[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

In the last twelve months I have bought 3 cameras and a bunch of other gear from Camshot. Prices are as low as anywhere else I have seen, and I have had no issues post purchase of any kind.

+1 to Camshot. Though I haven't purchased any Nikon gear from this place, I did purchase the Fuji XE1 kit + 2 Fuji X mount lenses and 2 Olympus m43rd lenses from them. Trustworthy folks

Recommended..with the only caveat being they are not authorised Nikon dealers.

Originally Posted by ajay_satpute

So as it stands now, I am almost sold on D5200. The prices vary so much between various sellers. I also want to check out few retailers by visiting their stores in flesh before finalizing. All of us have mixed experiences of all online stores, some good, some bad. What I want to know is if I should strictly avoid any particular online store.

Thanks a lot to everyone for their helpful posts and guidance.

Ajay, so you finally on your way to becoming a Nikonian! Great.

Do visit them in person. Also, another guy I'd recommend is Mahavir Photo Studio on Bajirao Road. They quote competitive prices AND are authorised Nikon dealers. Also IIRC you used to recommend Camshot for their pricing, right?

[ajay_satpute]

Originally Posted by R2D2

Ajay, so you finally on your way to becoming a Nikonian! Great.

Do visit them in person. Also, another guy I'd recommend is Mahavir Photo Studio on Bajirao Road. They quote competitive prices AND are authorised Nikon dealers. Also IIRC you used to recommend Camshot for their pricing, right?

Thanks man. There was lot of confusion between Canon and Nikon. The major factor in favour of Canon was the built-in auto focus motor even in the lowest end models. However Nikon makes more sense for me as a beginner since there are lots of Nikon lenses in the affordable range (<30k), where as Canon has very few.

Thanks for the name of the dealer. I will surely check with him very soon.

Now Camshot. I used to recommend Camshot always since they always give a flat 12% discount on MRP of any camera of any company. But, I can see 3 to 4 dealers offering even lower prices than Camshot and that too in the range of 3-4k. Secondly, Camshot not being the official delaer, makes me think otherwisei have not discarded them at all.

[R2D2]

Nikon announces new products:

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/08/06/ni...nnounced.aspx/

The 18-140 is an interesting FL and is expected to be a kit lens according to NR

There may be a new body announced in the near future, hopefully the much delayed D400. Should that happen you can be sure Canon will announce the 7D Mk2.

Originally Posted by ajay_satpute

However Nikon makes more sense for me as a beginner since there are lots of Nikon lenses in the affordable range (<30k), where as Canon has very few.

What type of shooting will you do & which lenses do you plan going in for?

Over time set aside some money not just for lenses but accessories like filters, bags, tripods. Well, you get my drift...bottomless pit and all.

Good luck in the final lap of the price evaluations and let us know what you finally pay.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by R2D2

+1 to Camshot. Though I haven't purchased any Nikon gear from this place, I did purchase the Fuji XE1 kit + 2 Fuji X mount lenses and 2 Olympus m43rd lenses from them. Trustworthy folks

My picture taking is mostly of people, close cropped portraits. I use my d7000 based system for most of that, brilliant results.
I also have a Fuji x100, that isn't as well suited for that. But it is a lovely little camera, which I still have to fully master. Although I don't use it as much, I can't bring myself to sell it, even though I am looking for a small sized picture taker, that is pocketable and will give low light no flash pictures of d7000 quality for prints up to 11x14 inches. I am sorely tempted by the x20 just now, although it isn't as pocketable as the Sony rx100. Or the rx100 ii, that is around the corner. But the x20 has a drool worthy form factor, which seems to be a Fuji trait.
I considered the XF 1 too, but I was put off by the not so robust feeling from the lens arrangement. In some respects it is better than the x20 - more pocketable, and with option of shooting at 6mp for better IQ.

[R2D2]

@Sawyer, I think the Sony R100 and RX1 and their upcoming successors are simply too expensive for "disposable' compact cameras. This factor is a distinct turn off.

When I wanted smaller cameras to lug around I chose the Olympus for my wife and Fuji XE 1 for myself. Yes, they don't beat the RX100 in portability or pocketability but offer other advantages including interchangeable lenses. I thought of the Fuji X100/X100s but that again is not something I want to explore. I have heard of and seen people put these up for sale <12 months after buying them. Not sure why though.

