D3000 vs D90 I paid $1200 for my D90 about 3-4 years ago. totally worth it.
Extensive review here http://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/slrs/nikon_d3000 only major downside is the lack of video.
I own this camera and use it for what it is, a great first step into the Dslr world. Very easy to use camera, has a “guide” for what u wanna do in the display screen( if u want to shoot kids playing or still photographs) and has easy to change aperture and shutter settings. If u have always owned a point and shoot and want to go the next level, buy this NEW camera and enjoy shooting in manual. Leave any questions I’ll be able to help if I can tomorrow afternoon. Also, I bought this camera referb 3 years ago for almost 200 bucks more.
For anyone also wanting to shoot video, look up the D3100 or D5000. Great cameras and shoot video.
I’ve used this, so I might be able to glean a bit of insight. For $400 the value is alright, but it’s important to put it in context.
This is an entry-level in the vein of the D40. It lacks certain features you see in newer or higher end models, but will still give performance far superior to any compact point-and-shoot.
The sensor is old, and becomes noisy trash in low light. It also lacks the auto-correction for things like fringing the newer models have The viewfinder is not spectacular or super bright, and live view is not an option. Higher-end options like bracketing and tethered shooting are not to be found here. No video either.
Take note: Like other entry Nikons, there is no AF motor in this body. You must purchase AF-S lenses if you want autofocus, and old F-mount lenses will shut off the metering.
The x-sync is better than you’d expect for an entry level 1/200"(!) albeit without support for Nikon’s wonky wireless flash system.
But, if you want a relatively inexpensive kit that gives you a bit of growth room and access to an expansive system, it’ll do. The “guide” mode holds your hand and tells you the sort of shot it’s taking, the idea being you’ll eventually be weaned off of it.
As a professional photographer with 10+ years of experience, I can’t recommend this camera enough. In fact, when I recommend a camera for beginners, the D3000 is always my first choice. Between the low cost, high quality output, and small form factor, it’s a real winner.
Also, while the 18-55 is a pretty basic lens, it’s a great stater lens for learning and still produces great results!
You really can’t go wrong!
As a side note, to those complaining about the lack of video (and some may mention the lack of AF motor… I’ll get to this in a sec), if you are new to DSLR photography, you don’t want to be shooting video. DSLR video photography is more complicated than many might think. You will need external microphones, lighting, stabilizers, etc for good results. This is a fantastic still picture camera.
Finally, to the lack of the AF servo, don’t sweat it. The modern lenses are soooo superior to many of the manual focus lenses. Not only that, the AFS lenses focus much faster and are much quieter. For those with older lenses, don’t let this worry you, your lenses will work on this Nikon system, you just need to manually focus it. You will even have a handy indicator to tell you when you’re locked on!
Out of curiosity, how does this compare with the Canon EOS Rebel T3 I got for the same price off of Woot last week?
Comparison vs D3100
D3100 sometimes goes for around $450 on Amazon. The D3100 has a lot of improvements, especially with having video. I will say I’m quite happy I went with Nikon over getting a T3. The 3000 series is great for entry level DSLR.
product website: corrected
picture collage video:
more traditional review:
Costco is currently selling a D3100 with the same 18-55mm lens and an additional 55-200mm lens for $650. The $250 difference is about the cost of the long lens, so you get the next generation camera, with video and improved photo quality, for free. That seems like a much better choice for anyone who is serious about getting into SLR photography and has the extra money to spend.
On the other hand, this camera is cheaper than high-end compact cameras like the Canon S110 or Panasonic LX7 and absolutely kicks their butts in terms of photo quality and versatility. So if you’re price-driven and don’t mind the bulk of a DSLR, this is a great alternative to one of them.
No love for celluloid anymore?
I have the Conon T3i as well. I really love it. I got mine from Ritz cause I couldn’t wait to find them on sale because I was going on a trip. I am very pleased with it. I did try the Nikon too and it was the first camera the salesman tried to push on me. I ended up going with the T3i because it has 16mp and a few more features.
