# Buying a DSLR



## Siddhant. (Mar 21, 2014)

Hi, I am a complete amateur in photography and have never owned a DSLR or an advanced P&S. The last camera I owned was a Sony Cybershot DSC W-350. My brother owns a DSLR and he takes some really fascinating pictures. I like photography but never took it up as I needed a good camera first.
I would like to know if I should or should not get a DSLR as there are many new features coming up in the sector of cameras. And if I should get one then which one. I should get a good DSLR with 18-55mm lens or a cheaper DSLR with a better lens. My budget is 40k max. 
Thanks!


----------



## The Incinerator (Mar 21, 2014)

If you love photography then DSLR is your answer to it. To start with get an mid entry level DSLR to learn,coz these have a very good guide feature and almost most of the features of a Pro DSLR. What you will miss in the entry level bodies is some advanced Metering and fast FPS options,among some other features.But that wont really effect you at all in the intermediate stage ,trust me.

Choose a Canon 600D or a Nikon D5100 initially and then move on to better bodies as you learn. Of the two the Canon has a better guide for beginners .


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 21, 2014)

I would suggest a D5200 now ....D5100 is old ....get D5200+kit and learn /read books/take tips


----------



## The Incinerator (Mar 21, 2014)

D5200 is at best 38K, I think the 600D with two lens ie 18-55 and 55-250 will be around Rs 36500 and IMO would be a better start up kit in that price range,what do you think?


----------



## raja manuel (Mar 21, 2014)

Can't you just borrow your brother's DSLR for some time and see if it is something you can live with? Whether a DSLR is for you or not depends a lot on the kind of photography you will do with it.


----------



## digit.sh (Mar 21, 2014)

sujoyp said:


> I would suggest a D5200 now ....D5100 is old ....get D5200+kit and learn /read books/take tips



Being old doesn't mean its bad. His budget is 40K and D5100 is the best bang for buck. The best combination I can think of, in his budget is:

D5100 + 18-55VR kit --- 26K
35mm 1.8G DX lens --- 8k

Total --- 35k max. The 5K he saved, can be used later to buy accessories like tripod/better bag/memory card or battery.
Or, he may even buy 55-200 f/4-5.6 VR lens which costs 7.5k or so.


@Op,
The two cameras are almost similar and one year from now, D5200 will be priced similar to how D5100 is priced now. The sensor of D5200 is slightly better than D5100's sensor. No other difference. But D5100 has longer battery life. The extra that you pay for D5200 is not worth it. Better spend money on lenses/accessories. Lenses last forever. After a few years when you will learn more about photography(and if you are serious about it) you will surely want a better body(semi professional, like D7100 or professional, like D800). So its better not to spend much on body.

And believe me, lenses are equally(if not more) important than body. A D5100 + 18-55mm + 35mm + 55-200mm will give much better result than a D5200 + 18-55mm.

And please do not even think of Canon 600D. D5100 costs 5K less and beats it hands down in every aspect, be it ISO, Dynamic range, image quality, color depth, battery life and even build quality.


----------



## nac (Mar 22, 2014)

digit.sh said:


> And please do not even think of Canon 600D. D5100 costs 5K less and beats it hands down in every aspect, be it ISO, Dynamic range, image quality, color depth, battery life and even build quality.


This really gonna poke some people.


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 22, 2014)

digit.sh ....please D5200 is way ahead of D5100 in technology ....please at least check the specs before posting.
D5200 have better 39 point 9 cross point AF system of D7000 ...Metering system of D7000 and a better sensor also 5 fps burst 

I agree that twin lens combination is better deal ... then why not a D3100+18-55+55-300  its better for wildlife as 300mm is minimum for birds 
there is no difference between D5100 and D3100 other then some funky features like  articulated screen,selective color mode and HDR mode.


----------



## digit.sh (Mar 22, 2014)

sujoyp said:


> digit.sh ....please D5200 is way ahead of D5100 in technology ....please at least check the specs before posting.
> D5200 have better 39 point 9 cross point AF system of D7000 ...Metering system of D7000 and a better sensor also 5 fps burst
> 
> I agree that twin lens combination is better deal ... then why not a D3100+18-55+55-300  its better for wildlife as 300mm is minimum for birds
> there is no difference between D5100 and D3100 other then some funky features like  articulated screen,selective color mode and HDR mode.



