I guess for a beginner it's ok, but personally I'd invest in a cheap dslr which you can always sell if you don't like it.
The T3 is actually pretty great to get you into the mindset of taking good photos, changing lenses, setting everything manually, etc.
Buy better gear as your skill grows, but start at a good point.
So basically a D3100 with sony sensor and wifi...
wow it's only going to be $700? I seriously wonder how it will compare to the a65, the current cheapest sony camera with the same sensor.
to me noticeable differences between the two
OVF vs EVF
4fps vs 10fps
1080@30p/24p vs 1080@60p/30p/24p
no gps vs gps
in lens stabilization vs in body stabilization
iso 100-6400 (boost to 12800) vs iso 100-16000 (boost to 25600, and i believe 50 iirc)
i also wonder how people are going to perceive it with the kit lens, as the nex 7 has been criticized with the 18-55 because of lack of resolving power and demanding high quality glass for the pixel density. but with the couple lost features from the a65 i can see why it's a bit cheaper, still a VERY exciting camera as the nex 7 with the sensor is rated as one of the best APS-C cameras (right by the k5 and the fuji x-pro), so it will be interesting to see what nikon manages to pull out with their firmware and no SLT blocking light (like the a65 and a77 which are rated lower on image quality than the nex7 because of this)
24mp? What the hell? Why, exactly? If I'm not mistaken mp =/= quality, right?
I don't really want professional gear. I just want something to do decent photographs of my everyday life I can print at home on 4x6 glossy paper.
The only thing professional about the d3200 is the image quality, aka the only thing you want to be professional at that price point
Which one should I get? My budget is $118 with shipping.
Video and Audio quality are important to me. A Stereo mic is a plus.
Stereo Microphone, and great nice video.
My friend said he'd split the difference on that Kodak.
If you know any good ones within the price range, go ahead and list.
Thank you for replying, both of them have great mics for internal
So I'm thinking of moving up from a Nikon D3000 to maybe a D5100/D90. What do you guys think and do you have any other recommendations?
I just won an Olympus Trip 35 on ebay for about £8 including P&P, I can't wait to see this very hyped up camera.
Is this shady?
I've been wanting to get into photography for a while, but it doesn't help that I have near no income and am down on my luck in terms of money.
If I were you I'd either find some nice 35mm film camera or save up.
Every film development place in the area is shutting down, and the ones left are niche places right beside starbucks where all the hipsters hang.
Film isn't an option. I want video functionality too, which is probably why I'm leaning toward a point and shoot.
I'm interested though, how would one get a picture taken on a film camera (on 35mm film) onto your computer, is there an easy to to do it or does it require you getting them developed, then scanning them? Surely that would be more expensive in the long run than just getting a point and shoot?
The D3200 looks pretty spiffy
Yes child I done won me an Olympus OM-2 with a 135mm f2.8 Promaster lens on ebay fo fifty biguns. Should nicely compliment my Olympus OM-1N and the handful of OM lens I have.
That D90 auction doesn't list how many previous shutter activations it's had as far as I can see... shady...
From an amateur's view, I honestly don't know why you (or anyone who isn't a supersrs pro-photog) would need anything more than a D3100/D3200, unless you were focusing on something like sports photography or very low light photography, which would require a more expensive body tailored for that.
I mean, one teacher once told me it was "90% about the glass" and I agree and that's something I love about my DSLR, the possibility to swap the all-around 18-55 for a 200 with a 2x teleconverter to take a picture of a bird from 100m away, or put a fisheye on it and take pictures and videos of skaters and stuff like that.
I'd say that if you can get decent money for the D3000 (not likely ) a D3200 and a new lens would be an interesting buy. You get video recording and a bigger sensor, a couple more functions, better performance in low light, and way higher MP count.
If anyone has something to say on the matter, enlighten me. "Why would you want something more?" is my question.
Because consumers basically have been sold the idea that they
want to beare a great photographer for years, which leads to desire for the "very best gear" (nota bene: not always the best for them). Now consumers are being sold the idea that they should be great videographers now, which obviously demands the very best equipment in their price range. After all, who would watch their videos of the road mystically flowing beside a moving car on Vimeo if it wasn't taken with the flavour of the month DSLR?
Heard about the D3200 just this morning at work and I was blown away. For an entry level it's fucking incredible.
Gonna be a mad rush to clear the 5100's though before these come.
Basically look at what you dislike about your current setup. If its image quality, go d3200. If its autofocus, or ergonomics, then d5100
No problem, glad to be able to help :)
I'm looking for a digital camera that has a retro aesthetic to it (think X10, or older film cameras), non-DSLR as my price range doesn't quite make it, looking at about £100 ($150), obviously picture quality is more important than aesthetics, but I'd love something that looks like the X10, the standard point and shoot look is horrible.
Actually, I'm open to 35mm film cameras in the same price range too if anyone has any ideas, maybe I should go 2nd hand?