Personally, I wouldn’t buy cameras or electronics now with Black Friday just around the corner. Just something to keep in mind
As would not be a surprise to anyone this camera will be seeing sales prices as it has been replaced but, this is still a great introductory Digital SLR. Personally, I prefer Canon to Nikon but at this level there is no real advantage of one over the other. If you are really into seeing reviews, you can find about 365 of them at B&H. The link takes you to the page showing the camera. Just scroll down to see the start of the reviews. BTW, the reviews are very good.
This is a very good price for a new in the box model with a genuine USA warranty and not grey market or aftermarket warranty. Even refurbs are going for only around 50 less and when you add shipping it is not even a $50 savings. Can be seen here,
To those just entering this level and/or SLR, you are making a bit more investment than you have in your point and shoot. Protect that investment. Just the lens (new) for this camera goes for $200 (or more) and it has excellent optics along with image stabilization. Invest in a UV filter that screws down on the front of this lens. If you want to order one on line the size for this lens is a 52mm. For one it is a clear glass filter that in place protects you front optic from damage by insuring nothing can come in contact with that optic. Replacing a cracked or damaged filter is only a few bucks compared to lens replacement/repair. The UV filter also filters out some unwanted UV rays. Also, when doing this get a good one. Tiffen is not a bad choice. A good filter is just not that expensive and the very few bucks you would save by buying on the cheap would then have you putting some kind of plastic thing over your great optics rather than optical grade glass.
Last, on the lens, this is a good standard lens for wide angle to normal shots but it is not going to (nor was it intended) to be a telephoto lens. You can do some digital zooming and cropping on your computer when you download but that will be it. Also, this camera as most will allow you to shoot at different levels of quality and obviously the better the quality the more memory used but, if you want to take full advantage of this SLR and lens, shoot at one of the higher or highest settings and you will also have better results in zooming and cropping on your downloaded image.
To fully expand your options with true telephoto a 55-200mm nikon lens will set you back about $250 and a 55-300mm would set you back around $400.
Also, to really take full advantage of what this great little SLR has to offer you may also later add a dedicated flash that has more power than the on board flash.
Compared to your point and shoot well, there is no comparison. This is a great example of apples and oranges and going SLR is a whole new and wonderful world. But there is still room for you current point and shoot if you decide to go this route so do not put it away in a drawer. It is small, easy to use and carry as well as comes out quickly and gets the shot. I carry a point and shoot with me about everywhere I go even when not carrying my SLR and when I do carry the SLR, I have my point and shoot with me.
Bottom line, if you want to step into the world of SLR, this is a fine product model to start with at a very good price.
I have a Nikon FM2 and a lot of great Nikkor lenses. Can I use any or all with this camera? All but one are autofocus but I prefer manual focus for SLR work leaving autofocus to my point and shoot.
You are doing just fine with the Canon. There has been an ongoing feud between Canon and Nikon users for years. I am an old Nikon person that moved over to
Canon. There was a time when certainly and clearly Nikon had the edge on the market. But back in the 80’s Canon moved ahead of everyone in AF optics in focusing speed as well as image stabilization. Nikon caught up quickly but the damage was done and many (including me) moved to Canon. That is when you started seeing all those white lens’s showing up on the sidelines of sporting events. Canon’s pro grade telephotos were white. So much so, everyone is producing a white lens now. I still shoot and prefer Canon but, at this level and these two models, they are both very fine at this price point and a person is not going wrong with either. In short, be happy with you Rebel, you did just fine. Enjoy your SLR.
Bought my wife the D3100 about a year ago, very similar to this one and is a great starter DSLR.
You will quickly outgrow the included lens, so absolutely budget for a something that has more zoom.
The only downside on this model is that it does not support auto-focus. You’ll need to move up to the D5100 (or the current model equivalent) for that.
If you don’t mind swapping lenses, the Nikon 70-300mm lens can be found on amazon for about $150. Not a bad way to extend the camera on a lower budget.
I just got this camera + lens about 6 weeks ago for $450, and while I can’t compare it with higher-end Nikons/Canons, it’s a great great camera to get you started with digital photography, and the quality of the photos is amazing especially if you’re coming from a point-and-shoot.
I would also recommend this book to anyone who buys this camera as their first DSLR. It teaches you the general theory behind photography and tailors the practice part to the D3000 by using instructions and settings specific to this camera.