Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Exclusive 25% off Affinity Photo: Professional photo editing with no subscription!

Nikon D3200/D5100

kodachrome 6 703
1 Sep 2012 8:13AM
OK, wait fot it, the D3S 'without' battery weighs, 1246g [2.7 lb], Phew!

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

thewilliam 9 6.1k
1 Sep 2012 10:31AM

Quote:You would be far better off spending your money on good glass if you intend to stay with Nikon.

Nikon seems to have fewer lens issues than some other manufacturers. Even the 18-55, which must be the cheapest lens that they do, is a little gem of optical performance.

The performance of Nikon lenses with modest aperture seems as good as their wide-aperture brethren.
Hinksy 5 7 United Kingdom
1 Sep 2012 11:10AM
I have every intention of staying with Nikon mainly because I have a large collection of Nikon Lens'es & batteries I also prefer Nikon to other makes but that is just my opinion.

I am in many ways hopeful that I do not find much difference in either the D5100 or D3200 from my D3100... I just want to see which one handles better with all the different images I want to do and which one feels more like a proper camera than a toy, which one I can grow my photography with for the next couple of years etc...

What lens would you recommend if I was to purchase a new one?

At the moment I have the following:

Nikon 18-55 (kit lens)
Nikon 40mm (micro)
Nikon 35mm (1.8)
Nikon 55-300mm
Sigma 10-20mm
Tamron 18-200mm
Tamron 70-300mm

I was looking at the 105mm macro and I did consider the 50mm 1.4 but I thought that the 50mm could be a waste with having the 35mm 1.8??
thewilliam 9 6.1k
1 Sep 2012 1:04PM
It depends on what you want to photograph.

If you were serious about sports photography, you'd want to use wide-aperture telephotos in place of the zooms: or with architecture, a tilt and shift wide-angle.
Hinksy 5 7 United Kingdom
1 Sep 2012 4:10PM
I do like sporst but not really had much opportunity to do any sports photography just yet but I suppose if I had a good lens, any recommendations of what is on the market at the moment?

I did buy the 10-20mm wide angle for my landscape photography which I have to say I have only had it a couple of months and it has transformed my landscapes into something spectacular.
rvoller 6 33 United Kingdom
1 Sep 2012 10:08PM
I would recommend upgrading your kit lens to a higher quality lens as when I did with my d3100 the image quality was improved by obvious amounts
Hinksy 5 7 United Kingdom
2 Sep 2012 9:13AM
Teh Sigma 17-70mm looks a good lens, and appears to cover the same sort of range as the kits lens whilst being much sharper.
thewilliam 9 6.1k
2 Sep 2012 12:49PM
Hinksy, unless you have very heavily laden pockets, I'd suggest that you don't buy anything unless you're reasonably certain that you're going to use it. You can hire most kit and in many cases, the dealer will remit hire charges against the purchase price.

I've learned the hard way that it's not a good idea to buy kit first and then hope you find a use for it. A couple of years ago, I found a Hasselblad bellows unit for a very good price and thought I'd be doing lots of fine-art close-ups. It's been used just once!

Sports lenses are seriously expensive. You'd have to pay about 5k for a nice used 500mm but you could get most of your money back when selling it. Now that the Olympics are over and the Paralympics drawing to a close, long telephotos will be plentiful and cheaper.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.