Worth upgrading from D3000?

[Brawler]

Hi All.

Need some valuable input.

First of let me say I know a better camera doesn't necessarily mean better photographs.

I have had my Nikon D3000 with 18-55 VR lense for around 2 months. Up until now I have been very happy with my purchase and learning very fast, I am glad to say that I am hooked into photography

That said, there are area's that I feel I need that the entry level D3000 doesn't do so well like high ISO noise and the lack of AEB which I would like to experiment with.

Would it be worth upgrading to a d90 or maybe even Canon 500d?

 

[Prof.]

I would suggest sticking with your D3000 for a while, for a year or so. The budget DSLR market is really growing rapidly now, you might pick up a nicer cam for the buck in a year's time.

EDIT: I meant to type D3000, not D5000.

 

[Brawler]

I would suggest sticking with your D5000 for a while, for a year or so. The budget DSLR market is really growing rapidly now, you might pick up a nicer cam for the buck in a year's time.

I wish I had the D5000 :erm:

 

[Prof.]

Fixed.

 

[Just_Ice]

I would suggest sticking with your D5000 for a while, for a year or so. The budget DSLR market is really growing rapidly now, you might pick up a nicer cam for the buck in a year's time.

D3000 - Never mind, you corrected it

Just take it easy for a while, get to know the proper techniques, and just play around some more. You shouldnt be using overly high ISO settings all that often either, unless you do a lot of night time photography. As for the AEB, its a nice add on, but you could always adjust the exposure yourself if you want. Not having it would actuallly teach you how to expose your pics a lot better anyway if you ask me. Rather than relying on taking say 5 shots and picking the best. That is, unless you do a lot of HDR. If thats the case then maybe its worth it.

Because what you may find is that you will upgrade, and then later realise that maybe you didnt really need AEB.

 

[Brawler]

D3000 - Never mind, you corrected it

Just take it easy for a while, get to know the proper techniques, and just play around some more. You shouldnt be using overly high ISO settings all that often either, unless you do a lot of night time photography. As for the AEB, its a nice add on, but you could always adjust the exposure yourself if you want. Not having it would actuallly teach you how to expose your pics a lot better anyway if you ask me. Rather than relying on taking say 5 shots and picking the best. That is, unless you do a lot of HDR. If thats the case then maybe its worth it.

Because what you may find is that you will upgrade, and then later realise that maybe you didnt really need AEB.

Thanks. I Have been experimenting with HDR and when I have to press buttons/turn dials in manual the camera moves slightly even on the tripod which kills it.

I have used the camera in a few dark scenes and have been disappointed at anything over ISO 400 - even in the auto modes.

The problem I have with waiting is that the camera will probably devalue a lot and then when I eventually do upgrade I will have to cough up more. I also want to get a good camera, get used to it and use it for a few years, don't want to change bodies often.

 

[koffiejunkie]

You can still do exposure bracketing - just not auto. Since this only really work for scenes that are static, it doesn't really matter if it takes a second or two between shots.

Stick to the D3000 for now, save for nice glass and see what Nikon releases in the next few weeks.

Do you have a fast 50 yet? Nikon has a 50mm f/1.8 too, but I would recommend you get the f/1.4 - it's better glas and can autofocus on the low-end bodies.

 

[Just_Ice]

You know what, if you are serious on photography and really enjoy it, you are right, upgrade now. But to something that will make you happy for the next couple years.

Sell your D3000 (what would you ask?), and buy a Cannon, or a more modern Nikon, as the D90 is already a bit of a veteran. If you are still experimenting with photography and discover that it is just a phase stick with the D3000. But you do sound serious, so as you said, you may as well upgrade while the D3000 still holds some value.

Oh, and listen to Koffie Junkie, he has many years experience

 

[koffiejunkie]

Thanks. I Have been experimenting with HDR and when I have to press buttons/turn dials in manual the camera moves slightly even on the tripod which kills it.

The camera shouldn't move on the tripod. Is your tripod sturdy? Consider using the timer anyway. Set it to two seconds, click and take your hands off so you don't introduce unnecessary shake. Most software can deal with minute changes in the scene and/or alignment.

 

[koffiejunkie]

...or a more modern Nikon, as the D90 is already a bit of a veteran.

Dude, what are you smokin? The D90 is still some of the best bang for buck on the market (it's only been out for a year and a bit).

