Beginner: D3000 vs S200EXR (Pics)

I really like the look of the Fuji S200EXR then I realised for the same money I can get the Nikon D3000 with F-S DX VR NIKKOR 18-55 mm f/3,5-5,6.

I am a total beginner, this will be my first camera and I really can't decide between these two. People tell me to go for the Nikon D3000 because "it's a dSLR" and because it's "Nikon" but could anyone offer some real advice on these two cameras?

I was drawn to the S200EXR because of these two particular pictures...

Dynamic range in standard mode
http://image.trustedreviews.com/imag...00contnorm.jpg

EXR DR mode
http://image.trustedreviews.com/imag...200contexr.jpg

That picture really blew me away! :thumbsup:

What is important to me

- The best image quality possible
- Low light capability

What is not important to me

- Live view, video, size, weight

Some years ago I had the predecessors of the two cameras you mention - the Nikon D70 DSLR and the Fuji F10 point-and-shoot. Both were 6Mpix and went up to 1600 ISO. I had ample opportunity to compare the two:

- in good conditions (daylight, not too much contrast) I couldn't tell the two apart on a print
- in contrasty light the Fuji burnt out the highlights and looked horrible
- the Nikon allowed me to shoot RAW which meant I make huge corrections easily
- the lens on the Fuji is f2.8 at the wide-angle end only. At the telephoto end it's f5.6 which means it's almost unusable in poor light (with the Nikon I can put any lens I want on it)

There was no contest - I always use a DSLR except when I absolutely had to have a very small camera in which case I take a Fuji point-and-shoot (currently a F40)

BTW the pictures you show - you can get the same effect with Nikon by using D-lighting. If you shoot RAW then you can add it later on your PC, and fine-adjust it to get just the effect you want. You could also bring back the colours in the stained-glass windows that look rather burnt out to me

Thanks for the advice. :)

I think I have made my mind up and will go for the Nikon D40 as it seems to do everything I need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nytol

Thanks for the advice. :)

I think I have made my mind up and will go for the Nikon D40 as it seems to do everything I need.

---

You're probably right, plus of course the D40 has been out of production for some time so you should be able to get a good deal.

Still I would advise you to look at the D60. It may be slightly more expensive than the D40 (it is almost the same camera) but it has one important advantage IMO - a dust removal mechanism. I had to clean the D70 every six months or so, which was a nuisance.

If you get a kit with D40 + 18-55 lens then it probably won't be the VR version. VR is useful in low light on static subjects. And if you want a real low-light lens, check out the 35mm f1.8 DX which will autofocus with the D40/D40x/D60/D5000/D3000. The popular 50mm f1.8 will fit but not autofocus with these cameras.

(Note: changed the text to specify that the lens in the D40 is not the VR version, unlike the D3000 kit)

Is this the lense you mentioned for low light?
http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...ew/conclusion/

Seems to be very good like you said. I would buy one for my D40/D60 for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nytol

Is this the lense you mentioned for low light?
http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...ew/conclusion/

Seems to be very good like you said. I would buy one for my D40/D60 for sure.

---

That's the one. I use it a lot in low light without flash. The "normal" view gives you the scene about as your eyes see it. It's the equivalent of the 50mm f1.8 which used to be the standard for film cameras before zooms came along.

Hmmm. Having a tough time finding a Nikon D40 online in France (Pixmania is sold out and Rue du Commerce don't sell them). Now looking at Canon 1000D as it is in stock everywhere. Would you know if there a Canon lense comparable to the Nikon 35mm f1.8 DX?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...e_EF_35mm.html

Why do you want a d40 other than price + as you report, they are probably hard to find a new one.
I'd stay with the D3000 you first mentioned or even a D5000. Much better for low light due to their sensors and being able to jack up the iso without getting a lot of noise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nytol

Hmmm. Having a tough time finding a Nikon D40 online in France (Pixmania is sold out and Rue du Commerce don't sell them). Now looking at Canon 1000D as it is in stock everywhere. Would you know if there a Canon lense comparable to the Nikon 35mm f1.8 DX?

---

The Canon 1000D is a good deal, except for the kit 18-55 kit lens which is not very good (see reviews on this site). Canon don't make an equivalent of the 35mm f1.8 DX yet - usually they are about 2 years behind Nikon with lenses for the smaller format. There is the 35mm f2 which is the right focal length but wrong price and the 50mm f1.8 which is right price but a short tele. It depends on what you want to do with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frog

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...e_EF_35mm.html

Why do you want a d40 other than price + as you report, they are probably hard to find a new one.
I'd stay with the D3000 you first mentioned or even a D5000. Much better for low light due to their sensors and being able to jack up the iso without getting a lot of noise.

---

Ken Rockwell scared me away from the D3000/D5000. Heh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nytol

Ken Rockwell scared me away from the D3000/D5000. Heh.

---

Chasseur d'Images doesn't mention any problems with the D3000 in fact they say the image quality is better than my D60. Believe Chasseurs d'Images, not Ken Rockwell.

Frog mentioned something about the D40 having an old sensor. The sensor is only half of the story. The D40 (and all its descendants) has a recent image processor and that's what makes it so good at high ISO (but not as good as the D5000 which has a recent sensor and recent image processor). My D200 and my D60 have very similar sensors but the D60 is way ahead at high ISO because it has the latest processor.

That second picture is nothing astounding - the exact same tonal detail was kept in both shots, the values were simply smaller in the first. Take the first through a quick curves adjustment in photoshop and you get the same picture as the second. The 'hdr' feature doesn't actually achieve more tonal detail, rather it just adjusts the tonal values. Its certainly not an 'HDR' image, the stained glass is terribly blown on both.

