Should I get the EOS 1000D or Nikon D3100?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Alvi, Apr 9, 2011.

  1. Alvi macrumors 65816

    Alvi

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Location:
    Mars
    #1
    I am looking for a DSLR to take pictures as a hobby and use it as my main camera if I'm out with my friends or I'm at a family event. That said, my budget is pretty tight.
    My local stores offer me a nice pack of Canon EOS 100D with the 18-55 Lens, a Bag and an 8GB SD Card for 620$
    Or the Nikon D3100 without anything besides the 18-55 Lens for 800$
    I could buy the Canon easily but the Nikon would be a bit harder...

    Is the Nikon a way better camera? or are they both great?
    Would it be worth it to wait a few more weeks in order to have the money for the Nikon?
     
  2. bsamcash macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, CA
    #2
    Get a Pentax K-x. The endless legacy lens catalogue will leave your pocket quite satiated. And unlike the Canikons, Pentax actually makes decent kit lenses.
     
  3. 8CoreWhore macrumors 68020

    8CoreWhore

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Big D
    #3
    Both brands are great. Play with both in a store. One of them will just feel right in your hands and the other less so. For me, the Nikon ergo suited me, but to each his own.

    Check out the kits at Costco and Sam's.

    Something to consider if you're new to SLR sized cameras, the public reacts differently to them than smaller "less threatening" cameras. It's a perception thing. Once I got a "point and shoot" people ignored me and I was able to get better candid shots.

    If you're set on an SLR (can we all drop the "D" from DSLR now?), then get one, but consider a camera like this one:

    http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerSh...r_1_12?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1302341424&sr=1-12

    Samples:
    http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/r...78/img_0201?inalbum=canon-s95-preview-samples

    The best camera is the one you have with you, an SLR won't mean much if you leave it home because it's too big.
     
  4. bsamcash macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, CA
    #4
    I still shoot with SLRs, and film is a whole different breed. So, no. Haha.
     
  5. 8CoreWhore macrumors 68020

    8CoreWhore

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Big D
    #5
    Well, then let's start using FSLR. :D
     
  6. bsamcash macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, CA
    #6
    I wish I could say that's a horrible idea, but I like it!
     
  7. merkinmuffley macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2010
    #7
  8. bsamcash macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, CA
    #8
    I wouldn't say that.

    Nikon D3100 vs Pentax K-x

    Canon 1000D vs Nikon D3100

    Canon 1000D vs Pentax K-x

    Both the K-x and the D3100 blow the 1000D away, but the K-x is still far superior to the D3100 in dynamic range, color depth, and overall image quality for a cheaper price. Not to mention it has in-body image stabilization that will work with all K mount and M42 screw mount lenses.
     
  9. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #9
    ^^^ I tried that snapsort and it said my Canon has a built-in focusing motor...

    :eek:
     
  10. bsamcash macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, CA
    #10
    Many mid range and up Canons do. Does yours?
     
  11. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #11
    Canon dSLR's have the focusing motor in the lens....
     
  12. bsamcash macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, CA
    #12
    Oh, sorry. You're right. I was thinking mid to high Nikons.

    Can you link me to where you saw that?
     
  13. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #13
    Get the Canon. It's cheaper and you'll not notice the difference.

    Paul
     
  14. munkees macrumors 65816

    munkees

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    #14
    I have no idea about the nikon lenses, but I know about the EF and EF-S, if I was to choose based on the body, I would pick the canon because of the lenses, but my guess there are just as good lenses on the nikon. Lenses is where the investment will be in the future, so I would pick the camera based on the lenses you plan to get in the future.

    On my Canon, I purchased 1 EF-S 10-22mm it will be the only EF-S lens I will ever purchase (other than kit lens), all other lens from now on will be EF lens, so I can move to a FF in the future. next purchase EF 16-35mm
     
  15. flosseR macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #15
    well, you are comparing a camera that is already fairly old(ish), the canon, to camera that just came out a few months ago. Yes the Nikon has more features etc than the canon but the canon is fairly cheap. There are a few things to consider for that 180 dollars that you get from the Nikon. The resolution, the HD video shooting, more focus points and the higher ISO support.

    I also read great things about the Introduction help screens on the nikon that explain the settings very easily to a novice while shooting.
    The whole lens thing, at this level is mundane because I don't think you will move to any higher class body for a while anyway. "investing" into lenses at this stage is not really a priority. Get to know the camera first.
    While there is always the argument with the "built in motor" etc. from the canon fanboys, aside a very few select lenses nowadays, all nikon lenses are with the built in motor. Just like Canon.
    Yes there are plenty of manual focus lenses for nikon floating around but there are just as many with the AF motor and at this stage of your new hobby, it won't matter. regardless of what people say. It matters once you start purchasing lenses (besides the 50mm f1.8) that are almost as much as the d3100 body or more.

    Anyway, the canon is old(ish), the nikon new(er). go to a store look at them both and then choose.
     
  16. merkinmuffley macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2010
    #16
    Sorry, but I would say that given the OP was about the Canon D3100 vs. the Nikon D3100 it is correct. You're introducing the Pentax has nothing to do with the original query. Stay on topic.
     
  17. TheStrudel macrumors 65816

    TheStrudel

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2008
    #17
    The easiest answer to this question:

    Pick up the camera. I was wondering whether to go Canon or Nikon at the beginning, and actually holding them made the decision easy.

    It is very well known that Nikon DSLRs are more expensive for the same bracket, but I find Nikon ergonomics and menus and handling to be superior to my tastes. Everybody's preferences differ, so there's no substitute for picking up the machine and finding out whether or not you like it.

    That having been said, I would agree that Pentax offers superior value for money and if you're just approaching this as a hobbyist, there's a lot to like there.
     
  18. The Mad Kiwi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Location:
    In Hell
    #18
    Buy the Canon, everyone knows Canon owners are more intelligent than Nikon owners, and more attractive too.
     
  19. flosseR macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #20
    Thanks that made my day :) or almost week...
     
  20. munkees macrumors 65816

    munkees

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    #21
    That is what I thought, but I saw lots of hot women at the Monterey Bay Aquarium with Nikons, me having my canon, well you know opposites attract.:D
     
  21. Matty-p macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2010
    #22
    1100d but im biased cos im a cannon guy:)
     
  22. JeepGC macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2011
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA
    #23
    I had a Nikon DSLR, after a while I sold it and decided to try a Canon. I rather the Canon.
     
  23. johnhw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    #24
    The 1100D (1000D's successor) is a really good camera. The reason I went to Canon is that you're sure ALL EF lenses you get have AF. The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is IMO better and has a built-in motor, the Nikon counterpart has none.

    Video on the 1100d is fantastic, although it's 720p, it's really high-quality and sharp. It's even sharper than the 500D. I know you think you're gonna lose alot when you don't have autofocus during video.. you're not missing anything out actually. Autofocus in video on the D3100 is quite mediocre and really inaccurate.

    You could choose the A55 which is rather great. (if you are not bothered by 100% live view and abit more expensive lenses.)

    The 1000D is quite outdated already and I'm not really recommending it..
     
  24. joemod macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    #25
    Besides what other posters wrote with which I agree with (try them in your hands) I would like to add that the price you got for 1000D is quite expensive. Since you post prices in USD I suppose that you live in USA. If that's the case you should find cheaper offers (at least for 1000D). For example I did a quick search in amazon and found this

    Edit: you should consider 1100D. As others said 1000D is quite old and if you like slr photography you will find out that probably 1000D is limiting (low iso for example).
     

Share This Page