i'd like to buy a entry level DSLR, but i can't decide which one to buy? D90 or D3100? which one is better for a newbie? thanks!
Nikon D90 vs D3100 which one i should buy?
- Thread starter Shino Guo
- Start date
It may be out of this list but I recommend D5100, which should be releasing sometimes soon.
that's what i think oso, coz D90 has been announced for all most 3 years, planning to buy during IT fair. does D5100 come out this IT fair?
Ea....Shino...you said it...it's IT fair...not Camera fair...so you don't see it....
Yes you may wait for D5100 (if you can wait)...but may takes about a month to reach SGP after announced by Nikon (S)....
IT fair sells cameras, but tat doesnt mean new cameras wun be released there. look at canon, they release the new 600D at this IT fair, same as wad they did for last yr, where there released the 550D
agree with the d90. no doubt it has been released for 3 yrs alr, it's still a great camera.
I will offer a differing view.
If you want to do quite a bit of video work, go for D3100 or the coming D5100.
If you just take stills, D90 is great, and you get to do AF on older and cheaper AFD lenses.
If you want best of both worlds, get the D7000 or the coming D300s replacement.
If you want to do quite a bit of video work, go for D3100 or the coming D5100.
If you just take stills, D90 is great, and you get to do AF on older and cheaper AFD lenses.
If you want best of both worlds, get the D7000 or the coming D300s replacement.
D7000 is too ex for me, although is good, and i most likely go for the stills.
i feel that if you are still very new to photography, you should probably get the D3100.
first of all, the price is much lower (provided we are looking at brand new sets for both)..
i mean, so what if it can't auto focus on most lenses? with the 18-55 and maybe an additional 35mm 1.8, you should be almost all good to go.
i haven't really tried the guide mode on this camera, but from what i hear.. it's quite useful if you're still new and haven't got the time to read up on your photography techniques.
what else? hmm.. i feel that the D3100 is sort of a "stepping-stone" body.. meaning once you own it and played with it enough, you will reach the decision whether to perform an upgrade.. or to stop photography entirely.. all this for a relatively low cost of $84X..
good luck with your decision and remember, the above is only my 2 cents worth. do your homework and be wise out there.
cheers!
first of all, the price is much lower (provided we are looking at brand new sets for both)..
i mean, so what if it can't auto focus on most lenses? with the 18-55 and maybe an additional 35mm 1.8, you should be almost all good to go.
i haven't really tried the guide mode on this camera, but from what i hear.. it's quite useful if you're still new and haven't got the time to read up on your photography techniques.
what else? hmm.. i feel that the D3100 is sort of a "stepping-stone" body.. meaning once you own it and played with it enough, you will reach the decision whether to perform an upgrade.. or to stop photography entirely.. all this for a relatively low cost of $84X..
good luck with your decision and remember, the above is only my 2 cents worth. do your homework and be wise out there.
cheers!
Right, want to add a 50mm prime? Only cheapest option is $700-$800. Want to add a 85mm prime? Only cheapest option is $1.4k (3rd party) or over $2k (nikon).
Compared to a body with built in motor? 50/1.8 is $190, and 85/1.8 is around $600.
One solution doesn't fit everyone. Some people will buy a camera with kit lens and will never ever want/need another lens. Some people are constantly looking for new things to try on their camera. In the end, TS needs to be given the options and the facts. He/she has to look at his/her own needs and make that call.
Last edited:
yup, and don't get me wrong. i'm not like pro-D3100 or anything like that. in fact, i'm more pro-D90 more than anything. it's true that the 50mm's, 85mm's, other lenses with motors built inside them are much more expensive. but new photography hobbyists might not be willing to shell out another say $600-ish (assuming brand new set) for a camera they don't even know what a body with built in motor means.
so that's where the upgrade/stopping entirely phase steps in. some might say the gear-chase is endless and there can never be a stop to buying the newest and latest, so why not jump on the bandwagon? start off low, upgrade when you need to, stop when you think it's getting out of hand. most importantly, one has to enjoy shooting with whatever they have in the first place.
so yup, it all really boils down to what TS needs. as we have all seen from countless "XXX or XXX?" threads, we are merely just pushing the thread starter towards our favourites of the two. so yeah, DO YOUR HOMEWORK! that's about it.
ps: lol, don't mind me if i'm not making any sense.. it's just getting late.. ha-ha..
Suggest D90 would be a better fit. If you want to try the AF-D lenses, it's a lot cheaper. Plus better build quality.
you could always rent those lenses if you need them ... besides the price difference plus a little top allows you to buy a 35 mm 1.8 and a 55-200vr which along with the kit lens in my opinion is all you need for most of your photographic needs unless you are a equipment measurebator and have nothing to do but collect lenses instead of taking pictures....
i don't even believe we are still debating this a more expensive camera released a couple of years ago compared to a newer cheaper camera with new sensor , new processor , higher resolution even a monkey would know the answer to this one if you don't want the the D3100 because of the lack of motor might as well go for Canon 550D or the 600D going for the D90 at this point is a mistake in my opinion (oooppppsss didnt see that you bought the D90 already enjoy your purchase dont listen to me.... hehehe)
Last edited:
Similar threads
