need help first dslr

[blakrose9999]

I want to make the jump to a DSLR. Years ago i used to use a regular film SLR and I can no longer stand my limitations with point and shoot digital cameras. Currently I am looking at the Nikon D5100 and Cannon Rebel T3i. I am open to other suggestions just going with those as I am familiar with both brands from film days. I do want the slightly higher than entry level camera as I know the more I get comfortable with it I will want the expanded features the T3i and D5100 have over the T3 and D3100, and I know I will never convince hubby to let me buy a new one too soon after. Any help is appreciated.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Do you have a budget in mind? Depending on your budget, you can also look at the Canon 60D and the Nikon 7000. That will get you into the prosumer arena with plenty of growth to go. Also, there is Pentax, Kr (entry/mid level) and the K5, and Sony (formerly Minolta) with standard DSLR's and their new translucent technology DSLR's. Both Pentax and Sony have in-body stabilization vs in-lens stabilization of the Canon and Nikon's. There is a large variety of cameras available today and all are very good. I would recommend you handle as many as possible to ensure proper ergonomics for you along with the feature set that you want.

 

[blakrose9999]

Do you have a budget in mind? Depending on your budget, you can also look at the Canon 60D and the Nikon 7000. That will get you into the prosumer arena with plenty of growth to go. Also, there is Pentax, Kr (entry/mid level) and the K5, and Sony (formerly Minolta) with standard DSLR's and their new translucent technology DSLR's. Both Pentax and Sony have in-body stabilization vs in-lens stabilization of the Canon and Nikon's. There is a large variety of cameras available today and all are very good. I would recommend you handle as many as possible to ensure proper ergonomics for you along with the feature set that you want.

as for budget i want to stay under $1000. Also is there a big difference between in body and in lens stabilization?

 

[photo_chick]

as for budget i want to stay under $1000. Also is there a big difference between in body and in lens stabilization?

The biggest difference... having in body stabilzation means every lens has IS. Having it in the lens means not every lens will. I'm not an IS fan myself, and there really is no need for it on some lenses, but if it's something you want having it in the body might be a good thing for you.

And while were on lens features... be aware that the Nikon D5100 has some limitations on what lenses it will auto focus with. Not as many as the D3100, but there are still some. Here's a handy dandy link with a chart.
http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html

 

[ChiSoxKeith]

Spend a lot of time with the cameras.

Make sure you get the camera that fits well in your hands and you like using the menus and what not.

 

[VVFF]

The biggest difference... having in body stabilzation means every lens has IS. Having it in the lens means not every lens will. I'm not an IS fan myself, and there really is no need for it on some lenses, but if it's something you want having it in the body might be a good thing for you.

And while were on lens features... be aware that the Nikon D5100 has some limitations on what lenses it will auto focus with. Not as many as the D3100, but there are still some. Here's a handy dandy link with a chart.
http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html

Don't know anyone could not be a fan of IS...I guess you could argue it will fail earlier...possibly true...but that's about the only downside.

And I hate the oft-repeated "some lenses don't need IS". I completely disagree...any lens can use IS. So what if its handholdable easier the wider the angle...I can hold it even longer by hand with IS.

 

[photo_chick]

Don't know anyone could not be a fan of IS...I guess you could argue it will fail earlier...possibly true...but that's about the only downside.

And I hate the oft-repeated "some lenses don't need IS". I completely disagree...any lens can use IS. So what if its handholdable easier the wider the angle...I can hold it even longer by hand with IS.

I can't use IS. It makes me dizzy when I look through the view finder. Something about the small shifts messes with my depth perception (at least according to the optometrist). I have talked with a few other people who have the same problem. I know most people don't have any problems with it, but a few of us freaks do. Consequently, I'm not a fan.

I guess I don't see the point of it on lenses that I can hand hold in near darkness.

 

[zackiedawg]

Then you might actually prefer the Sony/Pentax in body versions - any of the Optical Viewfinder versions don't show the stabilization in the viewfinder - only in the photo. So it won't mess with your perception.

And I agree with VVFF - it may not be needed, but having it can be a nice perk, even on fast primes and UWAs - I've used them extensively to allow me to extend the handholdability well beyond what would normally be expected - shutter speeds of over 1 second.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

That is one of the ongoing discussions about stabilization. When its in-lens you see the adjustments. When its in-body you don't. It is said that in-lens is more effective than in-body. One of the reasons I shoot Pentax is for the in-body and since I don't see any of the adjustments I feel I concentrate better. The lenses tend to be cheaper also. Although manufacturers like Sigma are making more of their lenses stabilized, they are still making the non-stabilized cheaper versions.