Last edited by Ezra Goh; 20th May 2011 at 02:24 PM.
Cam bodies wise, Nikon D5100 and Canon's 600D matched pretty well against each other. The next step is to see what sort of photography you are into. I am not really good with stage shots... I prefer outdoor shooting.
As to what little I know (might be wrong though), you might need to look into fast lens, like the 50mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.4, etc. And maybe also look into investing into a good monopod too for added stability.
I saw one professional photographer using the monopod during one of the budget talks that was organised by IRAS and Tax Academy once (I was lucky to attend that talk there).
Reasons for Nikon D5100:
-Higher ISO (which I understand helps me capture moving people better)
>> Yes, to a point. You will still need 'good' light to get good pictures. If only high iso was needed, everyone will be using green colored night vision cameras
Most cameras released from 2010 onwards have very good high iso performance.
The D5100 does use a nice high iso performing sensor though, which imo is better than one for the 600D. However, it has very little significance at normal viewing sizes (eg. your monitor or 50" TV).
-Less noise on high ISO (according to snapsort)
>> One advice, Snapsort is a lousy site. Its no more than a brochure compilation. No sample shots, do real user review.
You already know od DPR, try Imaging Resource as well.
-More dynamic range (which means colours are nicer yes?)
>> No really. It just means that more exposure levels (ie. brightness levels) is captured with a single frame.
>> Most DSLRs as of 2010 will have enough.
Reasons for Canon 600D
-Images are softer and thus nicer for people shots
>> Not really. Need to use better lenses for the 18mp sensor. Not apparent at normal viewing sizes anyway.
-In-built AF motor (hence cost savings on lenses in the long-run?)
>> It does not have a built in motor. Motor is on the lens for all Canon lenses. Its Nikon that has some lenses with motor and others w/o. The D5100 btw, does not have a on camera motor, so you need lenses with a motor (designated as AF-S).
-More user friendly for newbies to learn and start out with
>> Really depends on user getting used to each brands system and preference.
To me Pentax has a very good UI and photographer oriented interface (superimposed histogram; WB and pict style preview and saving; single button reset to default; AF calibration; etc)
So depends on user.
-According to friends, based on experience it performs better in low light even though specs seem to favour the Nikon. ("Higher ISO does not necessarily means the pictures come out nicer")
>> As mentioned above. No that relevant for normal viewing sizes and 'good' lighting still needed for good photos.
Personally, don't think there is any wrong camera between the two.
Do look at other brands as well if you are looking to get a bit more for your money. (eg. Pentax; Sony)
(Eg. On camera shake reduction; smaller cameras; smaller lenses; in-camera focus motor; etc)
if it were me i would go for the Nikon 5100 its the better camera overall... the only problem i have with it is it lacks a built-in motor and will only take the newer AFS lenses but since cost is not a consideration that shouldn't be a problem for you besides you can pair it with the excellent but cheap AFS 35mm 1.8 or the AFS 50mm 1.8 coming out this June and that should be more than enough for shooting shows on stage... don't get swayed with high FPS numbers you don't really need it... its nice to hear it burst once in a while just to make yourself feel good... but if you really think about it how often will you encounter a shooting situation where you require that speed...
alright thanks for all the help guys! so in the end it sounds like it's a false dilemma between the two and there isn't anything really significantly different. hahas I'll let u guys noe which one i eventually do get! kinda leaning towards nikon for now.
Thanks again for all your help!
AF-S 50mm f/1.8G lens not yet shipped to Singapore yet.
Stick to the kit lens until you know what you need for the next lens. I don't recommend new users to get 2nd lens especially on the first purchase.