If you had a good 30 minutes of time to shoot a few pictures of that church, and process them - you could achieve a much better HDR image then the ones you posted. Off topic but felt like mentioning. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anbesol

That second picture is nothing astounding - the exact same tonal detail was kept in both shots, the values were simply smaller in the first. Take the first through a quick curves adjustment in photoshop and you get the same picture as the second. The 'hdr' feature doesn't actually achieve more tonal detail, rather it just adjusts the tonal values. Its certainly not an 'HDR' image, the stained glass is terribly blown on both.

If you had a good 30 minutes of time to shoot a few pictures of that church, and process them - you could achieve a much better HDR image then the ones you posted. Off topic but felt like mentioning. ;)

---

Yep, I realise that now. :) I have learnt a lot in the past few days and now the Fuji S200EXR is not on my shortlist anymore, only dSLR's are. I have come to realise the true power of digital SLR's and what can be achieved if you have a vision!

Was reading DxOMark Sensor ranks (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor) which I found really interesting and helped me realise where the D40, D3000, D5000 and D90 all relate to each other and other cameras (especially low light ISO).

The D5000 is now at the top of my short list along with the 35mm f1.8 which Franglais mentioned. I think that combination would be ideal for me.

However, I have to decide whether I want to pay the extra and buy the D90; D5000 body + 35mm f1.8 or D90 with default lense kit. Decisions decisions! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nytol

Yep, I realise that now. :) I have learnt a lot in the past few days and now the Fuji S200EXR is not on my shortlist anymore, only dSLR's are. I have come to realise the true power of digital SLR's and what can be achieved if you have a vision!

Was reading DxOMark Sensor ranks (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor) which I found really interesting and helped me realise where the D40, D3000, D5000 and D90 all relate to each other and other cameras (especially low light ISO).

The D5000 is now at the top of my short list along with the 35mm f1.8 which Franglais mentioned. I think that combination would be ideal for me.

However, I have to decide whether I want to pay the extra and buy the D90; D5000 body + 35mm f1.8 or D90 with default lense kit. Decisions decisions! :)

---

Do you realize that all of these, except for the D40, are Sony sensors? - TF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldClicker

Do you realize that all of these, except for the D40, are Sony sensors? - TF

---

Sensor made by Sony but the image processor is by Nikon (manufacturer unknown - they don't say).

Nikon make the optical stepper machines that Sony uses to make the sensors.

The 6Mpix sensor in the D40 is made by Sony but it's a specific version which can be used as an electronic shutter. This allows the D40 to have a flash sync speed of 1/500s like the D70 (same sensor - different image processor).

I believe that Sony also manufactured the proprietary Super-CCD used in past Fuji compacts like my F10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldClicker

Do you realize that all of these, except for the D40, are Sony sensors? - TF

---

I don't care who it is made by as long as it does the job. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nytol

...
However, I have to decide whether I want to pay the extra and buy the D90; D5000 body + 35mm f1.8 or D90 with default lense kit. Decisions decisions! :)

---

I would go for the D90 with kit lens and add the 35mm f1.8 later. You always get a good deal on the kit lens compared with just buying the body, and for general picture-taking a zoom lens is more versatile than a fixed focal length. And the D90 is a much nicer camera than the D5000. There's a pile of D90 kits in FNAC in Velizy II

Of course if you're only going to do available light pictures at the Pacha Club or the Moliere then you could make a case for the 35mm first.

What are you going to be doing pictures of anyway? We've been through a whole range of cameras from the Fuji to the D90.

I think the point clicker was driving at is that Nikon isn't the one and only manufacturer on the planet, despite what some Nikonites might have him believe. There are some great competing models to all the Nikons listed and it would be a great disservice to you to only look at the Nikon offerings. Not that Nikon is a bad choice, but it would be foolish to not look at its competition. For example - it might be a good idea to get a Camera body with an internal autofocus motor, to widen the lens options to more then just Nikons AF-S series. The D3000/5000 d40 etc all do not have an internal AF motor included.

Thanks for all the information and advice folks. It took me a while but I finally ordered my first dSLR which is the Pentax K-x (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/page29.asp). :)

Took my first two pictures with my new Pentax K-x today. Lots of features and settings to get used to for a complete newbie like myself but it's exciting (and daunting) to to finally own a decent camera! :) These were taken at 400 ISO; I haven't figured out how to lower it below 400 yet.

http://www.noryaka.com/images/statue_versailles.jpg

http://www.noryaka.com/images/water_hydrant.jpg

Congratulations on your purchase!
Your photos are pretty nice and I can see you already have some creativity with angles and composition.
The iso should be pretty easy to change,(one of the advantages of digital). I did a bit of a search and found you'll need to press the Fn button and choose the iso from the menu.
Your manual should give you more detail.

Thanks. I can change the ISO from 400+ just not down. Will check out what you found (my manual is in French yet I am English!).

On another note. Can anyone expain these anomalies?

http://www.noryaka.com/images/statue_versailles_x.jpg

http://www.noryaka.com/images/poste.jpg

You might want to move your last post to help files.
Not sure but I think I see them in the fire hydrant shot too.

Congratulations on your new camera. You might want to start a new thread on the Pentax forum. Also note that I removed the original Fuji sample photos you posted. It's ok to link to photos on another site but to post them here confuses the image ownership issue. We don't want anyone to think we're stealing their photos :)

I'm not sure that the spots you've circled are anomalies. They look like they could just be spots on the car and statue to me. I'd have to see them at 100% and/or see second shots of both subjects to compare.