He does not need 39 AF points for good photography. Period.
Sensor is only marginally better.
Burst shooting is also only marginally better. And you don't need burst shooting capability for good photography. Period.

No question of D3100. It sucks big time and is much much inferior to D5100. I wish Nikon never made D3100. And price difference with D5100 is very little. D5100 + 18-55 costs around 27K and D3100 + 18-55 costs 23K. Difference = 4K. And, D5200 with 18-55 costs 37K!! Whopping 10K more than D5100. You are paying 10K more. 

@op, you can get D5200 if you think its worth. But as I said, the sensor is only marginally better and other enhancements are mostly gimmicks.


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 22, 2014)

marginally   D5200 have a better sensor even then D7100 ...its the best cropped sensor there for nikon

So you mean
9 AF point vs 39 af point ...not needed really...god knows why costly DSLR's like D800, 5DMKIII or upcomming 7DMK2 have soo many AF points...only 9 would be sufficient
better metering not needed ..D5100 have D90 metering system where D5200 have D7000 metering system...choice is urs
4fps vs 5fps is big if you shoot even 10 second you will shoot whole 10 shots more 

D3100 is not that bad as you say...dont forget I have used it for 3 years and got some great shots.....if photographer is not good enough then even a Nikon D4 wont help him...btw why not check my flickr profile for D3100 quality...I am sure you will be surprised..all shots after the spider web shot and magic shot are taken with D3100

same hardware you are ready to spend 4k more...but a lot better hardware 10k is huge


----------



## digit.sh (Mar 22, 2014)

sujoyp said:


> there is no difference between D5100 and D3100 other then some funky features like  articulated screen,selective color mode and HDR mode.



Really??  I thought you know at least something about cameras!!
See it yourself:



Seen?  
D5200 :   Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D5200 - DxOMark
Now see this: Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D5100 - DxOMark
and this:  Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D3100 - DxOMark

Dxomark overall sensor score:
D3100 -- 67
D5100 -- 80
D5200 -- 84

lol at you sujoyp 


@op, D5100 is way better in each and every aspect than D3100. Most importantly, low light capability, dynamic range and color depth, and believe me, these are the most important thing you need for better photography. And price difference is only 4K. Don't even consider D3100.


----------



## abc.kb (Mar 22, 2014)

sujoyp said:


> digit.sh ....please D5200 is way ahead of D5100 in technology ....please at least check the specs before posting.
> D5200 have better 39 point 9 cross point AF system of D7000 ...Metering system of D7000 and a better sensor also 5 fps burst
> 
> I agree that twin lens combination is better deal ... then why not a D3100+18-55+55-300  its better for wildlife as 300mm is minimum for birds
> there is no difference between D5100 and D3100 other then some funky features like  articulated screen,selective color mode and HDR mode.



No difference between D5100 and D3100??!

@op, the body and lens combination recommended by digitsh is the best I can think of in your budget. Surely D5200 is somewhat better, but not much. At the end of the day its the lenses that are gonna make difference. But yes, D3100 is way too inferior as digit.sh pointed out.
After a few years when you gain proficiency and know all the pros and cons you will want to settle for better body, so I think its not wise to spend 10K more on D5200 now. But yes, lenses last forever. Wiser to spend on lenses.


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 22, 2014)

I am sure you must have compared D5100 and D5200 too at snapshot ...y not post that result too

And bro I am not telling something without using ....I have actually used it for 3 years ...and my flickr data shows that D3100 is more capable then what you think

I am not saying that get D3100....I recommend D5200


----------



## digit.sh (Mar 22, 2014)

Plus points of D5200 compared to D5100, as requested:


----------



## srkmish (Mar 22, 2014)

Any good photographer can create miraculous photos out of D3100 ( 500px / Search ). It is a very capable camera. My friend, who is into Bird photography dedicatedly( whose photos i had shared earlier) had many of his prints up for Sale at Mangalajodi Bird Exhibition at Bhubaneswar. The only thing which might prevent me from purchasing a D3100 would be lack of bracketing ( For HDR shots).

And these "Way ahead, Far better " are such exaggerations. Give a capable photographer any camera, he can produce amazing pics.


