WootBot


quality posts: 14 Private Messages WootBot

Staff

Nikon D3000 SLR w/ 18-55mm Lens Kit

Speed to First Woot:
11m 5.663s
First Sucker:
Danadeth
Last Wooter to Woot:
yiluw18
Last Purchase:
9 months ago
Order Pace (rank):
Top 21% of Tech Woots
Bottom 37% of all Woots
Woots Sold (rank):
Top 21% of Tech Woots
Top 44% of all Woots

Purchaser Experience

  • 37% first woot
  • 9% second woot
  • 26% < 10 woots
  • 13% < 25 woots
  • 16% ≥ 25 woots

Purchaser Seniority

  • 32% joined today
  • 2% one week old
  • 3% one month old
  • 19% one year old
  • 45% > one year old

Quantity Breakdown

  • 96% bought 1
  • 1% bought 2
  • 3% bought 3

Percentage of Sales Per Hour

3%
3%
2%
2%
1%
2%
1%
2%
6%
10%
9%
9%
6%
4%
6%
5%
5%
5%
2%
5%
3%
5%
5%
0%
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Woots by State

zero wooters wootinglots of wooters wooting



Quality Posts


shaver


quality posts: 2 Private Messages shaver

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D3000-vs-Nikon_D90


D3000 vs D90 I paid $1200 for my D90 about 3-4 years ago. totally worth it.

-Chad

silyn


quality posts: 2 Private Messages silyn

Extensive review here http://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/slrs/nikon_d3000 only major downside is the lack of video.

ionix


quality posts: 3 Private Messages ionix

I own this camera and use it for what it is, a great first step into the Dslr world. Very easy to use camera, has a "guide" for what u wanna do in the display screen( if u want to shoot kids playing or still photographs) and has easy to change aperture and shutter settings. If u have always owned a point and shoot and want to go the next level, buy this NEW camera and enjoy shooting in manual. Leave any questions I'll be able to help if I can tomorrow afternoon. Also, I bought this camera referb 3 years ago for almost 200 bucks more.

"Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself"

ionix


quality posts: 3 Private Messages ionix
silyn wrote:Extensive review here http://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/slrs/nikon_d3000 only major downside is the lack of video.



For anyone also wanting to shoot video, look up the D3100 or D5000. Great cameras and shoot video.

"Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself"

Shinespark


quality posts: 30 Private Messages Shinespark

I've used this, so I might be able to glean a bit of insight. For $400 the value is alright, but it's important to put it in context.

This is an entry-level in the vein of the D40. It lacks certain features you see in newer or higher end models, but will still give performance far superior to any compact point-and-shoot.

The sensor is old, and becomes noisy trash in low light. It also lacks the auto-correction for things like fringing the newer models have The viewfinder is not spectacular or super bright, and live view is not an option. Higher-end options like bracketing and tethered shooting are not to be found here. No video either.

Take note: Like other entry Nikons, there is no AF motor in this body. You must purchase AF-S lenses if you want autofocus, and old F-mount lenses will shut off the metering.

The x-sync is better than you'd expect for an entry level 1/200"(!) albeit without support for Nikon's wonky wireless flash system.

But, if you want a relatively inexpensive kit that gives you a bit of growth room and access to an expansive system, it'll do. The "guide" mode holds your hand and tells you the sort of shot it's taking, the idea being you'll eventually be weaned off of it.

It's been 20 years, I am going to copy that floppy.

Dwass


quality posts: 6 Private Messages Dwass

As a professional photographer with 10+ years of experience, I can't recommend this camera enough. In fact, when I recommend a camera for beginners, the D3000 is always my first choice. Between the low cost, high quality output, and small form factor, it's a real winner.

Also, while the 18-55 is a pretty basic lens, it's a great stater lens for learning and still produces great results!

You really can't go wrong!

As a side note, to those complaining about the lack of video (and some may mention the lack of AF motor... I'll get to this in a sec), if you are new to DSLR photography, you don't want to be shooting video. DSLR video photography is more complicated than many might think. You will need external microphones, lighting, stabilizers, etc for good results. This is a fantastic still picture camera.

