I currently have a D3100. Most of my pics are birds or travel pics. Is this a good upgrade choice?
1815996
I shoot with the D7100 professionally as an aerial photographer. I am in love with this camera. You'll be blown away by the differences in the camera immediately! First and foremost, the D7100 has several shortcuts to change settings laid out intuitively around the camera, so you don't need to go through menus to change things like auto exposure, autofocus mode, flash level, ISO...etc. once you've become familiar with the body, you'll be moving around efficiently- something you can't easily do with the clunky low end D3100. Image quality is light years above the D3100. Resolution is significantly higher. There are dual SD card slots, which are perfect for long trips when you are away from your computer for an extended period of time, or shoot a massive amount of photos. The D7100 is a very logical next step, and really a wonderful body. Bobby- JetJocks Aerial Photography
1815997
I have been more than happy with mine. It's used for scenes, people, flowers, travel & I have some great shots of animals and birds in Kruger National Park, South Africa.
1815998
Yes, but if you're on a tight budget you should consider the D5300 for a lot less with the same sensor as the D7100. Both very good camera bodies. Also the D5300 has an articulating screen, which the D7100 does not.
1815999
I upgraded from the D90, haven't used the D3100. I'd expect it's a good upgrade as the D3100 has been upgraded twice. I think waiting at least ntil the second upgrade makes sense as the next upgrade is more incremental than revolutionary. I think you'll like the D7100. I find it easier to operate and use thatn my D90 even though I had it 3 years. Have fun shooting with whatever you choose.
1816000
Yes, its a very good choice for bird photos. I also have a D810, but I use the D7100 because of the 1.4X factor for my bird photography.
1816001
Just go for it if you have the budget. It will dramatically change your picture quality.
1621195
I highly recommend the A710. I bought it for a recent trip to Tokyo as an upgrade from the A70 and it did exactly what I wanted it to do. I like to take a lot of pictures in low light without a flash and the IS worked out great. The longer zoom is digital so I don't bother using it. I can crop later and zoom if I want to in photoshop. The normal optical zoom is good enough for me at 6x. I did most of my shooting in auto mode which gave me control over flash and macro settings. Manual mode is easy enough however. There are a lot of extras that I haven't used much. The one thing that I didn't like was the fact that this camera uses SD unlike my A70 which uses CF. Since I have a bunch of CF cards it would have been nice to use them in the A710 but a 2G SD card is pretty cheap. One more thing that I like about the A710 is that they removed 2 batteries so it's a bit lighter. I like canon cameras so I haven't looked at other brands with similar features and price. It sounds like you've done your homework and I think you'll really like this camera. btw, if you would like to see some of the pictures that I have taken with this camera you can see some of them here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cjw333/sets/72157594390957283/
749047
I had the same choice. I went Nikon and am very happy. Although I have never taken photos of gorillas in low light I have taken photos of my children who can occasionally behave as such in low light. This camera is superb. After owning 10 years worth of nothing but Cannons I finally strayed from the reservation and bought this Nikon after three months worth of contemplation. I am very happy. The 3D effect for very still shot photos might be some of the sharpest non professional photos I have ever seen. I would buy this again, or take on an African safari knowing the zoom will be a huge asset. Best of luck on whatever you decide.
1511862
In my opinion it is not significant of an upgrade to change. The only real differences are an increase of 5 megapixels and an slightly increased shot rate. Not enough to ditch the older model. Neal
2124491
What did you end up getting? I had the same dilemma but choose the 790 for its picture quality. It's a great camera and am very pleased with the results. I had fun with it right out of the box, but must confess I am a manual freak, so I did study it before the camera even came. www.steve-digicams.com posts reviews and sample pictures if you want more info. For me, it's a perfect little P&S; for your pocket.
520391
There is no comparison between D3100 or even D5100 and the D600. I had the D5100 before and I upgraded to the D600. It is just marvelous... except that little dirt problem, I had to return it for cleaning up at Nikon, I hope I won't have to do it very often.
825190
I recommend the Canon A720IS !!!!! My pet pictures are breathtaking (IMO) and I'll put a couple up to prove it! (If I can figure out how)
1365222
Your decision is a personal preference. I had Nikon lenses which which were usable in the 3100...and I like Nikon.
199905
if money is no object , buy the d5300 , i had the d3200 and it was a great camera you can routinely make really nice 20-30 size pictures ,specially with the prime lenses like the 50mm 1.8g , i bought the d3300 because the new sensor is scarper and the new lens is really much more portable and last but not least the included lightroom 5 software was in a refubrished package deal, between the 5200 or the 3300 the 5200 with its swiveling screen might be more camera to grow into , how ever if you only are doing basic photograhy the the d3300 or d3200 are more then enough for any photografer
1736084
I would get the Nikon Coolpix L120. By far the best choice out there, and it's affordable!
169376
This might be too late, but ... I love the A1300. It has a nice quick response and it is small enough to put in a pocket and take backpacking (nice and light). Great zoom and movie feature and the best part is that it still has a view finder so I don't have to use reading glasses when I am taking photos. This is my second camera - I destroyed the last one when I dropped it 10 feet (ALWAYS use the wrist-strap!) OK, so it isn't so great on impact, but everything else is A++++++.
1177554
Wolfgang, I don't have a D50 so I don't know what changes in accessibility the camera has compared to the D3100 I have. All I can say is that the exposure information and some other technical things would translate in function. It's a pretty inexpensive item, considering.
2187923
Definitely. I have the same camera/ lens combo. It's the best lens you can get for that camera for taking pictures of birds.
1645973
Thanks Conway, I was so happy to see your post it gave me the push to order the Nikon D700 today from B&H.; This is my first full frame camera and I just wanted to make sure that I was making the right decision. I was mostly leaning toward the Nikon but had to consider the Mark 2. Thanks again for your help.
2212638
For me major difference was Canon having ISO 100 - 6400 for shooting from bright to dim light whereas Nikon D3100 only has ISO up to 3200. That makes Canon a much better option as far picture clarity in dim light is concerned. I do agree that it is 12 mp but that's not too less compared to 14mp. Major CONS of canon do include 720mp video but if video isn't that important, i would stick with CANON..
1516436
I think that would be a better option than my DSLR. I'm planning on upgrading soon.
424367
I'm also trying to decide if the Canon XS or XSI is right for me. I own the original 6.1mp Canon digital Rebel slr and am wondering if now is a good time to upgrade? I used to shoot primarily landscapes while traveling, but am doing more portraits now that I have kids. The Digic III processor definitely caught my attention, but I'm wondering how much of a difference in the cameras will I notice?