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 22, 2014)

Thank you digit ....

I agree D5100 was better then D3100 ....but not on the ground of pic quality for focussing or metering ....but for better grip, more features tilt screen etc.


----------



## srkmish (Mar 22, 2014)

[MENTION=113218]digit.sh[/MENTION] : Can you post a link to your photography page?


----------



## The Incinerator (Mar 22, 2014)

He is too much in to synthetics and reviews rather than real time experience. I would love to be enlightened about the EOS600D being as bad as he is making it out to be! People are not fools like him buying the EOS 600D for no reason. And dont use that Period Sh#t with me. Post images you have taken with your synthetic favorite camera and I will post mine ...lets see. If you cant post photos and the gear you use please stop Trolling. We have very sensible people here who guide us better than your trolling ways without any concrete proof but links and reviews which mean nothing in the real world as long it is photography that is concerned.Your those comparison screen shots are laughable and shows your depth. Post some shots you have taken.

Post some Low Light images from the Nikon and Ill post some low light by the Canon show me a hint of noise that you are bragging about.Post some daylight birding shots and ill post mine too we will se what EV and Dynamic range you are ranting about.And yes do post some cloudy day shots we wanna see details and color rendition too.


----------



## nac (Mar 22, 2014)

Guys, come on. He has gone little overboard with his opinion, I am not denying it. But opinion differs, right... He really believes D5100 is good and the D5200 isn't worth the extra. Like I didn't feel 70D worth the extra on the other thread. Like Raja said, it's the buyer can weigh up things and decide whether the extra is worth or not. We have four D5200 users and the recent being  @kaz , and he is very happy with his purchase.

Inci, you sure have read a lot of discussion/debate on D5100 vs 600D before buying 600D. Let's take it as this is one among them. 



digit.sh said:


> Plus points of D5200 compared to D5100, as requested:
> 
> View attachment 13951


Really!!!


digit.sh said:


> Seen?
> D5200 :   Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D5200 - DxOMark
> Now see this: Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D5100 - DxOMark
> and this:  Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D3100 - DxOMark
> ...


I am imaging what would Pranav say about this DXO rating. 



srkmish said:


> ( 500px / Search ).


That's a nice link. I really wonder how the eyes are so sharp even @ 1/6th of a second 500px / Into the white! by Marianna Roussou


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 22, 2014)

yaah eyes are really sharp...1/6 on tripod with eye  light may give the sharpness


----------



## srkmish (Mar 22, 2014)

anyone who posts snapsort comparison isn't meant to be taken seriously 

- - - Updated - - -



nac said:


> That's a nice link. I really wonder how the eyes are so sharp even @ 1/6th of a second 500px / Into the white! by Marianna Roussou



And surprise , surpise . That picture is made using only KIT LENS! . Now whosoever was saying D3100 sucks and all , can eat his words ?


----------



## The Incinerator (Mar 23, 2014)

*Shot with a Canon 550D (I hope he knows that its 600D underneath) and Canon -EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens *

Amazingly Breathtaking!

*www.facebook.com/pruvic/photos


----------



## Siddhant. (Mar 23, 2014)

I am not really considering a Canon right now.. I think I would be buying a D5100 or D5200.
One of my friends has a D3200 with a 55-250 lens. His pictures are better than my brother's who uses a Canon 600D with a 18-55 lens. 
Now the final question is a D5200 with 18-55 lens or a D5100 with some more lenses. 
And also I am not much used to this camera talk so if you guys can just stick to basic things then it would be better or atleast explain how that difference would affect my pictures.
And also thank you all!


----------



## The Incinerator (Mar 23, 2014)

D 5100 with better glass should be your priority. If you check the facebook link provide you will know why Im telling this, The photographer uses a Canon 550D/600D body which is say Rs 29K or less but the lens used is an L series which costs Rs 60K.The results are right in front of you. So my point is the better the glass the better the picture.A little better Sensor wont take you far but the money saved and spent on Lesns gonna really show the result.


