Advice - D3000

Soldato
Joined
19 Sep 2007
Posts
3,149
Howdy!

I'm after a bit of advice guys & gals and would appreciate some of your input.

I've got the opportunity to buy a Nikon D3000 + lens kit for £297 (Brand new)

Now I've got to admit I've fancied a DSLR for some time now and have used a couple in the past Canon 1000D and a Nikon (can't remember the model) and I really enjoyed just taking pictures of everything around me.

However I'm always disappointed by the limited features on a compact camera and I really fancy being able to mess around with all the settings. (I'm a fiddler) To the point that my latest a brand new Fuji has just been given to my mum as I was disappointed with the lack of variation of the settings within the camera. However it does still take lovely pictures.

Now I'm not one who likes to carry a camera with me on nights out etc I leave that to the girlfriend but I have been known to take it out with me on walks and the like in order to see what's around.

But after that small digression what I really want to know is a d3000 regarded as a good entry level camera? Bearing in mind I can't see me buying lenses for a while.

I must admit the large screen and guide mode really appeal to me. I also think that this would help to fill that 1 gadget void I believe to be left in my current life. A decent camera.

Is that a good price for the camera? Could you recommend a similar priced equivalent/alternative? Finally does anyone on here have any links to photo's they have taken with a d3000 using the standard lens kit? I just want an idea of the images its capable of.

My only other concern is I don't have particularly stable hands would this be more noticeable with a dslr or less?

I am a secret lurker of the photography section and must admit I've seen some fantastic pictures in here people and hope one day I could join your ranks in taking pictures without a finger over the lens (should be quite a feat with a dslr)

Thanks for any responses!
 
That's a great price.

Finally does anyone on here have any links to photo's they have taken with a d3000 using the standard lens kit? I just want an idea of the images its capable of.
It's a very capable camera. The kit lens is extremely sharp for the price. I have a D40x and the image quality is excellent.
 
Not sure if you have a particular brand preference but you could look out for a used Canon 30D (40D if you want to be adventurous).

Personally I'd buy an older 30D for a bit less money and put that towards lenses!!

IMO this is important
'Put the money into the lenses!! - lenses are the most important part of you camera combination & as a bonus they also hold their money very, very well since they are almost never updated (and even the older versions of lenses are ofen 95% as good - so it's not like buying graphics cards, think of lenses as PC cases. Bodies are like graphics cards. ;) )! '​
:D:D:D



No seriously what conditions is the camera going to be used in. Are you shooting sports, landscapes, low-light gigs, portraits etc. etc. - It can make a big difference to the lenses we might reccomend.

As a basic all purpose lens however you can't really go wrong with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. As you may or may not know aperture determines the amount of light let into a lens and also the blur of the background. Without getting to technical you'll notice that the apertures are written as fractions. So the lower the number the larger the hole in the lens. The more light. The more background blur. f/2.8 is considered a very, very fast zoom intended for great to poor lighting. If light gets any lower you need prime lenses. Like the 50mm f/1.8.



So to summarise if it was me and I was just 'generally shooting (bit of landscape, bit of sport, bit of low-ish light stuff, few portraits) I'd look at these:

Canon 30D (or Nikon equiv.)
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 55-250mm


NOTE:

But thats only just general stuff. If you want to shoot sports perhaps spend less on the 17-50 and 50 and get a nice 70-200mm instead of the 55-250. Or perhaps if you want to shoot portraits an 85mm f/1.8 would be better advised and so on and so on. And I'm sorry if that post is a bit messy and perhaps rude - I'm tired and it's been a long week. :p
 
Last edited:
I got a D3000 at the end of Jan, and although I'm still very much a learner, I am incredibly happy with it :)

I've got some pics on my flickr but no idea how to link to the profile, so here's the three pics on it :p

4435958598_53d9e59061_b.jpg


4410998914_76939bc406_b.jpg


4538523780_c1d7e0ea2b_o.jpg


Like I said, very much a beginner, but all with the kit lens :)
 
i very nearly bought a d3000, but it didn't quite sit in my hand right (i have rather large hands). Its a very capable camera, and will beat a compact hands down.

the d3000 also has a 'guide' mode to help you out from what i recall. I hear its quite helpful.
 
Well I've gone and got my D3000 and I've gotta say I'm very pleased with it. I've take a few pictures and am off to grab a few more. Time to go annoy my family I think :D
 
Link

My attempt today :D I may have played around in photoshop but tbh I don;t reall know what I'm doing with it atm I just tweaked it until I was happy with it.

Any suggestions greatly appreciated.
 
I love my D3000 and I just started my adventure into the world of photography so it's a vote from me, good price too, mine was similar but with an 8gb card.
 
Depends what sort of "Quality" you're after. Raw resolution, noise etc.. is down to the body.

Yeah ISO is body dependant.

I still think a file from a 30D with a 300mm f/2.8 would produce sharper files (even when upscaled) than for example a 1DsIII with something like a 50mm f/1.8.
 
I still think a file from a 30D with a 300mm f/2.8 would produce sharper files (even when upscaled) than for example a 1DsIII with something like a 50mm f/1.8.
That's gotta be the worst comparison I've ever heard. :eek:

Even my d40x with Kit lens is sharper than the 30D with 17-40L. I have tested them myself.
 
Back
Top Bottom