Nikon D3100 D-SLR Camera

Nikon D3100 is an excellent deal for non beginner or nonprofessional photographer, that want to take family and travel shots. Nikon D3100 is better than all of those entry-level D-SLR camera in one crucial area, the area that matters: it takes excellent pictures without having to fiddle with the settings between shots. Yes, the other cameras are better in other respects:

This D3100 also makes the D3000 and D5000 obsolete. The D3000 is slow and noisy at high ISO. The D5000 only shoots 720p (not 1080p), no autofocus in movie mode, less resolution. Old technology.

What sets the NIKON D3100 apart from all the other cameras above is this: set the camera in P (program) mode, auto white balance, -0.3 exposure compensation, slow flash sync mode (for people shots), auto distortion correction on (great!), auto chromatic aberrations correction on (great!), and you are set; now you can concentrate on the only aspect of photography that matters: composition, i.e. framing your shot in the best possible way. There must be a photography mantra that says, “thou shalt buy the D3100, and the D3100 will set you free.” Now this is if you shot jpeg. If you shoot raw, you can then use a program like DXO, Aperture 3, or Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3 to further play with the pictures. My workflow with the XSi was to shoot raw, then use DXO to batch process all the pics according to two settings: people (low contrast, no saturation added) and landscape (contrast, saturation, etc.). DXO would then batch-remove lens distortion, chromatic aberrations, vignetting, apply custom curves, change white balance when necessary, and apply its (almost magical) auto lighting settings to make the shots pop. For now DXO does not have a custom module for the D3100 (still too new of a camera), so I’m shooting jpeg for now. Once DXO adds the module for the D3100, I’ll takes shots in both raw and jpeg fine and compare the jpegs straight out of the camera with the raw images processed with DXO. I’m curious to see the comparison.

This is great, not only for you, but also for your non-photographer spouse; my XSi took phenomenal shots, but I had to know how to set it. Can you imagine me going to my non-photographer wife and say, “okay, when you take indoor shots of our kids, set the camera on A mode (Canons expose for ambient light in A mode and adjust flash for fill, that’s great), +0.7 exposure compensation, ISO 400 or 800, white balance on cloudy, and shoot.” My wife was lost at “okay.” Sure the custom modes on the 40D would have helped, but the 40D is old technology; can it take 1080p video? I didn’t think so. Plus, what lens are you going to use with the 40D? The 17-55 IS? Great lens, but who wants to spend $1,000 for a non-weather sealed 17-55 dust collector (google Canon 17-55 and dust)? Will 17-55 be enough for your telephoto shots? Your kids’ baseball games? Didn’t think so. What about the Canon 18-200? Sub-par quality, noisy, overpriced.

Back to the D3100. Auto white balance (the second most important thing after composition) works great, even indoor (no cloudy setting necessary), the only changes are extreme situations (outdoor shade, or indoor fluorescent or tungsten lights at night, but that is true with every camera. Why that is is beyond me; can’t they make smarter cameras that account for these situations as well?); movie mode is excellent; yes, the mic is mono, but that’s okay for family use (and that’s why you buy this camera; if you are pro, you landed on the wrong page); if you really want to push it, you can use this camera for video, your iphone/ipod touch for audio with an app like FourTrack, and then sync video and audio in post with the excellent Singular Software Dual Eyes program. Your choice. Matter is: DSLR video can look awesome if used the right way, but keep in mind its limitations: jerky camera horizontal panning will give you the infamous jello effect (courtesy of the CMOS sensor), so pan slowly. You’ll also have to play with autofocus vs manual focus settings sometimes; I’ve used the camera in autofocus; it has worked great so far.

What lens(es) should you use with the D3100. You should sell the (excellent) 18-55 that ships with the camera. Quality is good, but not enough reach. You can sell it for $140 or so. Take the money and use it toward a more useful lens. What lens? The target market for this camera is moms and dads that want to take shots of their kids; even advanced amateurs like me don’t want to travel with a camera bag full of primes and heavy zoom lenses that you have to swap every 10 minutes; this is 2010 (almost 2011), for crying out loud; choose a single zoom and enjoy life and photography; I would use the excellent but underrated Nikon 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR ED Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras, the excellent (but expensive) Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX ED VR Nikkor Wide-Angle Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon DSLR Cameras, or my choice, the jack-of-all trades, the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II Nikkor Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon DX-Format Digital SLR Cameras. Yes, yes, if you check sites like Photozone, they will tell you that the optical quality of the 18-200 is not as good (or consistent) as the 18-105 or the 16-85, but it’s good enough for moms and dads bitten by the photography bug. A great shot of your kid at 200mm is better than no shot with either of the other two lenses. The optical superiority of the 16-85 disappears at 135mm or 200mm, simply because it can’t do it. The 16-85 and the 18-200 are about the same price. The 18-200 will set you free. It won’t help you if your kids play baseball at night (too slow), but you’ll have to live with it, unless you are willing to drop $2,000 on a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Cameras. Sure, we’d all like a 16-300 VR VIII lens with a 20-stop VR reduction, constant 1.4 aperture, with optical perfection, weighing only 500 gr. and below $1,000, but alas our engineers are not as good as the random mutation and natural selection that gave us our eyes