DSLRUsers.com

I want to buy a DSLR but im not sure where to start (never owned a DSLR before), from the little research i have done it seems that the Nikon D3100 is a good place to start. I plan to use this camera for some time lapse, 3D photography and hopefully upgrade for macro photography. Any recommendations or suggestions?

Most brands will have a model that will do what you want, though I m not sure what you mean by 3D photography. To me that is sculpture, not photography.

Since most brands will do what you want, the important thing to consider are the ergonomics. Choose the camera that fits bet in your hands. And which has the most sensible layout of the controls for you. Nothing beats walking into a good camera store and having a play.

For macro, the most economic way in is to use tubes. You can get by with a toilet roll, but the bought ones allow you to use all the features of your lens.

stu123 wrote:Any recommendations or suggestions?

Budget???

Mr Darcy wrote:I m not sure what you mean by 3D photography. To me that is sculpture, not photography.

Im refering to anaglyph images, this link will describe it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaglyph_image

Mr Darcy wrote:Choose the camera that fits bet in your hands. And which has the most sensible layout of the controls for you. Nothing beats walking into a good camera store and having a play.

I plan to go to a camera store in a few days to have a look, so i will keep that advice in mind

Chaase wrote:Budget???

my budget is preferably under $1500, but under $1000 would be great

and if anyone has any suggestions on the best camera or equipment for time lapse, it would be appretiated. A cameras ability to do time lapse is a major consideration.

stu123 wrote:anaglyph images

Hmm,
You will need to budget for two cameras. One for the left eye image, one for the right.
You could get away with one, but you would be limited to static images then. I would avoid zoom lenses as it would be very difficult to ensure both cameras are set to the same focal length.
As I read it, you don't need anything special for the cameras, but you need some quite special Post Processing.
The article claims Photoshop is up to the job. Damn There goes another few grand RRP.
You will also want to mount the cameras well. Something like these on a very good tripod. Damn there goes a few more grand.

stu123 wrote:best camera or equipment for time lapse

Traditionally done with a movie camera, but any still camera that can be set up to do repeat firing ( my D200 can) or will take a remote that will do so should be fine. On the camera, it will be taking lots of photographs without disturbing the setup, so battery life will become very important.
Again, you will need software to combine the still images into a movie file. Again, I think PS can do it (but don't quote me)

Hi Stu,
What's your level of experience/background and can you give us a few examples of your pictures? Otherwise some of this information may well be redundant and waster the posters time.

Mr Darcy wrote:You will need to budget for two cameras. One for the left eye image, one for the right.

I can do it with one, just take a picture (left image), then move the camera (about the distance between your eyes) to the right (right image), then combine them on the computer.

Mr Darcy wrote:but any still camera that can be set up to do repeat firing ( my D200 can) or will take a remote that will do so should be fine.

Yeah i had a feeling that would be the case.

surenj wrote:What's your level of experience/background.

I have had a small digital camera for a while, most photography i have done is for fun and not for any particular purpose other that i enjoy photography. I have got into anaglyph/steroescopic images, and more recently time lapse. I have recently decided to save up for a DSLR (after wanting one for years).
I will try to find time to upload some images, im new to this forum and am not sure how to go about that though

stu123 wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:You will need to budget for two cameras. One for the left eye image, one for the right.

I can do it with one, just take a picture (left image), then move the camera (about the distance between your eyes) to the right (right image), then combine them on the computer.

The distance will vary according to the stereoscopic effect you are after. Most stereo images I am aware of use greater separation than between my eyes. Anything from 30cm to several kilometres.
Yes you can get away with a single camera, but only for static things. any object that moves, even slowly, will be blurred in the stereo image.
Your alignment will be critical, so you will need a way to guarantee alignment of the camera in both positions. You won't be able to just fire off a snap, take a step to the side & take another snap. This may work well enough for proof of concept though.

You will also need to ensure your lighting does not change between photos. So sunlight will be out of the question. At the minimum, some artificial lights, and preferably strobes.

Ooh I see what you mean by static things, yeah it is limited by using one camera, but i have made it work for the most part. I would love to have two cameras to do the 3D technique properly, one day maybe.

You can also get a stereo lens - I don't know what the image quality is like though. Panasonic has a micro 4/3 stereo lens as well.

Murray Foote wrote:Panasonic has amicro 4/3 stereo lens.

That may be EXACTLY what i want, i assume i can still view the pictures as 3D on my computer with the use of 3D glasses. The website seems to mention viewing it on a 3D capable TV, dosnt meantion computer???

