:lol: what :lol: anyway stick with Nikon since you have lenses which consist of more than the kit shit

 

I'd keep the D90. Who cares if it's more than you need? If you're enjoying it, and you didn't bankrupt yourself to get it, then keep it!

 

If I unload it, I'm up $1500 for the gear fund, and will have the D3000.

For all intents and purposes, it'd be like swapping my current DSLR for a DSLR that does the same thing and a shiny new Strat. :idea:

 

...or Drew's sister????

 

...or an SLSMG?

 

I have one :agreed::woohoo:

 

So in an unprecedented act of fiscal responsibility...

:lol:

Matt, notice how he didn't say a banged up old silver Strat. :lol:

 

Go for it, I've heard the D3000 is a good camera...I'd definitely get one with the 18-55 VR IS lens if it's only $50 more.

 

Yup. The first IS lens I picked up made all of my standard lenses collect dust. It really makes a monster difference, especially in low lighting.

I ordered the D3000. :yesway:

 

Also: I used Diner's Club points to buy it. :yesway:

(Every 10k DC points = $100 gift cerfiticate to Amazon.com, and since DC is my corporate card, I have a LOT of fuckin' points. :lol

 

Sounds like a great plan to me. Yeah, the D90, while a great camera, really does sound like way more than you need. If you were really into maybe extensive landscape photography, nature macros, long range wildlife, or even studio work, just one of those things, I'd say keep it. But for futzing around, nah.

Really, I think Jeff has the right idea. Me, I need a big camera, and I'm going to upgrade this summer likely. But for just walking around, a smaller camera, with a lighter, easier to carry body, maybe a super zoom or a small lens, definitely something with a smaller sensor (since smaller sensor equals great focal length for relative to lens size) is better.

Is the D3000 full size sensor? I'm really enamored of those micro 4/3rds myself. Basically same performance as the full size sensors, but allowing for smaller lenses. :yesway:

 

I have a pretty ace P&S (Canon SD1100IS). My old Rebel XT took excellent macro shots, and the D90 (obviously) slayed with my Macro lens as well. But I don't print them, sell them, or really do anything with them - I just like walking around shooting, and having the extra abilities of a full DSLR as opposed to a P&S. Basically I'm selling off my D90 kit, keeping my favorite two lenses, and snagging a lower end model (though a $600 camera is hardly "low end") for free with points. :yesway:

 

^ the D3000 has a smaller 1.5x crop sensor, which is the same as most of Nikon's other consumer level DSLRs. Only the D700 and the D3 line have full size sensors.

 

Those full size sensors rule for low light/high ISO shots.

But the 4/3rds are essentially comparable. Not quite as good, but far lighter lens-wise.

 

chris probably has DX lenses anyway so he wouldn't want a FF sensor

 

I've been considering picking one of these up too.

I bought my now ex girlfriend a Nikon D50 (discontinued now) and that thing was fucking retardedly awesome. It took the best pictures I have ever seen. I have pictures of my cats that look like you can reach in and pet them :lol:

On a side note, I don't think I'm ever buying anything nearly that expensive for a woman ever again :lol: Worst $1500 I ever spent on that damn camera. Hope she broke it the day after she moved out :lol:

 

Lens is always going to be more important than the body, now that the bodies have gotten to such a high level even on the consumer end. Drop the D90, invest more in fast ED glass. My brother in law on my advice runs a $400 Rebel XS, with about $3000 in L lenses, and he couldn't be happier. He's a landscape/portrait guy, as well as shooting his kids' sporting events, and has already paid off his first L lens via selling prints to other parents. He sees no need for a higher end body, because the XS freezes everything as needed, focus is perfect, etc.

Maybe it's my old-school photog arrogance, but I have to laugh at people who think they need a really expensive body (not aiming this at you, Chris or anyone else here, just what I saw in my days selling the things). In my day I shot moto-cross with an FM2n in manual focus/manual exposure (that's all it had) with an MD-12 motor drive, and the pics turned out great, consistently.