Finally, to the lack of the AF servo, don't sweat it. The modern lenses are soooo superior to many of the manual focus lenses. Not only that, the AFS lenses focus much faster and are much quieter. For those with older lenses, don't let this worry you, your lenses will work on this Nikon system, you just need to manually focus it. You will even have a handy indicator to tell you when you're locked on!

[size=18][color=red]Я царь woot в России![/color][/size]

meandsecoya


quality posts: 8 Private Messages meandsecoya

Out of curiosity, how does this compare with the Canon EOS Rebel T3 I got for the same price off of Woot last week?

http://www.woot.com/offers/canon-eos-rebel-digital-slr-1

nowayride


quality posts: 0 Private Messages nowayride

Comparison vs D3100

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D3000-vs-Nikon_D3100

D3100 sometimes goes for around $450 on Amazon. The D3100 has a lot of improvements, especially with having video. I will say I'm quite happy I went with Nikon over getting a T3. The 3000 series is great for entry level DSLR.

robin731


quality posts: 6 Private Messages robin731

Costco is currently selling a D3100 with the same 18-55mm lens and an additional 55-200mm lens for $650. The $250 difference is about the cost of the long lens, so you get the next generation camera, with video and improved photo quality, for free. That seems like a much better choice for anyone who is serious about getting into SLR photography and has the extra money to spend.

On the other hand, this camera is cheaper than high-end compact cameras like the Canon S110 or Panasonic LX7 and absolutely kicks their butts in terms of photo quality and versatility. So if you're price-driven and don't mind the bulk of a DSLR, this is a great alternative to one of them.

CoffeeOnIce


quality posts: 8 Private Messages CoffeeOnIce

No love for celluloid anymore?

richardcadman


quality posts: 0 Private Messages richardcadman
meandsecoya wrote:Out of curiosity, how does this compare with the Canon EOS Rebel T3 I got for the same price off of Woot last week?

http://www.woot.com/offers/canon-eos-rebel-digital-slr-1



I have the Conon T3i as well. I really love it. I got mine from Ritz cause I couldn't wait to find them on sale because I was going on a trip. I am very pleased with it. I did try the Nikon too and it was the first camera the salesman tried to push on me. I ended up going with the T3i because it has 16mp and a few more features.

casey00001


quality posts: 13 Private Messages casey00001

Personally, I wouldn't buy cameras or electronics now with Black Friday just around the corner. Just something to keep in mind

charliecarroll


quality posts: 97 Private Messages charliecarroll

As would not be a surprise to anyone this camera will be seeing sales prices as it has been replaced but, this is still a great introductory Digital SLR. Personally, I prefer Canon to Nikon but at this level there is no real advantage of one over the other. If you are really into seeing reviews, you can find about 365 of them at B&H. The link takes you to the page showing the camera. Just scroll down to see the start of the reviews. BTW, the reviews are very good.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/635660-REG/Nikon_25462_D3000_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

This is a very good price for a new in the box model with a genuine USA warranty and not grey market or aftermarket warranty. Even refurbs are going for only around 50 less and when you add shipping it is not even a $50 savings. Can be seen here,

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/734482-REF/Nikon_25462B_D3000_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

To those just entering this level and/or SLR, you are making a bit more investment than you have in your point and shoot. Protect that investment. Just the lens (new) for this camera goes for $200 (or more) and it has excellent optics along with image stabilization. Invest in a UV filter that screws down on the front of this lens. If you want to order one on line the size for this lens is a 52mm. For one it is a clear glass filter that in place protects you front optic from damage by insuring nothing can come in contact with that optic. Replacing a cracked or damaged filter is only a few bucks compared to lens replacement/repair. The UV filter also filters out some unwanted UV rays. Also, when doing this get a good one. Tiffen is not a bad choice. A good filter is just not that expensive and the very few bucks you would save by buying on the cheap would then have you putting some kind of plastic thing over your great optics rather than optical grade glass.

