[chevelle]

Guys, i am a newbie in DSLR world. Till now had a ultrazoom and now i am planning to get a DSLR.

I am torn between D5100 and D7000. Price wise, there is a difference of $600 between the two with 18-55mm and 18-135mm lenses respectively.

I am also wondering if their respective replacements are coming up anytime soon. Any news on those?

How good are T4i and 60D from canon compared to D7000?. I have not heard many good reviews of T4i.

Looking at the difference, i am tilting a little towards D7000 but a few things that makes me hesitate are below

- no flip out lcd
- heavy
- $600 difference. (Can get a good lens for d5100)
- no in built hdr

But there are plenty of things to like for D7000

- built in focus motor
- 6 fps
- 39 focus points
- weather sealed
- ergonomics and quality is great
- 2 memory card slots
- less shutter lag
- less start up time
- faster max shutter speed.

Any advice regarding the two will be appreciated. I need to finalize in couple of days. I will mainly be using this to shoot anything to everything. So an all-rounder is preferred.

Thanks

[joslicx]

^^
As you are in US, get the D7000 with 18-200 lens instead of the kit one. I've seen mouthwatering $1500 for this combo on Amazon.

Buy a 35mm prime as well for low light. And you are set.

Nothing beats this. And dont worry about the replacements coming soon. That will keep happening forever. Best thing is to buy whatever is the best for you today and start shooting

[chevelle]

Originally Posted by joslicx

^^
As you are in US, get the D7000 with 18-200 lens instead of the kit one. I've seen mouthwatering $1500 for this combo on Amazon.

Buy a 35mm prime as well for low light. And you are set.

Nothing beats this. And dont worry about the replacements coming soon. That will keep happening forever. Best thing is to buy whatever is the best for you today and start shooting

Thanks for the info. Apart from the range what sets 18-200mm lens apart from 18-105mm?

I am just wondering if it is worth spending $200 more for essentially 95mm increase in range. Anything else that is special in that lens? I can instead spend those $200 getting a 35mm prime. What do you think of that?

[josejoseph]

Originally Posted by chevelle

Thanks for the info. Apart from the range what sets 18-200mm lens apart from 18-105mm?

I am just wondering if it is worth spending $200 more for essentially 95mm increase in range. Anything else that is special in that lens? I can instead spend those $200 getting a 35mm prime. What do you think of that?

chevelle, I have this combination of D7000 + Nikon 35mm f/1.8G + Nikon 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G.

Trust me, once you start using camera you'll always wish you have a longer zoom lens. That is why I went for 18-300 instead of 18-200 or 18-105mm.

I wanted a carry-around lens to stay on my camera and did not want to change my lens on every occasion so I went for 18-300. If you are not a professional photographer, and don't care too much about the image quality at higher zoom, then it is always better to get the 18-200 or 18-300.

Price difference of 18-200 & 18-300 is $150.

What I would say is get D7000 and a prime lens initially. Then you can rent any lens to know which one suits you. Since you are in Sacramento, you can try Borrow Lenses (http://www.borrowlenses.com/). They are located in San Carlos and you can either pick-up or they offer delivery.

I initially rented 18-200 and then 18-300. IIRC, they cost me around $60 each including insurance for a period 3 days. Based on my requirement I went for 18-300.

Thanks,
Jose

[chevelle]

Originally Posted by josejoseph

chevelle, I have this combination of D7000 + Nikon 35mm f/1.8G + Nikon 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G.

Trust me, once you start using camera you'll always wish you have a longer zoom lens. That is why I went for 18-300 instead of 18-200 or 18-105mm.

Price difference of 18-200 & 18-300 is $150.

What I would say is get D7000 and a prime lens initially. Then you can rent any lens to know which one suits you. Since you are in Sacramento, you can try Borrow Lenses (http://www.borrowlenses.com/). They are located in San Carlos and you can either pick-up or they offer delivery.

I initially rented 18-200 and then 18-300. IIRC, they cost me around $60 each including insurance for a period 3 days. Based on my requirement I went for 18-300.

Thanks,
Jose

Hi Jose,

Thanks for your opinion. Appreciate it.

