Originally Posted by joslicx (Post 3227911)

I'd second Sawyer here with the recommendation. But I'd suggest Nikon 5100 instead. 5100 + 18-55 lens + SB400 will still cost you less than 35k. The difference in price between 3100 and 5100 is not much but 5100 has the same high quality sensor as D7000 so its a good deal.

Am I confusing you even more or what :) BTW, I use a mirrorless (Olypmus OM-D) just like Samurai.

Originally Posted by Sawyer (Post 3227974)

That's what I was trying to avoid - talk of the 5100 and someone would say that the 3200 at the same price is the better deal!
All good cameras, but the sensible way is to define a budget and live within it.

Originally Posted by voyageur (Post 3227821)

Its so true that we don't use up all the feautres of our camera. Its really true. So if I buy something good in that range, I can concentrate more on lens.

Originally Posted by voyageur (Post 3228017)

I started my research with Canon EOS 1100D and here I am searching for D5100 and D5200.
Confusion part is always there. I am confused from day 2 of the search.

Originally Posted by voyageur (Post 3228017)

Do you know what the fun part is !! I started my research with Canon EOS 1100D and here I am searching for D5100 and D5200. Do you by any chance had an experience with canon. I wanted to know about Canon 600D which shares the same price as D5100. dpreviews has given a higher rating to 600d while some site recommends D5100.

Confusion part is always there. I am confused from day 2 of the search.

Originally Posted by vaisakhr (Post 3228067)

It is true. Being a beginner it is better to have a basic body.

Originally Posted by joslicx (Post 3228090)

If you have any friends/family who own DSLRs and SLR accessories already and who can share with you then you might wanna invest in the system they own!

Originally Posted by nilanjanray (Post 3228103)

Well, that also depends on whether someone has been shooting in the Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority or Manual modes before going for a DSLR.

If one has reasonable competence with having control over a camera, the basic entry level DSLR might not satisfy that person - where many things are driven through Menu options instead of through dedicated buttons.

Originally Posted by vaisakhr (Post 3228132)

By basic, I didn't mean 1100D. Apologies if that made a confusion. I know him personally, d5100/5200 suggestion was from me. As a beginner I think it would suit him very well. It may not have dedicated buttons, but that's a costly affair, isn't? Being a beginner he won't be rushing towards the manual controls and stuff. IMO, it will help him learn the way around a dslr.

Originally Posted by vaisakhr (Post 3228067)

It is true. Being a beginner it is better to have a basic body. Invest on lenses, learn the techniques and upgrade the body later on. For that you need to fix a brand because you are keeping the lenses. I would strongly suggest you to go for the wide ranged kit lenses like the 18-105 of nikon or 18-135 of canon. Later on you can add a telephoto and prime.


Every one have the same problem buddy. As you know am using d7k now. But that wasn't my target when I started my research. I was waiting for the d5200. I waited a whole month (dec '12) for that to launch. At last I ended up buying d7000. For the first few days I thought why did I spend this much on my first dslr. But after that am in absolute love with it. You won't get bored with this camera, with any camera for that matter. There is something new about it every time, every time it flips the mirror am sure that am improving myself. Its not about what you are having, its about how you are using them. So leave all the brands and confusions. Select a body which suits your pocket and go for it ;)

Originally Posted by joslicx (Post 3228090)

well last year I was in your shoes for about 6 months! I read about almost all of consumer DSLRs out there and had zeroed in on Nikon D7000 finally. In my case the photographers I've been most influenced by (Nasim Mansurov, Ming Thein) are mostly Nikon people so I favored Nikon. Then I came across the mirrorless page on this forum and started reading about them. Finally I ditched the D7000 and bought the Oly OM-D EM5. Cant say I regret the decision. I mostly like to shoot streetscapes (do not have the energy anymore to go after wildlife or any sports really) and my family. The OM-D is just perfect for that.

Believe me the confusion will go once you buy the thing. They are all almost same, both Canon and Nikon. Both are good enough for almost all of us! If you have any friends/family who own DSLRs and SLR accessories already and who can share with you then you might wanna invest in the system they own!

Originally Posted by nilanjanray (Post 3228103)

Well, that also depends on whether someone has been shooting in the Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority or Manual modes before going for a DSLR.

If one has reasonable competence with having control over a camera, the basic entry level DSLR might not satisfy that person - where many things are driven through Menu options instead of through dedicated buttons.

Better to go for a body - if budget permits - that will suffice for 2-3 years at least.

Originally Posted by Sawyer (Post 3228109)

That is perhaps the most sensible way to decide which of the two makes to go for. Canon and Nikon keep swapping the tech lead, but both are there for the long run - which is the most important consideration if you are looking for retaining invested value.

Originally Posted by vaisakhr (Post 3228132)

By basic, I didn't mean 1100D. Apologies if that made a confusion. I know him personally, d5100/5200 suggestion was from me. As a beginner I think it would suit him very well. It may not have dedicated buttons, but that's a costly affair, isn't? Being a beginner he won't be rushing towards the manual controls and stuff. IMO, it will help him learn the way around a dslr.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray (Post 3228163)

Both D5100 and D5200 have fantastic sensors, and would provide excellent image quality. Nikon does have a slight lead in terms of image quality for crop sensor cameras at the moment. The D5200 has pretty good AF as well, and is an amazing value for money body.

Originally Posted by aravindwarrier (Post 3229839)

... add some fresh new angle to the confusion?

Originally Posted by DerAlte (Post 3229865)

MLCs - <80% cost of DSLRs for 80-100% picture quality? Despite the currently slightly anemic lens range. More than price, it all depends on what you intend to do with a camera.

Originally Posted by aravindwarrier (Post 3229884)

... I went thru Samurai's thread on MILC/EVIL cameras page by page. ... Apart from that, most of the MILCs are costlier than DSLRs. Lens range/cost too are prohibitive. ...

Originally Posted by DerAlte (Post 3229920)

Excellent. Do you have any old Canon lenses lying around or something (you commented about lens interchangeability of EOS-M)?

One word of caution though: generalizing characteristics in comparison actually goes against your interest as it becomes an apples to oranges comparison. If you drill down one level deeper, perhaps you will find some costs justified, and find something that is justified for you.

I agree, E/PL3, V1, J1 and even EOS-M are not worth it. But NEX 3N at 28K with a 16-50 or 18-55 lens might be. Here, it is the sensor which justifies the camera, and it has a built-in flash. The EVF is a deterrent, though, for anyone for whom peering through OVF is second nature.

Originally Posted by aravindwarrier (Post 3229965)

... The entire combo of Body+Kit+zoom+prime for 31k:Shockked: I am sure there is a catch or its another scam ...

Originally Posted by aravindwarrier (Post 3229839)

Can someone fish me out of this dilemma, or add some fresh new angle to the confusion?