*Taken with Canon EOS 550D and Canon -EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens *

*imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/21/j6gh.jpg

*imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/89/xdx5.jpg

*imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/837/aakn.jpg

- - - Updated - - -

*Taken with Canon EOS 600D and Kit Lens*

*imageshack.com/a/img834/2277/91to.jpg

*imageshack.com/a/img809/5486/7v56.jpg

*imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/21/o4a7.jpg

Point is..... better Glass is always more rewarding at the end of the day.


----------



## nac (Mar 23, 2014)

When there is a super duper deal for dual lens kit combo, it's fine to go for it. Else, stick with kit lens. 
5 Reasons why Kit Lens is Best First Lens


----------



## Siddhant. (Mar 23, 2014)

I was looking at deals on Flipkart for D5100. I found these 3:
1. Nikon D5100 (with AF-S 18 - 55 mm VR Kit + Nikon AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikko SLR(Rs 39290)
2. Nikon D5100 (with AF-S 18 - 55 mm VR Kit + AF-S DX NIKKOR 35 mm f/1.8G SLR(Rs. 39290)
3. Nikon D5100 (with AF-S 18 - 55 mm VR Kit + AF-S NIKKOR 50 mm F/1.8G Le SLR(Rs. 39290)

Also the D5200 with kit lens is Rs. 36195.

Out of all these four deals which one is the best? 

And, If I really get into photography the I might spend a 10-15k for a lens in September(Its my birthday!)


----------



## nac (Mar 23, 2014)

I assume 1st one is 55-200 tele zoom???
Body with kit lens costs about 25k and the other lenses costs about 8k each. So the FK quoted prices are toooo much.

Only you can tell whether you're ok with D5100 or D5200 is worth the extra. If you think are a noob, do "inky pinky ponky" between the two and decide.  I am kidding... Do some research and decide... 

BTB, advance b'day wishes


----------



## Hrishi (Mar 23, 2014)

Hey why not buy a DSLT instead ?? It's new but very easy for beginners plus tons of features. 
The fixed mirror gives lots of advantages along with livefeed.

Maybe you can go to a showroom and ask the Showroom salesman to show you a demo of Sony Alpha A58 , this should cost you around 32-34k with stock 18-55mm Lenses , bags , etc.

I am also a new user , and I was about to buy a Nikon D5100/D3200 or a Canon 600D , but when I used the Sony DSLT for a while , I fell in love with it.  
And any DSLR can be good , remember you are the one who's taking the shots. DSLR is just a medium.

Go with the one which you find easy to use and understand and has cheaper accessories.


----------



## nac (Mar 24, 2014)

If I remember correct, A58 was selling around ~28k. 
In case, if you're thinking of SLT, A57 is better than A58. And it's priced 35k in chroma retail.


----------



## Hrishi (Mar 24, 2014)

nac said:


> If I remember correct, A58 was selling around ~28k.
> In case, if you're thinking of SLT, A57 is better than A58. And it's priced 35k in chroma retail.



A58@33k , bought it recently from Jumbo Electronics. (35k on Flipkart.)
A57 is not available any longer , isn't it ?? It's discontinued.


----------



## Siddhant. (Mar 24, 2014)

I am sticking with DSLR. No SLT! 

If I buy the D5200 it doesn't has a internal Auto focus so cheap lenses would be hard to take pictures with as I am not thinking to buy a 15k+ lens unless I take up photography as a profession. 

Even the D5100 doesn't has a internal auto focus.. Do the 8k lenses come with an auto focus? 

If not then I am going to buy the D5200 and then a lens after some time.


----------



## The Incinerator (Mar 24, 2014)

Internal Focus Motor is a myth today. All lenses that you buy today have Focus Motor built in to them.So none of the DSLR body has Focus motor in them anymore.


----------



## nac (Mar 24, 2014)

^ 
Don't let the AF motor be the deciding factor. Nowadays almost all the lenses are AFS lenses, esp. DX lenses. So don't worry about that...

Yes, all the three lenses you mentioned in your previous post are AFS lenses and do have AF motor in it.
Note: Cheapest lens is the kit lens and it is an AFS lens (AF motor in it)


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 25, 2014)

[MENTION=4648]Siddhant[/MENTION] most lenses released last 8-10 years have inbuilt focus motor...dont worry there are lots of lens available for D5200 or D5100


----------



## Hrishi (Mar 26, 2014)

^my dlst has inbuilt focus motor as well as on lens.


----------