For sheer pocketability my old Sony PNS will do.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by R2D2

@Sawyer, I think the Sony R100 and RX1 and their upcoming successors are simply too expensive for "disposable' compact cameras.

I thought of the Fuji X100/X100s but that again is not something I want to explore. I have heard of and seen people put these up for sale <12 months after buying them. Not sure why though.

Expensive is subjective. Having said that, the rx1 is too rich for my tastes too, but the rx100 @ around 30k suits. And it isn't "disposable". Now that I am used to d7000/x100 IQ, I can't use a PNS. And my need for interchangeable lenses is fully covered by the d7000 based system.

People sell the x100 because it is a quirky camera that forces one to think about the picture more than most people want to. For street and discreet picture taking, it has few equals, once it has been understood and mastered. Also, one zooms by walking. Which can be a good thing too.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

Expensive is subjective. Having said that, the rx1 is too rich for my tastes too, but the rx100 @ around 30k suits. And it isn't "disposable". Now that I am used to d7000/x100 IQ, I can't use a PNS.

Yes expensive is always subjective. Compared to some of my FX gear the Sony cameras sound reasonable. But what I get in return for my money does not please me as much as buying a Nikon would.

I paid about 21K for my Sony PNS years ago. And I know there would not have been anybody willing to buy it even if I had sold it a year or two after purchase. I fear the value of the RX100 will plummet similarly. The RX1 is too expensive for anybody but the most die hard enthusiast to consider.

[Sawyer]

Fuji is probably releasing x30 soon, fixed lens zoom, like the 20, but with a 1 inch sensor like the rx100, so I will probably wait to see that before deciding. I prefer Fuji to Sony, where possible.
What advantages do you obtain from the XE1 over a comparable priced DSLR? And the cons?

[adc]

Originally Posted by ajay_satpute

So as it stands now, I am almost sold on D5200.

I am trying to get prices from various online stores and they are as follows:

I just assisted yesterday one of my good friend for a buy on Nikon 5200 here in Kolkata. A fantastic camera by itself and among other features, high ISO picture quality is really good.

He bought nikon d5200 [body only] for Rs 34,200 here from a camera shop.

Online if you are looking for a great deal with kit, it is on right now at Rs 37,727 - and just 2 more units are available.

http://www.ebay.in/itm/121153031918

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

What advantages do you obtain from the XE1 over a comparable priced DSLR? And the cons?

4 Advantages:

a) compact size
b) EVF
c) JPG is usable SOTC
d) Quality of lenses is very good to excellent, speaking IQ and build wise. This includes the kit lens

6 Cons:
a) Fuji RAW is not compatible or not optimised to work with many PP software packages because of the proprietary sensor layout. That support is increasing. Hopefully Fuji shares optimised RAW decoders with software publishers ASAP. This hasn't made a difference to me as I generally use JPGs.
b) Sluggish AF, the current firmware improves it a bit
c) Cost. XE1 is not inexpensive. It is 'near the same price as a D7100 kit. Lenses are limited in number but well made and have good IQ which means they are pretty expensive compared to most DX grade lenses from Nikon.
d) Low resale values compared with N/C cameras
e) Service and support network not as good as N/C
f) No in body image stabilisation

IMO, there are more cons than pluses - so people thinking of buying a Fuji should pause and think before taking the plunge. I bought this camera only for its compact size and IQ...as a portable solution compared to my Nikons. My lens collection is limited to 3 only including the kit lens. Wife uses the Olympus OMD..she hates my Nikon DSLRs calling them big, ugly.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by R2D2

b) EVF

b) Sluggish AF, the current firmware improves it a bit

f) No in body image stabilisation

Wife uses the Olympus OMD..she hates my Nikon DSLRs calling them big, ugly.

Why is the XE1 EVF an advantage over say, a d7000 VF?

Sluggish AF, I agree, compared to DSLRs/OMD. But from what I have read, when it does focus, it is very accurate.

IS - Few if any DSLRs have it?

My d7000 kit is heavy, but what's the point of lifting weights in a gym if that is a deterrent?! More of a problem is that it isn't discreet.

I doubt that I will move across to Fuji for a system, because the XE1 with the kit zoom isn't small in any case - or not small enough to encourage the move. Instead a x100/x30 combination may serve my needs better. More so, since I already have the ef42 flash unit.