I don't know. You'll have to research it.

The website says "A 3D media player that supports the MP (Multi-Picture) format is required to view 3D images", so im not sure, its not looking good. But i will research further, coz it looks like it could be very handy

I'd suggest looking at the D7000 as it does do timelapse photography and you won't be restricted to only using AF-S lenses. Other models such as the D40, D40X, D60, D3100, D5100 do not have an autofocus screw in the mount, so any autofocus lenses that aren't AF-S won't work on them.

My suggestion is to create a short list of cameras (~3) within your budget and go into a shop to play around with it. Note down the following when you have the camera in hand:
* How does it feel in your hand;
* How easy/difficult is it to change AF points;
* How easy/hard is it to change the shutter speed and aperture setting in Manual (M) mode;
* Are there any lens restrictions with the current body?
* Is there a remote which supports the camera?

I don't have any experience with 3D photography, but it does sound interesting. If you want to experiment with it, why not get another P&S that is the same as yours and see if you can get a bracket to mount both in order to take a photo at the same time using both cameras. This would be a much cheaper option for the time being for experimenting. There's something called CHDK for Canon P&S that essentially hacks the camera to extend its capabilities.

See if you can find sample images. Maybe also search on places like Flikr. The Loreo alternative might be worth exploring too as it is not camera or format specific. In both cases they have two lenses. One question is does an exposure create one image (with red/green or other separation) or two? If two, it's probably a "normal" stereo viewing situation.

PiroStitch wrote:I'd suggest looking at the D7000 as it does do timelapse photography and you won't be restricted to only using AF-S lenses.

Thats a bit out of my price range atm, im looking for something in the $1000 mark, max $1500.
What is it about the D7000 that makes it time lapse capable?

and what are AF-S lenses?

stu123 wrote:Thats a bit out of my price range atm, im looking for something in the $1000 mark, max $1500.
What is it about the D7000 that makes it time lapse capable?
and what are AF-S lenses?

The D7000 has an inbuilt interval shooting option. It allows you to specify how many shots you want to take at each interval and what the interval length (i.e., how long until the next photo is taken). You can also schedule what time to start taking the photos as well.

AF-S stands for Autofocus-Silent. It has an inbuilt silentwave motor and as the name suggests, it allows for quieter and faster autofocus. Not all cameras require an AF-S lens as mentioned, only the ones that do not have an autofocus screw built into their bodies. Obviously an AF-S lens won't work on older manual focus bodies as well (to make sure I cover all bases).

Have a look at the D90 as well, albeit it's a slightly older model from the current generation not that it should detract you.

Soo confused, so many different camera options.

I wouldn't worry about it too much. Focus on the alternatives, make a choice and then whatever you have will work for you.

Maybe the D3100 is the best option after all. Time lapse ability can be added with a corded remote. Macro ability is rather less dependent on the camera body (although the D5100's articulated screen can help in certain camera positions).

It is always a bit risky to spend a lot of money before one is sure of one's needs. I'd keep it cheap and simple for a start. You'll need a range of accessories for what you want to do (mostly lenses) which will remain useful when you outgrow your first DSLR body.

Cheers
Steffen.

I might have a draft list of possible cameras:
Nikon D7000
Nikon D3100
Nikon D5100
Canon EOS 1100D

Any suggestions/recommendations?

Murray Foote wrote: I don't know what the image quality is like though. Panasonic has a micro 4/3 stereo lens as well.

I would be worried by this solution. OK for gimmick shots but little else IMO.
To get a 3D representation, you need to separate the right and left image sensor. The further apart the two cameras are, the greater the 3D effect achievable. The minimum would be eyeball distance. This seems to be well under that minimum. The maximum depends on what you are trying to achieve. I have looked at stereograms of landforms taken from space that achieve a realistic effect by having camera separation of 10s if not 100s of kilometres. I suspect that to achieve a real sense of 3D, you would need to be on the wide separation side, unless the objects you are photographing are quite small.

stu123 wrote:I might have a draft list of possible cameras:

While the D7000 (not sure about the Canon) is the most expensive, it allows you the greatest flexibility in picking up second hand (cheap) lenses, but as I said before, play with them. Choose the one that feels right for you.

Mr Darcy wrote:To get a 3D representation, you need to separate the right and left image sensor.

That's the usual method but I don't see why it's necessary as long as the perspective of each image is appropriately displaced. Whether the lenses are optically good enough or far enough apart might be other issues.