All this automation bullshit has done is further disconnect people from the art. Now of course you can shoot all these dSLR's in manual, but the temptation to do all automatic is too much, and people rarely learn why a camera does what it does.

 

All this automation bullshit has done is further disconnect people from the art. Now of course you can shoot all these dSLR's in manual, but the temptation to do all automatic is too much, and people rarely learn why a camera does what it does.

I have a Canon Powershot S5 (non-DSLR, but about one step down the chain) that I bought as my first "decent" camera to learn on, and while I'll occasionally shoot in auto mode, I'll at least generally use the "aperture" and "shutter speed" modes where you're manually entering values for those parameters, but the camera is adjusting the rest based on the light conditions. It's still cheating, but I'm gradually learning.

I'm also gassing like hell for a DSLR. There's just something more "liquid" about the shots I've seen from DSLRs than even my relatively good consumer camera.

 

As far as the original topic is concerned, I did sell my D90 kit, and am waiting on my amazon GC to show up so that I can grab the D3000. Damn things take 2 weeks to get here.

 

:lol:

Eh, I'm sure in a couple of months I'll crack and be posting asking for DSLR advice. :lol: I just don't feel like I'm good enough to justify it yet.

 

I want a DSLR because those are the ones that take the best pics. I've been through a lot of regular digital cams, and the pics usually suck. If I get the D3000, I'd only be getting the stock lens, and shooting in auto :lol: I have no interest in artsy shots, but that's what I did with my ex's D50, and the pictures were incredible.

I might do manual focus once in awhile in low light conditions where autofocus sucks donkey dick, but I keep my shit in auto.

 

Manual is good for long exposures (cool night shots, light trails, etc). And a 55-200 lens is a monster difference from the stock 18-55. Once you get into it, you'll see. The 18-55 is nice, but having that extra focal length makes a world of difference.

 

It will probably be awhile until I get one anyways, in saving mode for that house, probably have a new model out by then :lol:

 

What's odd is that my initial thought in this thread was to just sell everything and get another Rebel XT. I paid ~$600ish for it when they first came out, and they're still 4-500 everywhere.

 

So, if I go DSLR, that's where you'd recommend to start? Jeff too, it appears?

 

Right on. Also, Drew, if you get the D3000, it's always handy to have a buddy with the same rig for questions/lens-borrowing, etc. If you recall the day we spent in Boston with Jay shooting the boats and such, I spent almost that entire day with his IS 55-200 on my camera.

 

I DO remember that - I don't think Jay or I were quite sure if he was getting it back at the end of the night. :lol:

Does the Nikon have similar aperture-prioritization and shutter-prioritization settings as the Canon? I know you never really used those, but I'm kind of hooked on them, so it'd be something I'd definitely miss...

 

The D3000 seems quite similar to my D60 features-wise. I can't fault it. It's my first and only DSLR, the only thing swaying me towards buying another is the live-preview feature but even then, that's not important enough for me to drop a load of money on a new one right now. My sister has a few Canons and a Nikon that she uses for her photography degree. I tried them out and much preferred the Nikon UI. At the moment I'm using the 18-55 lens that came with the camera but I've been looking at getting a 55-200 lens. I want to get back into taking pictures, maybe plan a trip somewhere awesome where the scenery doesn't just consist of concrete jungle!

 

I just need something to take pictures of me humping gear, my pets, bands I go see, and maybe some vacation shots or something :lol:

 

pretty much any of them will do that. For most people the only difference between the brands is just how they feel and if they like how it functions because they all have most peoples' needs covered as far as lenses are concerned.

 

Well I loved that Nikon so I'll probably end up with the D3000, or it's replacement model, if it's that long until I buy a good camera.

 

I was just checking out some used stores and the D3000 is cheap as crap lol, go for it. I have this thing about SLRs which aren't substantial :lol: so I wouldn't touch those consumer models with a 10m stick but thats just me lol.