d3100 vs d3200 vs d5100 vs Canon

gad-westy said:
To try and clear up this confusion. All Canon bodies have a built in auto focus motor. That means that they can auto focus with any auto focus compatible lens. If a lens has its own built in motor, it will use that instead as it is generally faster and quieter.

Nikon's lowest end bodies do not have built in auto focus motors. Any body without a top LCD screen will not have its own AF motor, including the D3100, D3200 and D5100. This means that to have auto focus you need to use a lens with its own built in motor. Nikon offer such a huge range of these that this is of no real concern these days. Third parties, such as Sigma, Tamron and Tokina generally now fit auto focus motors into their lenses as standard as well as it generally offers faster focusing.

Erm, basically, what I'm saying is, I wouldn't worry too much about it either way.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this - doesn't help me decide at all!
 
j07cmt said:
@Sarky

(being the only Canon man over on Aria)
Click to expand...

Not true ;) i just can't be bothered getting dragged into a Canon/Nikon fanboi debate.

As Sarky and others on here have said get one of each in your hand and try them if you possibly can, there is very little to choose between them.

Website X might say camera Y has better Z but at the end of the day if you can't tell the difference when it comes to the ACTUAL pictures it boils down to what you want from the camera and how it feels in your hands.

Whatever you get i am sure you will love it and hopefully share some good pictures.
 
oh hai Mac :)

many thanks Graham, that has really cleared things up.

let's continue photo meetup talk on Aria forum, so we don't spam Chris' thread.
 
j07cmt said:
Thanks for this - doesn't help me decide at all!
Click to expand...

:) Look on the positive side. If you can't really decide, it probably means there is not a lot wrong with any of them, which in turn means that you can go into a shop and buy whichever one you fancy in the knowledge that you're not making a big mistake.
 
gad-westy said:
:) Look on the positive side. If you can't really decide, it probably means there is not a lot wrong with any of them, which in turn means that you can go into a shop and buy whichever one you fancy in the knowledge that you're not making a big mistake.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I did when I was deciding between the 550D and D3100.
 
Hi mac!

Well, I guess it comes down to availability and price when I hit the add to basket button.

So the 550d is a bit more than the d3100. Is the 550d more comparable to the d5100?
 
j07cmt said:
I'm now confused!

I thought the Canon had a motor in the body, so that you can use 3rd party lenses, such as Tamron, Sigma etc with AF
Click to expand...
All EOS compatible lenses have an AF motor built in. Canon don't use in-body motors. :)
 
Best advice is go and try out as many camera bodies as possible and see which one you feel comfortable using, can operate and reach the controls with ease. There isn't a great deal of difference between the entry level camera's. It was probably easier in my day, I have 3 camera's to choose from. Canon 350D or 20D and Nikon's D70s choose the 20D.

I'm not a big fan of the entry level Nikon's, just think you're missing the opportunity to using some fantastic lenses from their old range of lenses because the body lacks a focus motor. I wouldn't even consider the 3000 or 5000 models, D90 or its replace the D7000 would be my choices depending on budget.

As for Canon, well the XXXD models were too compact, preferred how the XXD models handled.

Don't get hung up on mega pixels, as you said, more mega pixels on a small sensor increase in loss of detail and noise when you start to really crop into the image.

There also a great 2nd hand market, with the used camera bodies, you can get more camera for your $$$ and hence more money to spend on decent lenses, as that's where a good proportion of your budget should be put
 
Here is an in-depth review of the d5100. Features and image quality are compared to the d3100. The same website has an in-depth review of the d3100 too.:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5100/

Personally, I went for a d5100 with 18-55 kit lens, which maxed out my budget at the time, as I bought it as a result of an insurance claim from a stolen d60. I went for it because the low-light/high-ISO noise was significantly better than the competition. I figured I could buy good quality lenses in the coming years as my budget allows, e.g the 24-70mm f2.8, then upgrade the body when I needed to in a few years time. It will last me a good long time - it's a solid camera, and in my opinion, much easier than the Canon equivalent.
 
With a budget of £700 you could be very close to a D300 and 18-200 lens if you shop around, £800 might be closer the mark but you are certainly in the ball park.
 
I have been looking at 2nd hand, 7d, 60d, d300 and d7000 all come close depending on condition.

Upon reflection, I'm thinking I may go 1100d/d3100, buy some decent lenses, and upgrade at a later date.
 
j07cmt said:
I have been looking at 2nd hand, 7d, 60d, d300 and d7000 all come close depending on condition.

Upon reflection, I'm thinking I may go 1100d/d3100, buy some decent lenses, and upgrade at a later date.
Click to expand...