If i would like to have an extended zoom, i will use my ultrazoom camera. With that i will easily get a 600mm range. That will be more than enough to satisfy my telephoto urge initially. Later on as i have money for extra lenses, i will go for the telephoto lens.

Renting a lens is really a good option. I will look into that.

Regarding the price difference, amazon has a good deal on 18-200mm lens which with body is just $1500. Basically half price of what it is selling for on amazon itself. While, the 18-300mm is a cool $1000 more as a stand alone. Moreover it is not including in the promotional savings too. So as of now, i am confused between 18-105mm and 18-200mm only. I will get 35mm prime lens for sure. May be in future i will get a 55-300mm to satisfy my telephoto urge.

Initially, i want to just get it started with a kit in order to get more comfortable. I can explore more lenses later on with the rent-the-lens option.

[rameshnanda]

Originally Posted by chevelle

Initially, i want to just get it started with a kit in order to get more comfortable. I can explore more lenses later on with the rent-the-lens option.

I own D7000 with the 35mm prime lens. I am more inclined towards 28-300 as this is fx lens and would do good when I switch over to FX camera in future. Think about this too. What ever you spend on lenses are an investment.

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by chevelle

Thanks for the info. Apart from the range what sets 18-200mm lens apart from 18-105mm?

I am just wondering if it is worth spending $200 more for essentially 95mm increase in range. Anything else that is special in that lens? I can instead spend those $200 getting a 35mm prime. What do you think of that?

Well D7000 + 35mm prime is very good. I suggested the 18-200 as I remembered seeing it being offered for such less price on amazon alongwith the D7000.

vis-a-vis the 18-105, the benefits are - much better build quality, metal mount (18-105 has a plastic one that can break if you are not careful enough in handling - and on a heavy body like the D7000 the chances of that are more) and also the extra 95mm range is useful (esp in US as you have lots of avenues of using that if you like nature/wildlife photography).

That said, you can alternatively consider the Nikkor 16-85 lens if you can get any good price on that. It is a bit sharper lens than the 18-200 and is wider as well. This is the lens I am planning to buy as my walkaround lens alongwith the 35mm prime.

However if you want to attend games there and shoot that, then it will be better to consider the Nikon EOS 60D or the 7D (if you have the budget for that). Canon's burst mode is better than these Nikons (the buffer in Nikons fills up too soon).

[R2D2]

Though this update belongs to the EVIL camera thread, posting it here as we were discussing it earlier. Sony has introduced the 24MP NEX7 in India with the A99 SLT soon to follow. No prices stated.

http://www.sony.co.in/product/nex-7k

http://www.sony.co.in/product/slt-a99v

[Omtoatom]

Guys - I've finally made up my mind. I'm going to get the D600 soon. Stepping up to full-frame now!

Joslicx - I think you mean the Canon 60D in your post above, wrongly shows as Nikon. Mods: please edit.

And I agree with you buddy, for shooting continuous action/games and video, the Canons offer far more versatility and generally outperform the Nikons. I've used a 7D - amazing all-round camera - pretty much one of the finest APS-C DSLRs that money can buy.

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by Omtoatom

Guys - I've finally made up my mind. I'm going to get the D600 soon. Stepping up to full-frame now!

Joslicx - I think you mean the Canon 60D in your post above, wrongly shows as Nikon. Mods: please edit.

And I agree with you buddy, for shooting continuous action/games and video, the Canons offer far more versatility and generally outperform the Nikons. I've used a 7D - amazing all-round camera - pretty much one of the finest APS-C DSLRs that money can buy.

Congratulations. The D600 is such a wonderful buy. Will look forward to your pics. What camera are you using right now?

And yes, I meant Canon EOS 60D there. Thanks for correcting me. I wish I could edit the post now and correct it. Guess Nikon is too deeply entranched in my psyche now

The 7D is good but is very expensive (with the 15-85 lens it costs upwards of 1.3L!!). And I've read it loses out to the Nikon D7000 in image quality as well. I think its much older than the D7000 as well. So its replacement might also be around the corner? The Canon guys here would know more about that probably.

[Behemoth]

Originally Posted by Omtoatom

Guys - I've finally made up my mind. I'm going to get the D600 soon. Stepping up to full-frame now!

