Getting into Photography

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Thanks to everyone for all the replies. It has really helped me a lot, and I feel like I have learnt a lot from it. I am going to have a trip down to my local Jessops over the weekend and have a play with the D5100. If I like the look and feel, then I think I will hold out for this one.

I am going to Rome in August, and really wanted to have my dSLR by then, but its going to be a struggle to have the extra cash for the D5100 (and all of the other stuff I will need such as bag, memory cards and flash gun) by then.

I will be sure to let you know how I get on.

Thanks Again,

Dan

One thing you don't really need right now - the flash gun!

The built in flash should be sufficient for what you are doing now. Once you know a more powerful and importantly a more flexible flashgun is needed,then get one and invest in a half decent one at that. Don't waste money on something you might not use.

Moreover,if you like the D5100,I would get it. Think how long you are going to keep the system. I don't see why a D5100 should be not enough for at least the next three years,so think a bit longer term. All up its around £100 to £150 more than the cheaper cameras like the D3100 and Pentax K-X dual lens kits. Not a small amount of money,but over a few years not so bad.

Also,while you are down at Jessop,I suggest you look at the Sony A37 which shares a similar 16MP sensor as the D5100 and uses the A mount(will work with decades of Minolta AF lenses). Might be worth a gander at too and is a bit cheaper AFAIK than the Nikon D5100.

[kalniel]

One thing you don't really need right now - the flash gun!

Well given his usage as stated:

So would like something I could use for anything from close up photo's of food, through to photos of people on the physio's table receiving treatments.

I'd argue a flash gun is one of the more important things to get, hence my comment about possibly choosing a camera that has wireless flash control.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Well given his usage as stated:



I'd argue a flash gun is one of the more important things to get, hence my comment about possibly choosing a camera that has wireless flash control.

I missed that one = oops! OTH,I would suspect he would need to thing carefully about the type of flash units he intends to use. AFAIK,in the macro thread Saracen talked about the Canon macro flash units and I suspect even if he got a "normal" unit, one which has a flexible head with many degrees of movement and very fine power control would be important. However,with his budget I suspect he would be getting a cheapo one as he indicated he was considering the following:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Polaroid-PL1...741267&sr=1-14

Not sure if it is worth it.

I had a quick look on the internet about the D5100:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...D5100FLASH.HTM

"Like 2008's Nikon D60, flash capability is an area where the Nikon D5100 shed some substantial capability relative to the D90 and higher models, though, in that its built-in flash can't serve as a Commander in Nikon's Wireless Lighting System. You can still use the Nikon D5100 with a Nikon SB-700, SB-800 or SB-900 flash or SU-800 wireless Speedlight Commander to control multiple remote flash units, but the built-in flash doesn't have that ability on its own."

The Pentax K-r:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/KR/KRFLASH.HTM

"In Wireless mode, the built-in flash can be used as a controller to multiple wireless slave flashes (including the Pentax AF540FGZ and/or AF360FGZ flash units). The built-in flash can be set to contribute to the exposure, or to act only as a controller. The Pentax wireless flash system offers four control channels, so up to four camera/flash setups can be used in the same area without interfering with each other. The K-x can connect on any of the four control channels: You program it by setting a flash unit to the desired channel, attaching that flash to the camera and then half-pressing the shutter button. This sets the camera to the channel the flash was set up for. After this, the flash may be removed and used as a remote unit, controlled by the camera."

Seems,the K-r has a slightly more capable wireless system.

Sony A33(the A37 is an improved version of that camera):

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD.../AA33FLASH.HTM

"The Wireless mode lets the Sony A33 work with compatible remote flash units with wireless capability, specifically the Sony HVL-F58AM and HVL-F42AM. Four separate control channels are available for wireless operation, to allow multiple photographers to work wirelessly in the same area without interfering with each other. You're limited to a single external flash unit vs the 3 groups that you can control with Sony's higher-end models, but it still opens a lot of creative possibilities, when the flash doesn't have to be attached to your camera. Operating in Wireless mode with a compatible external flash unit, the Sony A33's flash exposure compensation adjustment can adjust the intensity of the external flash remotely, once the camera and flash unit have been initially synched to each other."

It seems all the cases,the cheapest compatible flashguns made by the companies are around £200. However,that is not to say third party companies would do cheaper solutions.

The OP needs to do more research on that area.

Perhaps,using an old fashioned flash slave setup would be a cheaper and cruder way of doing it?? OTH,not sure if it will work well with the current flash systems.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Flipping replicators!

[Bobster]

if you like the feel of Nikon - the D7000 has great dynamic range..

large quantity of Pro Wedding photographers use 40D/50D/7D/5D/5D2/5D3/1Ds3/1D4/D300/D700/D3/D3s/D3x/D800 more are starting to move from 40/50/7D/D300 to the 5D2/3 /D700/800

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Nissin do some cheaper units with wireless compatability,but I am not sure how good they are. The only decent third party units I have had any experience with were Metz and some Sunpak and Vivitar ones.