 

[Brawler]

You know what, if you are serious on photography and really enjoy it, you are right, upgrade now. But to something that will make you happy for the next couple years.

Sell your D3000 (what would you ask?), and buy a Cannon, or a more modern Nikon, as the D90 is already a bit of a veteran. If you are still experimenting with photography and discover that it is just a phase stick with the D3000. But you do sound serious, so as you said, you may as well upgrade while the D3000 still holds some value.

Oh, and listen to Koffie Junkie, he has many years experience

Its on GT and already got a few offers at R4500, thats more than a grand off the cheapest price I could find with a VR kit.

The camera shouldn't move on the tripod. Is your tripod sturdy? Consider using the timer anyway. Set it to two seconds, click and take your hands off so you don't introduce unnecessary shake. Most software can deal with minute changes in the scene and/or alignment.

Its a crappy tripod and I am using the timer, it moves when I change the exposure

 

[koffiejunkie]

Its a crappy tripod and I am using the timer, it moves when I change the exposure

OK, so here's the deal. A fancier (read heavier) camera is not going to do you any good if your tripod is not stable. So invest in a better tripod first. I have a Velbon cheapy that cost met £25 and is stable enough to handle my (now departed) 40D + 24-105L (that's 1.5kg altogether), so there's no excuse. I think it's a CX400 or CX440 - something like that.

 

[bwana]

First of let me say I know a better camera doesn't necessarily mean better photographs.

If it doesnt then you're doing something wrong.

I have had my Nikon D3000 with 18-55 VR lense for around 2 months. Up until now I have been very happy with my purchase and learning very fast, I am glad to say that I am hooked into photography

I believe smoking and crack are slightly less addictive . . . and easier on the wallet.

That said, there are area's that I feel I need that the entry level D3000 doesn't do so well like high ISO noise and the lack of AEB which I would like to experiment with.

I'm surprised no one pointed that out when you bought it.

Would it be worth upgrading to a d90 or maybe even Canon 500d?

It's never too late to go Canon. Do you have a lot of Nikon glass

 

[Brawler]

OK, so here's the deal. A fancier (read heavier) camera is not going to do you any good if your tripod is not stable. So invest in a better tripod first. I have a Velbon cheapy that cost met £25 and is stable enough to handle my (now departed) 40D + 24-105L (that's 1.5kg altogether), so there's no excuse. I think it's a CX400 or CX440 - something like that.

but.. if I am correct and use AEB I wouldn't need to use manual and press anything? A new tripod is certainly on the cards but that won't help with higher ISOs.

 

[bwana]

but.. if I am correct and use AEB I wouldn't need to use manual and press anything?

You're right. I've hand held more HDRs than I've used tripods for.

 

[PostmanPot]

Stick to the D3000 for now, save for nice glass and see what Nikon releases in the next few weeks.

Do you have a fast 50 yet? Nikon has a 50mm f/1.8 too, but I would recommend you get the f/1.4 - it's better glas and can autofocus on the low-end bodies.

Agreed.

Unfortunately the Nikon fast 50 doesn't work on the entry-level bodies/bodies without internal focussing motors. But there is the 35mm f1.8 for those bodies which is fast and great for low light. Also quite cheap at around R2500 last time I checked (quite a bit more than the 50mm ).

 

[koffiejunkie]

I believe smoking and crack are slightly less addictive . . . and easier on the wallet.

LOL! But at least at some point you'll have all the glass you need and the expenses will start to taper off.

 

[bwana]

LOL! But at least at some point you'll have all the glass you need and the expenses will start to taper off.

Tripod(s), heads, flashes . . . and then there are primes . . . new bodies . . .

 

[Brawler]

Tough decision. Think I will go into orms tomorrow and have a gander at the 500d.

 

[koffiejunkie]

but.. if I am correct and use AEB I wouldn't need to use manual and press anything? A new tripod is certainly on the cards but that won't help with higher ISOs.

Yes. But like I say, if the act of turning the dial moves the camera enough that you can do an HDR from it, you really need a better tripod. One trick you can try is weighing down the tripod. Find something heavy you can attach to the bottom of the tripod. My newer one has a hook and I just hook my camera bag over it - sturdy enough to sustain a fairly strong breeze. On a cheapy you may have to DIY it a bit.

With regards to high ISO. You have a slow lens. Get a fast 50 - you'll be able to shoot with lower ISO.