Go for it buddy! This is the one I got when I upgraded from my D90 recently. I am quite happy with the results. There are some adjustments/ differences which will take getting used to, but it is great once you get used to it!

Regards,
Behemoth

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Omtoatom

Guys - I've finally made up my mind. I'm going to get the D600 soon. Stepping up to full-frame now!

Congrats! That's a great choice. Are you buying the kit? The kit lens is good to start you off.

Do make sure that you buy good glass to accompany this body. Leaving aside the expensive professional lenses, here's what I'd recommend you get:

a) The 1st lens is the 50mm 1.8G, or if you have the budget the 50mm 1.4G for those low light shots. One of these is a must have.

b) A great walk-about lens is the 28-300mm VR2, OR if you are willing to sacrifice a bit at the short end, the 70-300 VR2 that costs far less than the 28-300. The latter is a great lens for the price.

Good luck and have fun!

[Omtoatom]

Originally Posted by joslicx

Congratulations. The D600 is such a wonderful buy. Will look forward to your pics. What camera are you using right now?

Thank you. Like I said, I've got the 7D and the D90. The Canon goes to my brother, the Nikon stays with me

Originally Posted by joslicx

And yes, I meant Canon EOS 60D there. Thanks for correcting me. I wish I could edit the post now and correct it. Guess Nikon is too deeply entranched in my psyche now

Hahaha indeed it is, my friend. And you're welcome

Originally Posted by joslicx

The 7D is good but is very expensive (with the 15-85 lens it costs upwards of 1.3L!!). And I've read it loses out to the Nikon D7000 in image quality as well. I think its much older than the D7000 as well. So its replacement might also be around the corner? The Canon guys here would know more about that probably.

I agree. It is a little overpriced especially for a crop sensor camera. But it is also lightening quick with its dual DIGIC 4 processors, has fabulous build quality and produces images of stunning detail. I think Canon managed to position it uniquely and somehow succeeded!

The 7D is not that older than the D7K - just under a year actually. Despite a lot of buzz to the contrary, I don't think a direct replacement/upgrade to the 7D is anywhere on the anvil. The 7D continues to rake up the numbers in the US, Europe and Australia. Like I said, easily one of Canon's best-selling models despite its stiff pricing.

However technically though not a replacement, Canon has already announced the EOS 6D which features a 20.2 MP full-frame sensor. Pitted directly against the D600. Those 2 going head-to-head should be mouth-watering!

Originally Posted by Behemoth

Go for it buddy! This is the one I got when I upgraded from my D90 recently. I am quite happy with the results. There are some adjustments/ differences which will take getting used to, but it is great once you get used to it!

Thanks Behemoth.

[Omtoatom]

Originally Posted by R2D2

Congrats! That's a great choice. Are you buying the kit? The kit lens is good to start you off.

Thank you R2D2. I'm most likely going with the body only.

Originally Posted by R2D2

a) The 1st lens is the 50mm 1.8G.

b) The 70-300 VR2 that costs far less than the 28-300. The latter is a great lens for the price.

I already have the 50mm 1.8G and the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G - both FX lenses from my D90. So no sweat there buddy!

Thanks for the recommendation though

[chevelle]

Originally Posted by joslicx

Well D7000 + 35mm prime is very good. I suggested the 18-200 as I remembered seeing it being offered for such less price on amazon alongwith the D7000.

vis-a-vis the 18-105, the benefits are - much better build quality, metal mount (18-105 has a plastic one that can break if you are not careful enough in handling - and on a heavy body like the D7000 the chances of that are more) and also the extra 95mm range is useful (esp in US as you have lots of avenues of using that if you like nature/wildlife photography).

That said, you can alternatively consider the Nikkor 16-85 lens if you can get any good price on that. It is a bit sharper lens than the 18-200 and is wider as well. This is the lens I am planning to buy as my walkaround lens alongwith the 35mm prime.

However if you want to attend games there and shoot that, then it will be better to consider the Nikon EOS 60D or the 7D (if you have the budget for that). Canon's burst mode is better than these Nikons (the buffer in Nikons fills up too soon).

Thanks a lot for your suggestion. I will get the D7000 with 18-200mm.

I don't plan to attend games here so it won't bother me much. Thanks