Want to get a camera (Nikon D3100 or Canon 550D?)

[shelomoh]

You will not go wrong with either Nikon or Canon. Both are good brands with a good line up for bodies and lenses either new or used. It is like personal preference. Do you like the color yellow or the color red?

Ask yourself do you have more friends using Nikon or Canon? Why is this important? It is because you seemed new to DSLR. It is a very steep learning curve. So it helps to have friends with the same system to help and guide you,... as well as to borrow lens from.

 

[Rashkae]

For one... not all SLT cameras are m4/3 technology. If I am not wrong only Olympus and Panasonic uses this technology. The rest that offer small package such as Samsung and Sony, they are not using m4/3 technology but their own mirrorless technology.

Currently only Sony is offering SLT technology. Mirrorless is not SLT.

 

[rhino123]

Oh one more question about lenses. Why is there a need to get a prime lens, say 35mm f1.8 when I can achieve that 35mm on a kit lens (can I?)? Is it due to the aperture? Kit lenses are like f3.5-f3.6. Kind of don't understand why is it that even though f3.5 (on kit lens) is lower than the f2 on a LX-5, yet it is able to achieve the bokeh effect.

Ok... edited... I am not the expert lets listen to Rashkae. I know nothing of the matter. so I will shut up.

Happy now Rashkae?

 

[Rashkae]

First thing you need to know is what is a bokeh exactly. It is basically the blur in the photo. Which mean your subject is sharp while it is blur at those part that are not focus. So basically bokeh is the out-of-focus area in your photo. Aesthetic quality of the blur was created also by the number of blades of your lens (aperture shape) and so not all lens give the same bokeh effect.

BZZZZZZ wrong! Bokeh is NOT the blur itself, it is only a reference to the QUALITY of the out-of-focus blur. Is it smooth, harsh, nice specular highlights, poor highlights, does it complement the subject, etc. You can say "nice bokeh" but just because the background is blurred does not mean it's a "bokeh effect".

I suggest you read the links you yourself posted.

 

[rhino123]

Currently only Sony is offering SLT technology. Mirrorless is not SLT.

Oops, my bad. I should have said EVIL rather than SLT, sorry.:embrass:

 

[dancemania]

What is your budget and what is it you want from your camera? This will help you to decide.

 

[rhino123]

BZZZZZZ wrong! Bokeh is NOT the blur itself, it is only a reference to the QUALITY of the out-of-focus blur. Is it smooth, harsh, nice specular highlights, poor highlights, does it complement the subject, etc. You can say "nice bokeh" but just because the background is blurred does not mean it's a "bokeh effect".

I suggest you read the links you yourself posted.

oops... okay, you win... should be more specific.

1) 'Bokeh describes the rendition of out-of-focus points of light.' and

2) 'Bokeh describes the appearance, or "feel," of out-of-focus areas. Bokeh is not how far something is out-of-focus, bokeh is the character of whatever blur is there.'

quote from www.kenrockwell.com

 

[daredevil123]

And before that, you would want to understand how does aperture control the DOF. For short, the smaller a f-number, the wider the aperture opening and more lights entering the lens. (there are quite a number of literature available on the net to explain how this would affect the DOF, so I will not go into it in too detail).
......

If your camera - said a LX5 had a wide opened aperture (f/2) and light entered from the lens, but since the sensor is really small, the actual light being capture is still not that much thus have a very deep DOF. If your kit lens on your DSLR aperture was being opened widely (f3.5) although it is seemed that the f-value is higher and so not as fast, but the amount of light that could be captured are much more because the sensor are much larger as compared to the LX5... thus resulting in shallower DOF, thus the same amount of out-of-focus area is present as compared to the f/2 LX5.

Depth of field has NOTHING to do with HOW MUCH light is captured absolutely.

Please do not try to advise on subject matter you have absolutely no idea of, or you will end up misleading unsuspecting newbies.

I advice you read the links you posted yourself in detail, and understand DOF properly.

 

[Rashkae]

I think his advice so far has been an epic self-p4wn of the decade. I love how he even writes in an "I'm an expert, listen to me" fashion.

 

[mayhemics]

whatever you do, go to a reputable shop for the purchase! and don't get swayed into buying things you hadn't heard of/researched before ha...

 

[coolthought]

Hi Cupnoodles.

If size and weight is more of a concern, you might want to consider the micro 4/3 camera.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system

This cameras are generally has better aesthetics in looks over most DSLR and yet it has all the full range of lenses similar to a DSLR.

Size generally are smaller than the DSLR and larger than the pns.

Prices are about the 550D range.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=171706
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=731489

PS. Simpler definition of Bokeh - Aesthetic Blur part of photo.

 

[Rashkae]

PS. Simpler definition of Bokeh - Aesthetic Blur part of photo.

You mean, "aesthetics of the blur part of a photo". It's NOT the blur itself!

 

[rhino123]

I think his advice so far has been an epic self-p4wn of the decade. I love how he even writes in an "I'm an expert, listen to me" fashion.

Okay. No need to get personal. I am just trying to help here. Okay my theory is flaw BUT I HAVE NEVER CLAIM THAT I AM AN EXPERT, so don't mislead other members in this and tanish my name.

 

[Rashkae]

Okay. No need to get personal. I am just trying to help here. Okay my theory is flaw BUT I HAVE NEVER CLAIM THAT I AM AN EXPERT, so don't mislead other members in this and tanish my name.

