[ampere]

Originally Posted by ashwin.terminat

600D or the D5200?

Feel both the DSLRs bodies in terms of ergonomics and then see which one you are comfortable with. I wont suggest which one to use between a Canon and Nikon. Because that can be biased. From a lens eco-system point of view, I find the Canon nomenclature much easier to chose from, than Nikon. (Thats my perception).

And also note, if you spend 100 Rs on a photography equipment, its only 30 Rs which goes to body. The rest should be towards the lens.

[ashwin.terminat]

Originally Posted by girimajiananth

If you are a first timer , there is not a lot of difference between the two. Most people suggest what they have been using. I have been using Nikon and I find the ergonomics comfortable.Just find out which one offers a better ISO range and has lesser noise at higher ISO. Less noise at higher ISO is always better.

Originally Posted by ampere

Feel both the DSLRs bodies in terms of ergonomics and then see which one you are comfortable with. I wont suggest which one to use between a Canon and Nikon. Because that can be biased. From a lens eco-system point of view, I find the Canon nomenclature much easier to chose from, than Nikon. (Thats my perception).

And also note, if you spend 100 Rs on a photography equipment, its only 30 Rs which goes to body. The rest should be towards the lens.

Thanks for the replies guys.

So you suggest I decide solely based on ergonomics?

Or is there anything else I could use to break the deadlock?

[girimajiananth]

Originally Posted by ashwin.terminat

Thanks for the replies guys.

So you suggest I decide solely based on ergonomics?

Or is there anything else I could use to break the deadlock?

Ergonomics is a key factor here, it must be easy to adjust ISO, shutter speed and aperture quickly. You must not end up fiddling for buttons .

[Dry Ice]

Originally Posted by condor

@Dry Ice, can you share stats of how many pics you have taken with the 10-20 vs other lenses ? And for good measure, even if approximate, how many pics do you see in the other threads here which are with UWA' vs other lenses ? You could even select pics by only those who have UWA & other lenses

I do agree with you that a UWA is very useful up there. But there will be more opportunities for pics with other lenses. The 35 mm, the 50mm & lower half of the 70-300 (that ToyotaFan has) can get used much more. Just that, Mountains are not only about UWA's.

As far as my pics go, all of them. Hardly 10 or 15 with a friend's 70-200.
But, if you go comparing like that, there might be more pics with P&S here of Ladakh - so does that imply that a P&S is the best choice then?

About opportunities of pics with other lenses, sorry, but I disagree. You can't generalize like that - it's an individual's choice afterall. You might be happy with just a 70-200, I won't be.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by ashwin.terminat

Help required for an amateur getting his first DSLR.

I'm confused between the Canon 600D and the Nikon D5200.

The guys at Chroma were suggesting Nikon D5200.

But I'd rather hear from the experienced chaps here.

600D or the D5200?

If you have the budget, get the D5300. It is the latest in the D5xxx series and offers
. Faster Processor, so the video is faster, burst rate is faster and high ISO noise is less
. No low pass filter, hence the images are sharper

If you do not need the Swivel Screen, GPS and WiFi, then a D3300 is a better and a much cheaper buy. It has the same sensor and processor as the D5300 without all its gizmos, so the image quality is the same. In fact it is an ideal camera if you like things to be plain and simple.

Originally Posted by ToyotaFan

......

I took landscapes with my 18-135mm lens last time I was there. That was the only lens i had at the time. Though the results were good they were no where near what I see in the travelogues now a days. I wanted to take better pictures so if you can 1 lens that might be useful or even a filter if it is useful I will be highly obliged.

Good images need not require better/expensive equipment. In good light e images taken by Cell Phones and P&S cameras can give the DSLR a run for its money. To get a reasonably good shot in these cameras is easy, in a DSLR requires all the settings to be perfect.

Another fact that we tend to ignore is that Zooms, especially non professional ones, are inferior in sharpness and micro contrast compared to prime lenses. Shooting technique also contributes a lot. A wide range zoom is fine when you just want to document what you saw while traveling, but if you want good, sharp images then it is good lenses (mostly primes) and a good technique. A tripod helps a lot in eliminating camera shake.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by ashwin.terminat

Thanks for the replies guys.

So you suggest I decide solely based on ergonomics?

Or is there anything else I could use to break the deadlock?

All other things being equal, the Nikon sensor in the D5200 is better than the 600D's in terms of dynamic range and MP. That makes a difference in certain situations.

[Traveller Nayak]

I would put myself in the category of being an enthusiast in terms of photography. I have owned a Nikon SLR since 2003 and a Sony point and shoot past about 3 years. I could move to the DSLR very recently as I got bogged down with a housing loan, some investments and a related personal loan.

Things are looking up so am I - bought the D5300 with stock 18-55mm.

I am exploring having a zoom lens but confused as to which one to buy. I also don't want to buy something which will not have a tangible benefit.

My interests are in: landscape/portrait/nature and I love travelling (which is also becoming a recurring phenomenon). I am scheduled for a Leh drive end of August.

As I read this again - I realised I have put down all categories. Therefore, if I were to put it other way - when I have a camera in my hand, I am happy clicking anything interesting.

I was exploring Nikon 18-300 mm. Costly. Also, from what I read in one of the posts, it (or 55-300mm) may not give picture sharpness. Instead suggestion was around 70-300 mm.

In 70-300 mm I would assume one should go for the below with VR and not the other one.