[TheAnimus]

Isn't the D7000 waaaaay over budget?

And also wouldn't the K-5 be not only cheaper, but better?
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D7000-vs-Pentax_K-5
Better image quality, stablisation, better weather sealing, better in low light.

Oh and cheaper!
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/549...-CASHBACK.html
So case, lens body for £650 after cashback?

[Bobster]

numbers.. numbers..

lets see the results!

weather sealing is better? how often do you take a shower with your camera?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

numbers.. numbers..

lets see the results!

weather sealing is better? how often do you take a shower with your camera?

Right,so you mean the photographer is the important link.

So the Pentax mentioned would be fine then or a cheaper camera from ANY other company.

But anyway,I looked on Ebay and the cheapest D7000 cameras were around £600 secondhand without a warranty and no lenses.

The OP is already on the limit of their budget with lenses on cheaper bodies,plus the other bits,and needs to have the camera by August.

[TheAnimus]

numbers.. numbers..

So ignoring analysis of the cameras, your saying pick the more expensive one?

lets see the results!

Top from flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kengoh8888/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billgfoto/7431959896/

Your saying there anything wrong with those results? Because it beats the device on paper, and in pratice has better IQ.

weather sealing is better? how often do you take a shower with your camera?

More than just the water, my photos from my africa road trip: http://forums.hexus.net/photography-...t=banger+rally I wouldn't have dared do with anything that isn't weather sealed (my 16-50mm still has that very fine sand in the rubber grips, but not on the lens or camera, you wouldn't get that with any canon or nikon in the price range).

What happens if I duno, you go outside? Kinda nice to just take the camera, no bag, no fuss.

So basically your saying that you should take the more expensive one.

that has less features?

[Bobster]

well no, because otherwise id be saying buy a D800E

and where's the photos of the sand storms etc? nothing in those photographs makes me think, damn i need an amazingly well weather sealed camera and lenses..

my 50D and 70-200 have survived being covered in fine dust from stock car racing (the fine dry dust you get that just sticks and clings to everything)

[GeorgeStorm]

I must admit, you do seem very anti the Pentax, even though on paper it seems to be better, and as TheAnimus has shown, can produce fantastic results.

[g8ina]

I say steady on you chaps fighting in the back there !!

Animus and Stringent, please be nice

[TheAnimus]

I say steady on you chaps fighting in the back there !!

Yeah I just get absolutely tired of "Oh I've not heard of this, I'm completely ignorant of this, it must be bad" attitude. To actively then promote as a matter of factness that view is something I will un-apologetically jump up and down with.

well no, because otherwise id be saying buy a D800E

What? real pro's use medium format!

and where's the photos of the sand storms etc? nothing in those photographs makes me think, damn i need an amazingly well weather sealed camera and lenses..

Because there wasn't a sand storm, but to give you an idea what failed, two mobile phones and a canon powershot. The Saharan dust is so fine, its unlike anything you find in Europe. All I can say is no adverse effects despite having not refused to take a picture. And since you asked this one:
http://0bytes.net/misc/Banjul/TeamBBTBanjul-105.jpg
Ended up getting the CPL caked in fine, fine dust, again unlike anything I've ever come across in europe. It was that kind of stuff that killed one of the guys canon's. However it would be stupid to say "it did it no harm" because I honestly don't know. I know it hurt my body taking that, and ultimately it could be responsible for the lens having an issue in 5 years time. I can't say.

my 50D and 70-200 have survived being covered in fine dust from stock car racing (the fine dry dust you get that just sticks and clings to everything)

But again mine has never had problems in the rain, in tropical downpoors. All I know is I'd rather have a much, much better build quality, for less money.

The idea of not taking a bag when you go out for a day is great. Getting stuck on a glacier for instance: http://sdrv.ms/LX4bot if you look at the photo after that I couldn't even hold the camera level, the cold wind was so bad. A 350D been the cheap end of canon build quality broke. Inside a bag, inside a jeep. I was outside helping dig with my camera and no case.

But none of this matters, because all the extra Weather Resistance sealing will do, is help the camera last longer, let you take it more places without worry of damage.

I can't understand are you honestly saying that the:
1) More Expensive
2) Less Image Quality
3) Less Build Quality
Camera is better?

[Bobster]

I can't understand are you honestly saying that the:
1) More Expensive
2) Less Image Quality
3) Less Build Quality
Camera is better?

when you buy a SLR/DSLR you buy into the lens system

[Stringent]

I say steady on you chaps fighting in the back there !!

Animus and Stringent, please be nice

Don't have a problem with being told I'm wrong, just not in the way I was spoken to. But as requested I'll be nice. Animus, catch



Taken with a Nikon according to the metadata