To get good pictures the photographer needs to recognise the shot and the camera needs to be able to capture it. High end compacts have the features to allow the photographer to control what it does. The finer points of detail and image quality are not THAT important really.The only practical advantages of SLR over a high end compact are responsivness and the ability to change lenses. Which is also a curse, because typically the lens on a compact will be more versatile than the one you get on an SLR so you could find yourself wanting more lenses to be able to do what you want.
+1.
And practice, practice, practice. I find if I don't get out with my camera often, then my first hour or more is getting my mind back into it.
I used to take pictures almost daily and was much more switched on.
Down to sensor size and quality really. No fundamental reason why a non-SLR with a decent sensor (and lens) can't perform as well as an SLR.
Give it 5 years and flappy mirrors will be a thing of the past.
Give it 5 years and flappy mirrors will be a thing of the past.
Not for me, they won't! I'll be amazed if the OH let's me upgrade my D80 in the next 5 years!! 
I had a play on d3100 with 50mm prime lense. To be honest, camera is fine but it doesn't have shutter speed control which is a big shame.Eh?
What's the S mode do then?
M = Manual
S = Shutter Priority
A = Aperture Priority
P = Program ( I think)
And the 3100 does have full shutter speed control and auto-focus too, assuming you have an auto-focus lens
Reading the reviews of the new Nikon 1 mirror-less cameras, they seem to have an excellent auto-focus system and beat nearly all the top DSLRs on frame rate - will be interesting to see how things pan out...
Olympus reckon their latest Pens are a match for DSLR. Having tried one in a shop I certainly wouldn' dismiss that claim.
You must log in to post.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
