I am looking at a DSLR Camera

I am looking to finally purchase a DSLR. I'm looking at the Nikon d3000, 10.2 MPX and it comes with the 18-55 lense. Does anyone have any experience with this camera?

Also, what else should I pick up with the camera other than a memory card?

[Blueface]

Darrell,
There is a thread a few months ago from Patrick, Mr. Maduro, where we beat to death just about all cameras.
Me personally? I am a Nikon fan and have the D80 but hear it is now discontinued.
Only have seen the 3000 you refer to on commercials. Looks nice.
Get the best lens you can for the money.
I have the 28-105 mm Nikkor and it is an awesome lens.

Ah if their is already a thread, I'll find it. Sorry for the duplicate.

Mods you can lock this up.

[Mr.Maduro]

http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showthread.php?t=6976

Not much on the D3000 but some other good info.

[Scothew]

Nikon fan here as well. The D3000 is a good looking camera, but you might could find a D40 for cheaper and its going to do basically the same in every aspect, but is a tad lower in resolution if I remember off hte top of my head.

Theres alot of great info about nikons, canons, and everything else on www.kenrockwell.com he does reviews on the stuff and as far as i know doesnt get paid from either source or anything.

edit: for a general purpose do everything lens, spend hte money and get a Nikon 18-200 VR lens. Its fabulous. i've not taken it off my camera since i bought it.

I havnt messed with the D-3000, but im sure if Nikon stuck to what they normally do, its basically and updated D40 and thats a great thing! Although most reviews ive read are good on the 3000 Ken Rockwell (whose opinion is not the most highly regarded on most camera forums) clearly wasnt a fan of the 3000. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3000.htm

They only thing you should think about adding right off the bat is probably a second lens. The kit lense is that 18-55 which is in my opinion a little crappy. My girlfriend uses it with her D40 and it drives me up the wall when I use it. Something about it just feels cheap, while the pictures turn out well, it just doesnt feel very well made. Im sure youve read a lot of articles but heres some time saver if you havnt read Thom Hogan's review of the lens http://www.bythom.com/1855lens.htm

For just an all around lens thats not gonna set you back tons, look for a white boxed, 18-105. I think they are around $300-350 last i looked Thats the lens that comes with all the D-90s so theres tons of them out there. Other than being a little soft at the end has worked out well for a great walk around lens with plenty of range. That would be just my suggestion. But it really depends on what your shooting. For me the 18-55mm is limiting in the longer length so thats where the 105 helped me. If your curious for more 18-105 shots by an amatuer ive got about 30 on my flickr acct that will give you examples of what someone who has no clue what they are doing can give you. So i give all credit to the hardware. http://www.flickr.com/photos/calexan/

Ive also heard that the 35mm DX prime is a really great lens that makes you use the dreaded foot focus to get your shots.

I threw a couple of examples in at the bottom. While nothing to write home to mom about picture quality is great with both lenses. Just remember neither of us really know what we are doing.

Shot with a 18-105 on a D90




Shot with the 18-55 on a D40 (by the gf)

And why is this in the cigar thread..... i just noticed that

[Chemyst]

I occasionally look at getting a new DSLR, to replace
my 8MP Nikon Prosumer (Coolpix 8800).

There are two things that I'm looking for:

1) at LEAST double the number of pixels (16MP)

2) a full 24mm X 36mm sensor, to make use of
previously owned Nikon 35mm AF glass.

The Coolpix is nice, but won't make anything larger
than an OK 11X14, or a nice 8X10.

I understand that Nikon does have a full sized sensor
line, now. Good. I think it's the DX line. Not sure.

It would be nice to be able to afford Photoshop, and
learn it thoroughly, too. But, Adobe wants too much $$$$.
My entire wet darkroom didn't cost what Adobe wants
for just the current version of CS4 Design Premium. Sheesh.

Chemyst

[ir13]

Check out the D90, you can still find them new and its a great camera as well, just a year old.

Its more about getting to know the features of the camera and making the work best, then buying the most expensive camera thinking it will take the best pictures.

[Tenor CS]

Originally Posted by Chemyst

I understand that Nikon does have a full sized sensor
line, now. Good. I think it's the DX line. Not sure.

DX is the smaller digital sensor. FX is full frame. Most old Nikon lenses fit on the new DSLR bodies. But some functions like TTL metering don't work. In bad cases, even AF doesn't work. But that's rare.

[King James]

I'm a canon guy.

Won't get into Canon vs. Nikon (as that discussion can end nowhere good lol)

BUT, you can get a 40D for relatively cheap right now (and it is has a better sensor than the newer 50D )

Or, the new rebels that Canon has come out with are really not bad, then you can save $$ on the body and focus on the lens.

I am assuming the Nikon you looked at comes with a kit lens. It is my opinion that kit lenses are FAR less superior than spending some money on a better lens. The body is not what is important for quality pictures (having the most MPs, etc doesn't matter) Sacrifice a little bit on the body if you are on budget and put it into a better lens. A faster, sharper lens will help out way more than an extra MP or two for the body.

[Tenor CS]

I have tons of both Nikon and Canon film and digital gear.

3 Nikon Bodies, 3 Canon Bodies, about 12 lenses total.

Both Nikon and Canon make perfectly acceptable DSLR's. My take-everywhere camera is a 4 year old Nikon D50. In my experience, the Canon shutters are quieter. My Nikons have slower, but more reliable auto-focus.

