Canon 1100D or Nikon D3100?

shifty_uk · 16 Dec 2012 at 11:54

Looking at treating myself to my first DSLR this winter. Been using a variety of Fuji bridge cameras for years and always had great results but it's time to up the performance and have a variety of lenses, prior to a few trips abroad planned this year!

In terms of performance the Nikon seems to come out on top, offering higher resolution in terms of both images and videos but for me it's about build quality and investment(despite being relatively cheap)

Opinions are either pro-canon or pro-nikon, it's hard getting an unbiased opinion on each brand

What's the thoughts?

Nexus · 16 Dec 2012 at 12:27

There is no point really trying to listen to Canon/Nikon arguments, especially at entry-level.

What you need to do is go to a shop and try both cameras and see which one you personally like shooting with best. Of course the only other factor of use may be if you already know somebody with lenses you can use for one system or something.

theheyes · 16 Dec 2012 at 12:52

Out of those two I'd go for the Nikon, and I say that as a Canon guy. You do need to look at the broader system though and perhaps think about what sort of lenses you would like to buy further down the line.

ShakenNstirred · 16 Dec 2012 at 13:07

from the reviews I have seen the D3100 is the better cam
not just saying that as I have a Nikon, I looked at both of those cameras before I got my D5100
and was going to get the D3100 but changed mind to the D5100

shifty_uk · 16 Dec 2012 at 20:58

Cheers guys, I'll have a play around with them both! Having had a look before I think my preferences leaned more towards the Nikon.

theheyes said:
Out of those two I'd go for the Nikon, and I say that as a Canon guy. You do need to look at the broader system though and perhaps think about what sort of lenses you would like to buy further down the line.

I'd be looking at buying some wide angle lenses, not too sure where to begin though! It's not strictly for landscape, I just love the effect when focusing on foreground subjects.

One thing that worries me about the D3100 is the thought of getting bored within 12 months and wanting to upgrade to a better camera if it isn't quite good enough!

Do you think the body will perform enough going forward with new lenses?

ShakenNstirred · 17 Dec 2012 at 09:09

From the pictures people have put on dpreview the d3100 takes great pictures, sure after a year you may feel you have out grown it but that could be the same for any camera. You could also go for the d5100 instead

Posted from Overclockers.co.uk App for Android

Devrij · 17 Dec 2012 at 10:10

I hate to say it, because I'm a canon guy, but the Nikons tend to come out with better colours SOC. Both mine and my gf's canons come out looking quite flat even with the jpeg processing, which is reflected in some of the reviews I've read. I think Canon are a bit more user friendly to learn with, but there is a part of me that wishes I had gone Nikon. It's a bit closer at the top end though, and that's worth keeping in mind since you'll be building a lens collection that you'll take with you for a long time.

theheyes · 17 Dec 2012 at 20:16

shifty_uk said:
I'd be looking at buying some wide angle lenses, not too sure where to begin though! It's not strictly for landscape, I just love the effect when focusing on foreground subjects.

One thing that worries me about the D3100 is the thought of getting bored within 12 months and wanting to upgrade to a better camera if it isn't quite good enough!

Do you think the body will perform enough going forward with new lenses?

Wide angle lenses seem like a great idea but they can be a little unwieldy. You definitely only need one, and on a crop sensor you need the absolute widest you can find. I have a 17-40mm and it does a top job but I bet it only spends about 10-15% of the time on my camera because it's not the most versatile of tools.

Your camera body will be more than good enough. As long as it focuses nicely and has a decent ISO range it won't limit the types of pictures you can get.

It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking 'my photos aren't good enough, it must be the camera' or 'I need a weather sealed body and super awesome AF'. In my experience it's rarely the camera that's at fault, it's more than likely you. And if you find yourself thinking you wish your camera body had feature X, then take the opportunity to work around the problem. That's what good photographers do. Throwing money at new cameras is a bit of a fool's errand.

An Exception · 17 Dec 2012 at 20:34

theheyes said:
It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking 'my photos aren't good enough, it must be the camera' or 'I need a weather sealed body and super awesome AF'. In my experience it's rarely the camera that's at fault, it's more than likely you. And if you find yourself thinking you wish your camera body had feature X, then take the opportunity to work around the problem. That's what good photographers do. Throwing money at new cameras is a bit of a fool's errand.

To continuously work around a problem at inconvenience is what dumb and/or resource limited photographers do. If everyone had that attitude we would still be painting pictures rather than taking pictures.

"Hey Jensen, don't listen to McLaren and all that aerodynamic witchcraft.. improving your car won't win you a championship. After all it won't make you a better driver"

King Damager · 17 Dec 2012 at 21:10

An Exception said:
"Hey Jensen, don't listen to McLaren and all that aerodynamic witchcraft.. improving your car won't win you a championship. After all it won't make you a better driver"

A 1100D or D3100 is more like the HRT though... with the McLaren being the 5DmkIII/D800....

I'll refrain from taking the topic off thread though and talking about F1. But to be fair, it would be more equivalent to picking an engine sponsor to sponsor you.

To be honest, OP, pick whichever you want. Even long run if you invest in one system of the other, I doubt it'll make a huge difference to you.

Personally I think both the 1100D and the D3100 feel a bit plasticky, and would personally be looking to start off at at least 5100 kind of level.

kd

shifty_uk · 18 Dec 2012 at 22:51

theheyes said:
It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking 'my photos aren't good enough, it must be the camera' or 'I need a weather sealed body and super awesome AF'. In my experience it's rarely the camera that's at fault, it's more than likely you. And if you find yourself thinking you wish your camera body had feature X, then take the opportunity to work around the problem. That's what good photographers do. Throwing money at new cameras is a bit of a fool's errand.

