So for mother's day and my birthday this year, I have decided I want and am going to get myself a new camera. I've got a really crappy point and shoot that I just want to throw over a bridge. Anyway, I'm looking at either getting a Nikon D3000 or this...
I like the one from Target because it can record video in 1080p which is appealing to DH even though we already have two mini camcorders that record in 720p. I don't see video capabilities for the D3000 but my thinking is that for another $100 I can get the really nice camera with the lens and what not. So I'm just not sure. So for those of you that have a Nikon DLSR, could you tell me how easy it is to use? I'm just afraid I'm going to spend all that money on it and the pictures turn out slightly better than what I get now with my point and shoot. And I remember somebody on here saying that if you don't take the time to learn about the DLSR and take advantage of its capabilities then you might as well just stick with a point and shoot or something along those lines.
Re: NBR: DSLR or really nice point at shoot?
We just bit the bullet and bought a DSLR (Nikon D90), so you can probably guess what I'd choose.
We tried out my grandmother's Nikon DSLR before buying and really felt comfortable with it. We also loved the quality of the pictures and the shutter speed, which to us is really important because we always experience a delay with our point and shoot. As a result, we're always a few seconds too late when we try to take some pics of H. Plus, the flash always blinds her (we have a ton of wide-eyed WTF pictures of her because of this) and we never had a problem with the DSLR. IMO, a DSLR is going to hold its value pretty well, and the technology probably won't be outdated as soon.
ETA: I know nothing about either camera you're considering, nor am I a photography expert by any means. I was just speaking about my experience with our point and shoot (Sony Cybershot). The Nikon D3000 is definitely a nicer camera so it probably doesn't have some of the same problems.
This is perfect! Thanks for your review of the P100. I couldn't find a whole lot of reviews. Not enough to make me feel confident in buying it anyway whereas with the DSLR cameras, it seems like everybody on here's got one and loves theirs.
we were in the market for a new camera and decided to go in-between - not a P&S but not a fancy DSLR. based on the reviews in consumer reports and cnet, we bought this one:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002LITT3I/ref=oss_product
so far, so good!
I've got no problems with buying lenses once I figure out how to use it. So is the standard 18-55 lens just kind of useless? Should I just buy the body and the 55-200 lens instead? If the 55-200 lens is so much better and the one people like to use the most, what's the benefit of having the 18-55 lens?
I'd also consider the size of the camera too... We have a p&s and 2 SLRs and we take them to very different places. If we're going out for the night or somewhere that I don't want to carry my purse/camera bag, then we take the p&s. the SLR is going to take up a lot of space and if you think you'll want a camera to throw in the diaper bag so that you can take it with you to GTGs, the park, etc, then the p&s might win in that category.
in general, i think if you have any interest in photography and learning the settings so that you can at least use some of the camera's potential, then get the SLR. if you're just going to leave it on auto and use the kit lens, then i'd get a p&s because it will take similar pictures and be much easier for you to take anywhere you want.
i don't know anything about nikon's lineup, but for canon there is a G10, which is a crossover p&s/SLR. it's a little bigger than a traditional p&s, but it will still fit in a purse, but it has very little lag time on the shutter and a pretty advanced focusing system. I think you can even get external lenses for it and a hot shoe flash.