VR

http://www.flipkart.com/nikon-af-s-v...3-0444d9dd012f

non VR

http://www.flipkart.com/nikon-af-zoo...8-072330afeb89

I also saw a Sigma 150-500 mm. (am I getting overly enthusiastic here?)

http://www.flipkart.com/sigma-150-50...3-7084558e5569

I am conscious I will have to build up the assets over the next 1- 2 years. More as learn and acquire as against try and get everything at one go. And, possibly also invest in another body.

For my immediate need for Leh trip, I have:

1. Sony P&S (I am unable to recollect the model) but it is a decent one with good results

2. D5300 with 18-55mm

3. Which is the other lens should I get? 70-300 mm with VR?

And, a related question: which lens cleaning kit should I go for?

Thanks in advance and grateful for guidance.

[null]

^^ I am impressed with the 55-200 VR lens which I picked up from Flipkart@7.3K few weeks back for my D5200. I had posted a query around it couple of pages earlier. The photos come out pretty good even at 200mm and not really seeing any major shake effects on the stills. Since I have got it, this is mounted on the camera for all photos (just like the earlier 50mm prime which I was soo obsessed with).

[condor]

Originally Posted by Traveller Nayak

I was exploring Nikon 18-300 mm. Costly. Also, from what I read in one of the posts, it (or 55-300mm) may not give picture sharpness. Instead suggestion was around 70-300 mm.

My take:
18-300 though a VR, is still a general lens and wont be as sharp as a 70-200 or even a 70-300

About the 70-300 - definitely a VR.
IMO, between the 70-300 vs 55-300, the 70-300 is likely to be better.

For your trip, also suggest one UWA - may be the Tokina 11-16 (type II .. with a motor), or a Nikkor UWA.

[Traveller Nayak]

Originally Posted by condor

For your trip, also suggest one UWA - may be the Tokina 11-16 (type II .. with a motor), or a Nikkor UWA.

Thanks condor. Is the below what you are referring to?

http://www.flipkart.com/tokina-at-x-...CDHHF3YJRAZFCE

[condor]

Yes, but I would prefer to check & buy. Even for a new one. Take a few test shots in day light, see the image (not just on the camera), and then buy.

[NetfreakBombay]

Originally Posted by Traveller Nayak

Things are looking up so am I - bought the D5300 with stock 18-55mm.

I am exploring having a zoom lens but confused as to which one to buy. I also don't want to buy something which will not have a tangible benefit.

My interests are in: landscape/portrait/nature and I love travelling (which is also becoming a recurring phenomenon). I am scheduled for a Leh drive end of August.
In 70-300 mm I would assume one should go for the below with VR and not the other one.

VR
non VR

Certainly VR, since non VR lens is not compatible with D5300. This sepcific lens requires a camera body that has focus motor.

70-300mm VR is a great versatile lens that will work for travel and great for portraits too at around 100mm.

Regarding Leh trip, An alternative could be:

1. Cheaper prime lens (35 mm 1.8, costs around 7.5. - 8.5k, but much batter quality)
2. Sturdy tripod (4k)
3. Polarizing filter (3k )
4. MC-DC2 Remote Cord (Costs around 800 - 1200)

In my opinion, with these you can capture stunning Leh landscape since D5300 makes exposure bracketing so easy.

http://travellinglens.net/ladakh-photo-guide/

[Speed Pujari]

Originally Posted by Traveller Nayak

..

2. D5300 with 18-55mm

3. Which is the other lens should I get? 70-300 mm with VR?

...

Since you seem to be an experienced photographer then the genre of photography must be clear. I believe you are looking out for a street/wildlife kind of gear i.e. why the tele lenses. As u might be aware that the D5300 with 18-55mm fits max requirements. If u need portrait lens then go for 85mm f/1.4 or f/1.8.

And if quality is the requirement then go for 17-55 f/2.8. I had that lens and never regretted, had to sell it since I moved to FF. And take my suggestion, never buy a UWA. I had a 12-24 and think hardly 2-5% of whole of my pic lot were shot using that lens.

[condor]

Originally Posted by Speed Pujari

If u need portrait lens then go for 85mm f/1.4 or f/1.8.

And if quality is the requirement then go for 17-55 f/2.8. I had that lens and never regretted, had to sell it since I moved to FF. And take my suggestion, never buy a UWA. I had a 12-24 and think hardly 2-5% of whole of my pic lot were shot using that lens.

Not 85, but 50 mm would be better, IMO

The 17-55 f2.8 is a goood one ! Actually, this, instead of the 18-55 f3.5-5.6 would be much better.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by Traveller Nayak

My interests are in: landscape/portrait/nature and I love travelling (which is also becoming a recurring phenomenon).

If you ask me, you could just buy a 18-105 (or 18-140 - even better) and a 70-300VR and be happy for a while. The 18-105 is a very handy walkaround lens. And the 70-300 VR is a great VFM one (for example b/w 70-200mm it is as good as the 80-400mm which costs 3 times).

While these are not the best of lenses, one needs to be at a certain level on the learning curve to make full use of great glass. 18-140 and a 70-300 and a 50mm 1.8 D (super cheap) could take care of most of your needs. The 70-300 can act as a nice portrait lens also - personal experience.

But yes, do go for the VR version of the 70-300.

If you are very keen on - or want to take up wildlife photography - especially birding - then you would need a longer lens e.g. the Sigma or the new Tamron. If you want a UWA, then a Tokina 11-16mm will be good.

I have been using the 18-105 and 70-300 for a while now (I do rent other lenses for my wildlife trips). Many of the photos here were taken with these two lenses: http://500px.com/nilanjanray

But yes, I am planning to upgrade soon.