Last, on the lens, this is a good standard lens for wide angle to normal shots but it is not going to (nor was it intended) to be a telephoto lens. You can do some digital zooming and cropping on your computer when you download but that will be it. Also, this camera as most will allow you to shoot at different levels of quality and obviously the better the quality the more memory used but, if you want to take full advantage of this SLR and lens, shoot at one of the higher or highest settings and you will also have better results in zooming and cropping on your downloaded image.

To fully expand your options with true telephoto a 55-200mm nikon lens will set you back about $250 and a 55-300mm would set you back around $400.

Also, to really take full advantage of what this great little SLR has to offer you may also later add a dedicated flash that has more power than the on board flash.

Compared to your point and shoot well, there is no comparison. This is a great example of apples and oranges and going SLR is a whole new and wonderful world. But there is still room for you current point and shoot if you decide to go this route so do not put it away in a drawer. It is small, easy to use and carry as well as comes out quickly and gets the shot. I carry a point and shoot with me about everywhere I go even when not carrying my SLR and when I do carry the SLR, I have my point and shoot with me.

Bottom line, if you want to step into the world of SLR, this is a fine product model to start with at a very good price.

lancef1


quality posts: 0 Private Messages lancef1

I have a Nikon FM2 and a lot of great Nikkor lenses. Can I use any or all with this camera? All but one are autofocus but I prefer manual focus for SLR work leaving autofocus to my point and shoot.

-Lance

charliecarroll


quality posts: 97 Private Messages charliecarroll
richardcadman wrote:I have the Canon T3i as well. I really love it. I got mine from Ritz cause I couldn't wait to find them on sale because I was going on a trip. I am very pleased with it. I did try the Nikon too and it was the first camera the salesman tried to push on me. I ended up going with the T3i because it has 16mp and a few more features.



You are doing just fine with the Canon. There has been an ongoing feud between Canon and Nikon users for years. I am an old Nikon person that moved over to
Canon. There was a time when certainly and clearly Nikon had the edge on the market. But back in the 80's Canon moved ahead of everyone in AF optics in focusing speed as well as image stabilization. Nikon caught up quickly but the damage was done and many (including me) moved to Canon. That is when you started seeing all those white lens's showing up on the sidelines of sporting events. Canon's pro grade telephotos were white. So much so, everyone is producing a white lens now. I still shoot and prefer Canon but, at this level and these two models, they are both very fine at this price point and a person is not going wrong with either. In short, be happy with you Rebel, you did just fine. Enjoy your SLR.

acraigl


quality posts: 15 Private Messages acraigl

Bought my wife the D3100 about a year ago, very similar to this one and is a great starter DSLR.

You will quickly outgrow the included lens, so absolutely budget for a something that has more zoom.

The only downside on this model is that it does not support auto-focus. You'll need to move up to the D5100 (or the current model equivalent) for that.

acraigl


quality posts: 15 Private Messages acraigl
charliecarroll wrote:As would not be a surprise to anyone this camera will be seeing sales prices as it has been replaced but, this is still a great introductory Digital SLR. Personally, I prefer Canon to Nikon but at this level there is no real advantage of one over the other. If you are really into seeing reviews, you can find about 365 of them at B&H. The link takes you to the page showing the camera. Just scroll down to see the start of the reviews. BTW, the reviews are very good.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/635660-REG/Nikon_25462_D3000_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

This is a very good price for a new in the box model with a genuine USA warranty and not grey market or aftermarket warranty. Even refurbs are going for only around 50 less and when you add shipping it is not even a $50 savings. Can be seen here,

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/734482-REF/Nikon_25462B_D3000_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

To those just entering this level and/or SLR, you are making a bit more investment than you have in your point and shoot. Protect that investment. Just the lens (new) for this camera goes for $200 (or more) and it has excellent optics along with image stabilization. Invest in a UV filter that screws down on the front of this lens. If you want to order one on line the size for this lens is a 52mm. For one it is a clear glass filter that in place protects you front optic from damage by insuring nothing can come in contact with that optic. Replacing a cracked or damaged filter is only a few bucks compared to lens replacement/repair. The UV filter also filters out some unwanted UV rays. Also, when doing this get a good one. Tiffen is not a bad choice. A good filter is just not that expensive and the very few bucks you would save by buying on the cheap would then have you putting some kind of plastic thing over your great optics rather than optical grade glass.