Murray Foote wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:To get a 3D representation, you need to separate the right and left image sensor.

That's the usual method but I don't see why it's necessary as long as the perspective of each image is appropriately displaced. Whether the lenses are optically good enough or far enough apart might be other issues.

Sorry. Yes. I meant "eye". But the physics of the system dictates the 3D effect at any given "eye" displacement.

There is no reason though why you cannot have a folded path to the sensor(s) itself. Given appropriate filtering, there is no reason why the final image cannot be built in camera on a single sensor. But if the "eyes" are too close together, it doesn't matter how good the optics are. You simply won't get good stereo separation.

Old fashioned "bent barrel" binoculars use this to good effect, and explains why they give a better 3D image than the more compact roof prism binoculars. The binoculars that use "bent barrel" systems, but have the objectives closer than the eye pieces are simply a triumph of style over function. You are better served by a telescope. Even though Nikon do this & I have a pair.

So right now im leaning towards the:
Nikon D3100
-cheapest
-found a deal with bag, tripod, and 2 lenses for $1100

Nikon D7000
-more expensive at approx $1700
-can do time lapse

And i assume the Nikon D3100 can do time lapse, if i attach an external timing device?

stu123 wrote:And i assume the Nikon D3100 can do time lapse, if i attach an external timing device?

Nikon don't sell one that will work for you, but something like this looks like it will do the trick. Never tried one though. Phottix probably have something too but the Cleon that showed up in my search would not.

If you type "timer remote shutter nikon" into eBay you'll get dozens of hits from HK sellers in the $15-30 range. I haven't tried any of these but the risk seems reasonably low at this price (and free shipping).

Cheers
Steffen.

stu123 wrote:So right now im leaning towards the:
Nikon D3100
-cheapest
-found a deal with bag, tripod, and 2 lenses for $1100

Nikon D7000
-more expensive at approx $1700
-can do time lapse

And i assume the Nikon D3100 can do time lapse, if i attach an external timing device?

The cheapest isn't always the best. But the D3100 is a great camera for starting with.

As to the tripod, I'd be inclined to refer to it as a lightweight paperweight. In terms of the package deal, you would do well to ascribe a zero dollar value to it.

I'm not sure where you've seen your deals from, but you might want to consider Ryda in Sydney, who seem to be doing excellent pricing on Nikon Au stock.

D3100 twin lens kit with bag and cleaning kit: $900

With the $200 saved, you could buy a semi decent tripod.

gstark wrote:As to the tripod, I'd be inclined to refer to it as a lightweight paperweight. In terms of the package deal, you would do well to ascribe a zero dollar value to it.

Yes, if it's the kind of tripod you get in those "free gifts" packs then it's about the same as a telescopic back scratcher, only not as solid. They sell separately for around $2 shipped.

Cheers
Steffen.

Steffen wrote:telescopic back scratcher

Steffen wrote: They sell separately for around $2 shipped.

They've gone up in price? Must be the volatility of the PP.

Speaking of which .... I have heard that Greece has cut production of Hummus and Tzatziki confirming it is indeed a double dip recession

gstark wrote:a lightweight paperweight

I disagree. paperweights are designed to prevent things blowing away in a light breeze. Not assist them to do so.

I do find these tripods assist with blurry photos though. You are pretty much guaranteed to get a blurry photo if you use one.
Until you can afford a decent tripod, use a wheat bag instead

Mr Darcy wrote: You are pretty much guaranteed to get a blurry photo if you use one.

I don't agree. It depends on the weight of your equipment. If you have lightweight equipment, then these cheapies can be useful; especially if you got it for free. I paid for mine and have got 8 years out of it including regular dunkings in the sea. So that would be about $8 per year. Since I upgraded the body, the middle column is slipping. Lesson: Keep the minimum equipment possible....

But seriously, take that $200 (or $300 if you can afford) and get yourself a stable tripod.

PiroStitch wrote:I don't have any experience with 3D photography, but it does sound interesting. If you want to experiment with it, why not get another P&S that is the same as yours and see if you can get a bracket to mount both in order to take a photo at the same time using both cameras. This would be a much cheaper option for the time being for experimenting.

i just found this, which looks promising: http://www.camerahouse.com.au/products/ ... amera.aspx

surenj wrote:What's your level of experience/background and can you give us a few examples of your pictures?

I have recently create a flickr account, you can take a look to get an idea of the types of photos i take.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68413001@N04/