Valid points there - If can achieve relatively decent results whilst out and about from a little compact bridge camera....

....I'm sure I can achieve decent results with an entry level DSLR.

King Damager said:
To be honest, OP, pick whichever you want. Even long run if you invest in one system of the other, I doubt it'll make a huge difference to you.

It may. It's something I'd like to take more seriously as a hobby. Always had a keen interest in photography and I'd like to have a decent camera for work(I'm a designer) and trips abroad.

shifty_uk · 18 Dec 2012 at 22:56

Oh, just a quick question - I was thinking of buying myself the camera + additional lens for Christmas but I'm a bit hesitant incase Jessops or the likes have a January sale on cameras? Then again, the D3100 is a couple of years old, surely it wont get any cheaper?

Cheers!

theheyes · 19 Dec 2012 at 18:14

An Exception said:
To continuously work around a problem at inconvenience is what dumb and/or resource limited photographers do. If everyone had that attitude we would still be painting pictures rather than taking pictures.

"Hey Jensen, don't listen to McLaren and all that aerodynamic witchcraft.. improving your car won't win you a championship. After all it won't make you a better driver"

Scratch my advice, you're absolutely right. All beginners and those looking to improve their skills should plough money into better camera bodies at the earliest opportunity.

Gosh, how could I have been so stupid.

lukechad · 19 Dec 2012 at 19:57

shifty_uk said:
Oh, just a quick question - I was thinking of buying myself the camera + additional lens for Christmas but I'm a bit hesitant incase Jessops or the likes have a January sale on cameras? Then again, the D3100 is a couple of years old, surely it wont get any cheaper?

Cheers!

Not sure about Nikon but canon have winter cashback on a lot of things at jessops currently, so I dont think prices on canon gear will go much lower.

I was a little gutted, I paid 500 for my 550D with 18-55 IS, then around 6 weeks later they did the same price but also threw in a canon 70-300, not sure if they do a twin lens deal on the likes of the 1100D?

ShakenNstirred · 19 Dec 2012 at 20:00

lukechad said:
Not sure about Nikon but canon have winter cashback on a lot of things at jessops currently, so I dont think prices on canon gear will go much lower.

I was a little gutted, I paid 500 for my 550D with 18-55 IS, then around 6 weeks later they did the same price but also threw in a canon 70-300, not sure if they do a twin lens deal on the likes of the 1100D?

they did last year a mate at work got one from jessops
there doing a 2 lens kit on the 550d now for £449.95
also Nikon D3100 + 18-55mm VR + 55-200mm £349

lukechad · 19 Dec 2012 at 20:05

Ive just took delivery of my new 70-200 F/4 L so I'm not all that fussed on missing out on the 70-300 now

shifty_uk · 21 Dec 2012 at 15:27

ShakenNstirred said:
also Nikon D3100 + 18-55mm VR + 55-200mm £349

That's the deal I was going to go for! However, the 55-200mm isn't VR which puts me off slightly! So, after some thought, I'm thinking I'll spend that extra money and just get a 3200 or 5100(at a push) instead!

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 21 Dec 2012 at 16:03

shifty_uk said:
What's the thoughts?

Don't limit yourself to two brands or even an SLR. I would try as many models out in a shop as possible. You might find some brands pushed more than others as companies like Jessops are partially funded by them. See what suits you the best instead of what people think will suit you. Photography,at least at the amateur level,is art,so you need to use the tools you find the most comfortable to use.

TheAnimus · 21 Dec 2012 at 16:16

shifty_uk said:
prior to a few trips abroad planned this year

If your getting on well with what you have at the moment, have you considered maybe getting something a bit differen't? I have a rugged waterproof camera, which with a little creativity can deliver some great results, despite been a low quality, low cost little thing. I have a great picture (I can't post online, slight NSFW) of a girl friend doing ballet poses in a sulfure lake. The steam coming off from the water giving it a truely etherial feal. Printed on an incandesent process, with a slightly de-saturated colour.

A friend who really knows nothing about photograph declared it was my best picture (compared to the stuff I had up on the walls). Kinda heart breaking in a way that some of the others where taking with many thousands of pounds worth of kit.

One of my favourite travel photographers is an interesting luddite at times:
http://www.tomang.com/?page_id=111
Most of the time he never shoots raw, he told me its because he considers it to make you lazy.

Anyway, the point of my little diversion is what is it you can't do, that you want to be able to do? If its just a notching up the epeen, spend that £300 on a flight some place interesting

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Don't limit yourself to two brands or even an SLR. I would try as many models out in a shop as possible.

+1. Some people think that best photographs come from the most expensive, biggest camera and largest lens out there. Yet whenever I'm in a gallery or awards exhibit I see a shockingly disproportionate number of 'lesser' cameras.

shifty_uk · 13 Jan 2013 at 23:09

Just an update, thanks for all those who gave advice in the thread, was much appreciated!

I ended up going with the D5100 in the end, put a bit of extra money into it for the performance. Overall, pleased with the purchase, haven't took it out and about yet but it's very easy to get to grips with and the body, features and interface are excellent.

Only niggle is the image quality, I assumed it would be on par with my lower MP bridge cameras in terms of noise performance however, the photos I've taken around the house so far are fairly grainy when zoomed in on, even at varied ISO settings and lighting. Perhaps it's the limited kit lens? New to DSLRs so don't shoot me down