The 2 best good investments you can make:

1. A GREAT QUALITY bag that is cushioned enough to protect your gear and light enough that you can carry it around all day.
2. A tripod or monopod. Carbon fiber is expensive, but much lighter.

(As a bonus suggestion, regardless of what brand of body you get, spring for a 50mm/f1.8 lens. $100-125 or so, and essential for low-light photography. Your least expensive option in a prime (non-zoom) low-light lens.

Also, never buy grey market (not intended for US sale) stuff. You might save a few bucks, but not having a warranty isn't worth it.

PM me if you need more advice.

Example pics taken with my D50
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...6&l=574b4eaa24
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...6&l=9b72703b62

Originally Posted by Chemyst

I occasionally look at getting a new DSLR, to replace
my 8MP Nikon Prosumer (Coolpix 8800).

There are two things that I'm looking for:

1) at LEAST double the number of pixels (16MP)

2) a full 24mm X 36mm sensor, to make use of
previously owned Nikon 35mm AF glass.

The Coolpix is nice, but won't make anything larger
than an OK 11X14, or a nice 8X10.

I understand that Nikon does have a full sized sensor
line, now. Good. I think it's the DX line. Not sure.

It would be nice to be able to afford Photoshop, and
learn it thoroughly, too. But, Adobe wants too much $$$$.
My entire wet darkroom didn't cost what Adobe wants
for just the current version of CS4 Design Premium. Sheesh.

Chemyst

I think anything of 10MP is almost overkill. Unless im printing posters for a living ive never came close to needing a 12+MP camera. So long as im shooting ISO 100-200 its always pretty clear when blown up.

I think the megapixel race between the companies got way out of hand way to quick. People will see a 6MP D40 and think their 12MP Point and Shoot will give them better pictures...... Its sad walking into an electronic store and seeing that most of the people there are just comparing MPs

[Dux]

Originally Posted by Darrell

I am looking to finally purchase a DSLR. I'm looking at the Nikon d3000, 10.2 MPX and it comes with the 18-55 lense. Does anyone have any experience with this camera?

Also, what else should I pick up with the camera other than a memory card?

Darrell

I would ask yourself what your looking for in a camera before you buy one.
I will agree with everyone here that Nikon is the way to go. I just bought a Nikon D5000 and couldn't be happier with my choice. The D5000 is a go between the D90 and the D60. You get a lot of the bells and whistles of the D90 without the price tag. The D90 will run you "Body and Lens" around $1200 depending of where you shop. However for you can get a D5000 for $850. The D5000 also does 5min HD movies that you can play back on your TV, I nice little option for quick video. The D5000 has a swivel screen making hard see shots "over crowds" easier. The interface on the D5000 has also been overhauled, with the flick of your thumb you can select the type of setting your are planning to shot and the camera will adjust the shutter speed to match the requirements. here is a great video so you can see what I'm referring to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbz6BaT5tMk&feature=fvw/

No matter what camera you pick I'm sure you will be happy, also one thing to remember, The camera is a just a tool its the director that makes the shot

-Doug/Dux

[Beagleone]

Unless you are shooting high end photos, you shouldn't worry too much about the MP. I believe at 5mp, you should get a great blow up resolution for an 8x10 photos.

I got a D90 last year and have been very happy with it. I got a 18-200 zoom (non-kit), and have since picked up the SP-900 flash, but I want more lenses. I also shoot in RAW+JPG Fine, so I keep picking up 16GB SD cards whenever they are on sale.

[The Poet]

As for accessories, aside from lenses, flash, etc., Christian is right about a good bag and a tripod. For the tripod, keep this in mind - if the tripod is both small enough and light enough for you to feel comfortable carrying it around, it is worthless. The purpose of a good tripod is to hold your camera/lens both steady and in safety. To properly do this, it needs to be a pain in your @$$ to lug about. Sad fact, but true. Your health insurance may cover your hernia operation, but your warrenty will not cover a dropped camera.

I ended up going with a Lodge Brother today who is a photographer.

I got a Nikon d40 with the 18-55 lens. He also gave me the 18-200 lens because it just collects dust for him.

I think my next purchase for it will be the SB 600 flash. I got a nice bag, but no tripod yet.

[the nub]

Originally Posted by ir13

Its more about getting to know the features of the camera and making the work best, then buying the most expensive camera thinking it will take the best pictures.

I agree 100%.

[Blueface]

Originally Posted by Darrell

I ended up going with a Lodge Brother today who is a photographer.

I got a Nikon d40 with the 18-55 lens. He also gave me the 18-200 lens because it just collects dust for him.

I think my next purchase for it will be the SB 600 flash. I got a nice bag, but no tripod yet.

Very good camera.

Darrell,
As a former photographer who carried around on his shoulder enough flash power to reach the moon, I believe in more as opposed to less when it comes to flash power. You can always tone down power but you can't push power you don't have. I particularly used more as I threw light around, as opposed to directly at my subject.
Spend the extra money on the SB800.

I like it better than the SB600 for a few reasons.
One, already mentioned, more power.
Two, comes with a nifty diffuser cap that will allow you to shoot just about anywhere indoors with soft lighting as I did for weddings. You can always buy (and should) a better diffuser like a Gary Fong Whale or Dome.
Three, more power.
Four, more power.

Those are the eight good reasons.

[The Poet]

Yeah, flash power is good - that's why I usually carry a small thermonuclear device in my Tenba.