Please read what I wrote. I never said that you said you were an expert. I was referring to your writing style.

 

[rhino123]

Hi Cupnoodles.

If size and weight is more of a concern, you might want to consider the micro 4/3 camera.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system

This cameras are generally has better aesthetics in looks over most DSLR and yet it has all the full range of lenses similar to a DSLR.

Size generally are smaller than the DSLR and larger than the pns.

Prices are about the 550D range.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=171706
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=731489

PS. Simpler definition of Bokeh - Aesthetic Blur part of photo.

You mean, "aesthetics of the blur part of a photo". It's NOT the blur itself!

Maybe next time everyone should just let Rashkae do the helping. Since he is the EXPERT here. And if we say anything, he might just jumped out and slap you upside down.

(Sometime I really wonder, we are all here to learn, and so... what I thought right are wrong, so what? Anyone could simply come out and point it out... then I learn something new. But instead of that, some senior members simply came out and slap me with insulting words and sneer... well... so sad.)

 

[Rashkae]

Maybe next time everyone should just let Rashkae do the helping. Since he is the EXPERT here. And if we say anything, he might just jumped out and slap you upside down.

First, you should realize that when trying to give advice to newbies, if you write in the fashion of "First you need to understand what bokeh is: It is blah blah blah" when actually you have all your facts wrong, and even post links that explain it in a way that contradicts your own, then you are misleading newbies. If you type like what you are saying is 100% correct, newbies will believe it. That is why I had to put a hard stop to the things you were saying.

 

[coolthought]

Oh one more question about lenses. Why is there a need to get a prime lens, say 35mm f1.8 when I can achieve that 35mm on a kit lens (can I?)? Is it due to the aperture? Kit lenses are like f3.5-f3.6. Kind of don't understand why is it that even though f3.5 (on kit lens) is lower than the f2 on a LX-5, yet it is able to achieve the bokeh effect.


rhino123: I guess I misunderstood the Nikon lenses compatibility thing... I had thought that not using the 'right type of lens' will damage motor or engine due to the auto-focusing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

 

[coolthought]

You mean, "aesthetics of the blur part of a photo". It's NOT the blur itself!

hmmm... seems like the online sources I used are wrong. You probably would like to help to correct them too?

aesthetic quality of out-of-focus areas of a photographic image

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bokeh

quality of out of focus areas of a picture

http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/entry.pl?id=Bokeh

aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus areas of an image

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh

aesthetic quality of the blur, in out-of-focus areas of an image

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/bokeh

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

hmmm... seems like the online sources I used are wrong. You probably would like to help to correct them too?


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bokeh


http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/entry.pl?id=Bokeh


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh


http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/bokeh

bro, it's correct lor...
There's a small difference.

Bokeh is referring to the quality of the out-of-focus area, but doesn't refer specifically to the blur...

:dunno:
I guess in laymen's terms, it's how nice/ugly the blur is.
Bokeh =/= blur, basically...

 

[estrangable]

Hi, as you can see, I am totally new. Need some opinion on selecting my first camera. (yes first!)

Very daring of me to want to jump into a DSLR for a first camera, yes?

So... I did some research and I went from wanting a Panasonic Lumix LX-5 (was looking at pro-consumers like S95, G12, and also 4/3, but 4/3s are quite expensive...) to a Nikon/Canon DSLR. Eventually I narrowed down to Nikon 3100 or Canon 550D. I know they are not exactly on the same level or for best comparisons.. anyway, I have to admit that I am already leaning towards the Nikon D3100, due to its price (also why I thought I might as well get a DSLR since it's only slightly more than a pro-consumer) - but some of its cons is making me consider further.

What I researched is that:

Nikon D3100 DSLR
Alan Photo ~ $849
Harvey Norman ~ $999

Pros:
Same price as Canon G12 (I like the flip LCD!) on Alan Photo.
Cheaper than Canon 550D
In build photo processing

Cons:
No wireless remote (erm, sometimes want to take self-portraits with friends)
No external mic input (don't really care about this actually)
No usb cable included in kit?
No bracketing
No AF motor?
Only compatible with certain lenses. AF-S?


Canon 550D DSLR
AP: 18-55mm ~ $1399, BC: $1299 +/- $1.3k
18-200mm ~ $1699
Privilege Programme: $1072, $1.3k

Pros:
Auto Bracketing
External mic output

Cons:
…. Nothing. Expensive.
No in-build processing (can use photo editing prog?)


One thing I am concerned about is weight, will a DSLR stop me from bringing my camera out regularly? My bag is usually quite heavy already.

I also read that buying a DSLR is more about the after, like the entire system. The lens compatibility etc. Can seniors advise me on Nikon/Canon lens? Also is it a must to get a dry cabinet when I purchase my DSLR? Can I use a drybox instead?

Apologies for the long post, but really would like to hear some opinions and input. I did quite abit of research, read the guides on buying a DSLR.. stickies, etc, I guess I just need to hear if the D3100 is a right choice.

Hey cup, the price for D3100 is actually 835 with 1 8G card... just went to funan yesterday. This is the price quoted by challenger and SLR Rev.

Same situation as you -comparing D3100 and Pentax KR and Canon 550D...in the end got a KR since the feel is better. the speed is also much faster at 6X per second compare to 3x for D3100.

KR is selling at 910 so it's slight more ex than D3100. Then again, you cant really go wrong with either camera. Have tried the D3100, got to say it's really impressive. value for $$.