Last, on the lens, this is a good standard lens for wide angle to normal shots but it is not going to (nor was it intended) to be a telephoto lens. You can do some digital zooming and cropping on your computer when you download but that will be it. Also, this camera as most will allow you to shoot at different levels of quality and obviously the better the quality the more memory used but, if you want to take full advantage of this SLR and lens, shoot at one of the higher or highest settings and you will also have better results in zooming and cropping on your downloaded image.

To fully expand your options with true telephoto a 55-200mm nikon lens will set you back about $250 and a 55-300mm would set you back around $400.

Also, to really take full advantage of what this great little SLR has to offer you may also later add a dedicated flash that has more power than the on board flash.

Compared to your point and shoot well, there is no comparison. This is a great example of apples and oranges and going SLR is a whole new and wonderful world. But there is still room for you current point and shoot if you decide to go this route so do not put it away in a drawer. It is small, easy to use and carry as well as comes out quickly and gets the shot. I carry a point and shoot with me about everywhere I go even when not carrying my SLR and when I do carry the SLR, I have my point and shoot with me.

Bottom line, if you want to step into the world of SLR, this is a fine product model to start with at a very good price.



If you don't mind swapping lenses, the Nikon 70-300mm lens can be found on amazon for about $150. Not a bad way to extend the camera on a lower budget.

Capeto


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Capeto

I just got this camera + lens about 6 weeks ago for $450, and while I can't compare it with higher-end Nikons/Canons, it's a great great camera to get you started with digital photography, and the quality of the photos is amazing especially if you're coming from a point-and-shoot.

I would also recommend this book to anyone who buys this camera as their first DSLR. It teaches you the general theory behind photography and tailors the practice part to the D3000 by using instructions and settings specific to this camera.

charliecarroll


quality posts: 97 Private Messages charliecarroll
acraigl wrote:Bought my wife the D3100 about a year ago, very similar to this one and is a great starter DSLR.

You will quickly outgrow the included lens, so absolutely budget for a something that has more zoom.

The only downside on this model is that it does not support auto-focus. You'll need to move up to the D5100 (or the current model equivalent) for that.



I am confused as to what you are saying. If you are saying this offered today nikon does not have AF that is wrong. It does have AF and the included lens is an AF lens. Maybe I just read your post wrong.

radi0j0hn


quality posts: 79 Private Messages radi0j0hn

Attn "Gym Photographers" and others trying to stop kids in their tracks indoors: no magic fairy dust here, you need to spend more for the LENS to get those shots!

The specs SHOULD read: 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR. That means the lens is a "variable aperture" model that lets the opening get smaller as the lens in zoomed.

This makes it more compact and they have been doing it for years.

SOME TIMES (not often) it will shoot at 3.5 but MOST TIMES at 5.6.

In your typical gym, you will need to crank up the ISO all the way and be sure to shoot at aperture priority (wide open) to TRY to get a fast shutter speed. But chances are, it won't be fast enough.

You either need a lens with a larger lens opening (big $$$) or a camera body with a very high
- and high quality - ISO setting, at least 6400.

So save more money and get the right tool for the job. I know his camera seems like a lot of money to those who up to now have only spent $89 for a point and shoot, but it's not. Right now, cameras and lenses that do what you want cost thousands. (sorry!)

And if all this ISO, shutter speed and aperture stuff is gobbledegook to you, you need to get educated about "how to use the digital camera you just bought."

The magic fairy dust camera that does everything for you perfectly in all situations has not yet arrived. It will someday, but right now brain power and hardware needs to be added to the mix.

acpress.com Not cute, but useful.

krissta


quality posts: 2 Private Messages krissta
charliecarroll wrote:I am confused as to what you are saying. If you are saying this offered today nikon does not have AF that is wrong. It does have AF and the included lens is an AF lens. Maybe I just read your post wrong.



I'm guessing he bought an older lens that the camera doesn't 100% support. So it doesn't work with the lens he purchased separately.

gantt


quality posts: 11 Private Messages gantt
charliecarroll wrote:Personally, I prefer Canon to Nikon but at this level there is no real advantage of one over the other.