With a £700 budget you can easily get a decent body (600D on Digital Rev body only for around £400) then buy some second hand lenses, maybe looking out for a 17-85mm and 55-250mm for example and skip the kit lens altogether.

http://www.digitalrev.com/product/canon-eos-600d-dslr-body/MTExMDU_A
http://www.digitalrev.com/product/canon-ef-s-55-250mm/MjE4NA_A_A
 
Last edited:
Definitely worth getting to at least hold the different cameras as they are noticeably different.
I have just changed from a 20D to an 1100D (because I wanted lightest weight) and figured the 1100D would perform at least as well as 20D due to age difference (which it does).
However, they are completely different cameras, the 20D was very well made and solid, with a lot of rubber on grip, a large grip due to larger size whereas the 1100D is clearly cheaply built, no rubber smaller grip area etc,.

I am not that bothered about differences in menus, buttons etc, and both cameras can do all the common things I do very quickly but this may matter more to you.

For info - I got the 1100D as a Canon refurb for £193 and it is like new.
 
I went to currysdigital and jessops last night. I'd say the Canon's felt better, bigger, stonger.
 
Sarky said:
I'm excited there's probably going to be another Canon club member on Aria lol.
Click to expand...

Still got the obstacle I will call the girlfriend for now. Wants to know why I can save money for a camera, but I can't save for a ring!

Too long a story, I would happily buy her a ring but things aren't quite right with my ma and pa at the moment and can't imagine getting married with half full church.

Currently watching a few cameras on ebay, deciding whether a 2nd hand higher model might be good - I can then say to her it was a bargain/accidental bid/such a low price, I never thought I would win it!
 
j07cmt said:
Too long a story, I would happily buy her a ring but things aren't quite right with my ma and pa at the moment and can't imagine getting married with half full church.
Click to expand...

You should try explaining that to her maybe.

It is only when married for 10 years that you can buy what you want with no questions asked as you both know you are as bad as each other at smuggling in new toys :)
 
She bought two pairs of shoes last night and had the cheek to take my wallet from me when I walked into Jessops!

She knows about my family problems, but says I should marry her anyway!
 
Ah but shoes are practical you see, everybody needs shoes. Whether you needs 30 pairs is a different matter though of course.
 
550 is a very good camera. Paired with a good lens you won't go wrong
 
j07cmt said:
Currently watching a few cameras on ebay, deciding whether a 2nd hand higher model might be good - I can then say to her it was a bargain/accidental bid/such a low price, I never thought I would win it!
Click to expand...

Need to check how many actuations/clicks the camera has. I wouldn't buy a camera with more than 20k.

Good luck on persuading though mate...
 
Got a d3100, kit lens, bag 4gb card and Hoya Pro 1 digital filter for £300 (unwanted gift).

Too good a deal to buy a Canon - I'll invest in some good glass until I can afford a D300s/new model etc
 
j07cmt said:
Got a d3100, kit lens, bag 4gb card and Hoya Pro 1 digital filter for £300 (unwanted gift).

Too good a deal to buy a Canon - I'll invest in some good glass until I can afford a D300s/new model etc
Click to expand...

congrats - i thoroughly enjoyed my d3100 - just remember to look at AF-S lenses when adding to your kit or they wont AF on the d3100 (as it has no inbuilt focus motor). not really an issue as there are a good selection of nikon lenses that are AF-S now.

:thumbs:
 
j07cmt said:
Got a d3100, kit lens, bag 4gb card and Hoya Pro 1 digital filter for £300 (unwanted gift).

Too good a deal to buy a Canon - I'll invest in some good glass until I can afford a D300s/new model etc
Click to expand...

Thats a very nice price! Hope you can get used to it as you did prefer the feel of the Canons.
 
I like to think of myself as adaptable. The 550d obviously felt stronger and more heavy duty that the d3100, its twice the price. Sadly, SWMBO didn't think my budget was sensible so I had to make a compromise. The d3100 seems a good camera for the price, I'll just have to make sure I'm gentle with it!
 
Proof will be in the pudding but although the D3100 and 1100D level of cameras feel light and cheap, plastics are pretty tough these days. I am not planning on treating my 1100D with kid gloves.
In fact I would treat a better built, but much more expensive camera more gently most probably in fear of damaging something much more expensive.
 
The front bumper of your car takes a far, far more regular battering than any camera, and plastics are good enough for that.

IMHO, people should be far more worried about the delicate and hi-tech innards than the shell. It's impact and water that do far more damage than abrasion and time.
 
danbroad said:
The front bumper of your car takes a far, far more regular battering than any camera, and plastics are good enough for that.

IMHO, people should be far more worried about the delicate and hi-tech innards than the shell. It's impact and water that do far more damage than abrasion and time.
Click to expand...

Actually ( and setting safety issues aside for a second) one of my biggest bugbears with modern cars is that they don't have a proper bumper any more and one 10mph tap on a front panel is usually enough to require a replacement.

If a camera gets dinged properly, it's usually a lot faster than that (think laws of gravity etc). If anything cameras are a lot more robust than car bodywork.
 
DemiLion said:
Actually ( and setting safety issues aside for a second) one of my biggest bugbears with modern cars is that they don't have a proper bumper any more and one 10mph tap on a front panel is usually enough to require a replacement.
Click to expand...

Yeah it was much better with heavy chromed steel bumpers that were guaranteed to cause a pedestrian some real damage!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top