[freakmuzik]

Friends, I've finalised on a 600d after waiting for such a long time and am placing my order today on Flipkart. I'l be getting the 600d with 18-55 kit lens, 4GB card and an 8 GB card (class 10), UV filter, Tripod, Camera bag and a lens cleaner. I'l be getting all this under 30k. And that's when I saw an offer on a Tamron AF 70-300mm lens and I can get it for 6.9k. So in total, it will sum up at around 37k for the whole set of the cam, 18-55 kit lens and the 70-300 tamron along with the other free stuffs. I'm a beginner and I am equally interested in videos too. So do you think I can go for the 70-300 too?

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

Why is the XE1 EVF an advantage over say, a d7000 VF?.

We have had detailed discussions on the EVF v/s OVF in the TBHP Mirrorless camera thread..you should find some inputs there. I prefer an OVF but the EVF does have its advantages like real time updates of exposure compensation on the image etc . BTW, I haven't used DX cameras extensively so not very conversant about the VFs, only that they are comparatively dim and small with limited frame coverage.

Originally Posted by Sawyer

Sluggish AF, I agree, compared to DSLRs/OMD. But from what I have read, when it does focus, it is very accurate..

Yes but that's not comforting to me because I've missed shots waiting for the silly camera to lock on. Very unlike my Nikons which have razor sharp reflexes by comparison. But there's been an improvement since the firmware update.

Originally Posted by Sawyer

IS - Few if any DSLRs have it? ..

Sony DSLTs have it. I know its not a DSL"R" in the strictest sense of the word but close enough coz it uses a mirror and sized like a DSLR. That said I'd have preferred IBIS because it reduces cost of lenses & as far as my experience with the 5 axis Olympus IBIS goes, it works very well too. Light weight is a virtue to an limit but detrimental to stability which is why I prefer stabilisation built in. Oh yeah, I also forgot to mention MLC cameras have under-par ergonomics once again due to their size...cramped buttons, difficult to grip/hold among other pains that I notice.

Originally Posted by Sawyer

My d7000 kit is heavy, but what's the point of lifting weights in a gym if that is a deterrent?! More of a problem is that it isn't discreet..

I don't lift weights at the gym preferring to jog or walk..so my POV is a bit different. Discreteness is another great advantage of the Fuji & other MLCs or compact cameras, which I like but forgot to add. The Nikons or other DSLRs, especially full frame bodies and lenses, are too in-your-face and attract attention sometimes unwanted as well.

[manim]

Just received my new prime lens!

It had been two years since I had bought my Nikon D3100 and had been itching for an upgrade!
Bought from Flipkart for Rs.12,912 (read on this thread that they are not an official dealer so no warranty, but took a risk since I trusted Flipkart).

I wanted to use this for vacation, family, friends and street photography.

As I see it there are these advantages over the kit-lens:
1) Aperture upto 1.8, so good for low light indoor shots.
2) Small-size and low weight.
3) Sharper and better picture-quality.

My kit-lens also appears to be damaged a bit. It works but there is a shake in the focus ring so I will be using my new prime as my only lens always.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by R2D2

BTW, I haven't used DX cameras extensively so not very conversant about the VFs, only that they are comparatively dim and small with limited frame coverage.

The 7000 has a decent VF/focus point visibility - even with my 16-85 zoomed in where the aperture drops to 5.6. Much better than the 3 and 5 bodies - the FX bodies are of course a further step better. I don't find a great difference between its VF and the EVF on the X100.
The nice thing about the X100/XE1 also is that they looks like precision instruments, not a weapon of self defense as the 7000 can look like.

Originally Posted by manim

Just received my new prime lens!
As I see it there are these advantages over the kit-lens:
1) Aperture upto 1.8, so good for low light indoor shots.
2) Small-size and low weight.
3) Sharper and better picture-quality.
My kit-lens also appears to be damaged a bit. It works but there is a shake in the focus ring so I will be using my new prime as my only lens always.

Brilliant little lens, the 35 1.8 G. Light, good optics, a normal perspective, and a tool to learn more about the art of picture taking. Be aware though that it needs faster shutter speeds/higher ISO than the VR equipped kit lens to eliminate camera shake induced blur, for flashless low light work. The advantage of the 35 in use is the shallow depth of field in decent light. And better image quality, when used correctly.