There are some lens that won't go wrong to replace kit lens. Eg is 17-50mm 2.8
D700 - 24-70mm F2.8 ED - 105mm VR2 Micro - Samyang 14mm - 50mm 1.8D - Mb 10 - SB900 - SB400
heh. personal feel... if budget's not a constraint, get the D7000
i'm anti-canon (and yes i admit it)
Hi 5 bro. I hate the thumb scroll from the higher end bodies.Originally Posted by kei1309
You can try to approach from another way. Look at what are the suitable lenses available and then back to the camera system.
In this case, probably you have to get a "fast" lens (big and constant aperture) to capture the action in the dark theater and if you can stand right at the edge of the stage, a 17-55mm zoom range probably will be able to suit your needs. A zoom lens will be easier to use than a fixed focus one and it offer you a choice of going wide to include much of the stage to half body shot. For Nikon and Canon, lenses available will be the 17-55 f2.8 and as well as the third party lenses from sigma, tamron and tokina. Then look at your budget, which one you can afford. Nikon and canon lenses are generally more expensive than the third party ones. The third party lenses are value for money. In fact, a review from a reputable website mentioned that the sigma 18-50 f2.8 is the sharpest zoom lens they have reviewed to date.
Now, you can look at which camera system that these lenses can be used on. The third party lens maker do not make lens mount for all the different camera system. After narrowing down which camera system it support, you may want to look at the dynamic range of the sensor and the noise suppression when using high iso of the different camera that is within your budget. With this, you can compare the prices and make a judgement which one will give you the best value for your money.
Last edited by coolthought; 20th May 2011 at 07:46 PM.
Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif
Check this out.
I too was considering between 600D and D5100. But after spending hours infront of the computer reading about photography and the various camera functions. It seems these two is too simple and very soon you will find yourself hitting the ceilling and unable to go forward. In the end my choice is the D7000 ^^
It may be more expensive and require much more time to fully utilize the camera. At least, it will keep me company for a long period of time.
-Higher ISO (which I understand helps me capture moving people better) - that's the same among all entry level cameras..
-Faster FPS - i've seen faster.. whenever i use my camera, i see that =P
Reasons for Canon 600D
-Images are softer and thus nicer for people shots - i think this can be pp-ed.. btw softer nicer meh?
-In-built AF motor (hence cost savings on lenses in the long-run?) - others can offer you in-body AF and in-body IS.. how's that?
-Better video function - ('.' ?) i hope you know that there's no AF for video recording..
-More user friendly for newbies to learn and start out with - sure? when i tested the camera in courts, i cant even figure out to adjust anything.. i'm a newbie..
-According to friends, based on experience it performs better in low light even though specs seem to favour the Nikon. ("Higher ISO does not necessarily means the pictures come out nicer") - i beg to differ...
Want to get back to photography
seriously, you reallly think people would lend you their precious lenses? Would you? if you meant sampling, i suppose people wun mind lending you their lenses during outings.. and just because a brand is not particularly popular, doesnt mean that brand doesnt have good lenses.. hehe
Want to get back to photography
yea.. if you're getting a D5100, i rather you get a D7000.. not sure if it has in-body AF though..
Want to get back to photography
Anyway, Canon camera (irregardless of whether it is entry-level, pro-level or semi-pro level) didn't have any inbuilt AF motor. I believe all EOS mount lens had in build AF motor to the lens. Old FD mount lens will be completely manual lens though.
And btw... been reading this AF in movie mode. Seriously... is that really a deciding factor. I mean, sure, it is a good to have function. But I have try taking a few clips with my 7D, and so far, I don't find manual recording really that difficult and it is seriously all up to oneself.
By far (and it was only my own opinion, not others) I find Canon pretty straight forward, Nikon come next... not really try the Sony, because I don't like the feel of the camera (this is only me, please don't flame me later). Didn't try Pentax though. Olympus is great, but not that easy to use.
Last edited by rhino123; 20th May 2011 at 11:46 PM.
LOL actually. in my terms of ranking. the easiest to use are:
yup the Sony A55 and A33 are pretty smallish but no DSLR so far can match the Phase Detection AF full-time in movie recording.