I always point out that in addition to specs, menus, etc., one should consider ergonomics. I loved the D5100 based on specs and reviews, but when I picked it up it didn't feel comfortable in my hands: grip too small, etc. I think the D3000/3100 body size was similar. The Canons were a better fit. Some other people are likely just the opposite.

I feel that a comfortable grip and ease of operating the controls are important factors that will affect how likely you are to use the camera and the quality of your results.

shelldigity


quality posts: 1 Private Messages shelldigity
meandsecoya wrote:Out of curiosity, how does this compare with the Canon EOS Rebel T3 I got for the same price off of Woot last week?

http://www.woot.com/offers/canon-eos-rebel-digital-slr-1



I bought the Canon too. In terms of specs, the Canon was the better deal. http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-T3-vs-Nikon_D3000

zuiquan


quality posts: 13 Private Messages zuiquan
acraigl wrote:Bought my wife the D3100 about a year ago, very similar to this one and is a great starter DSLR.

You will quickly outgrow the included lens, so absolutely budget for a something that has more zoom.

The only downside on this model is that it does not support auto-focus. You'll need to move up to the D5100 (or the current model equivalent) for that.



I think maybe you mean the camera body doesn't have a motor for autofocus separate from the lens. This is true, you have to buy Nikkor AF lenses or a lens from another company that makes a compatible lens. That being said, the AF on the Nikkor lenses is basically silent and extremely fast. I've never had an issue with the motor being built into the lens rather than being built into the body of the camera.

pdiddyhagan


quality posts: 1 Private Messages pdiddyhagan

CNET review 2009

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/nikon-d3000-18mm-55mm/4505-6501_7-33765424.html

charliecarroll


quality posts: 97 Private Messages charliecarroll
zuiquan wrote:I think maybe you mean the camera body doesn't have a motor for autofocus separate from the lens. This is true, you have to buy Nikkor AF lenses or a lens from another company that makes a compatible lens. That being said, the AF on the Nikkor lenses is basically silent and extremely fast. I've never had an issue with the motor being built into the lens rather than being built into the body of the camera.



I much prefer the AF motor in the lens. It is much more advantageous. If it is in the camera body and that motor goes sour, you have lost auto focus regardless of what lens you use unless and until you send the body to the great camera hospital. When it is in the lens, if you have the AF go south in a particular lens, you are just out the AF on that one and any/all others you own will still be usable. Personally, I would not want a camera that AF came from a body motor for this very reason.

jmbunkin


quality posts: 24 Private Messages jmbunkin

Bad Woot,bad bad Woot. I just bought a Canon SX40HS(like it a lot)because I could not quite swing the extra money to get a DSLR and now you've had a Canon and a Nikon DSLR in the last few weeks for $400. I just know ya did it on purpose,mean is what you are!

toast95135


quality posts: 0 Private Messages toast95135

The D3000 is fine, but its basically a D80 with some different software and features removed. The D80 had a top LCD screen (which is extremely useful, you can see all your settings without messing with the camera) and an autofocus motor. They share the same sensor so you might as well find a good used or nib D80 for cheaper then this.

whatsamattaU


quality posts: 1015 Private Messages whatsamattaU
radi0j0hn wrote:Attn "Gym Photographers" and others trying to stop kids in their tracks indoors: no magic fairy dust here, you need to spend more for the LENS to get those shots!

The specs SHOULD read: 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR. That means the lens is a "variable aperture" model that lets the opening get smaller as the lens in zoomed.

This makes it more compact and they have been doing it for years.

SOME TIMES (not often) it will shoot at 3.5 but MOST TIMES at 5.6.

In your typical gym, you will need to crank up the ISO all the way and be sure to shoot at aperture priority (wide open) to TRY to get a fast shutter speed. But chances are, it won't be fast enough.

You either need a lens with a larger lens opening (big $$$) or a camera body with a very high
- and high quality - ISO setting, at least 6400.

So save more money and get the right tool for the job. I know his camera seems like a lot of money to those who up to now have only spent $89 for a point and shoot, but it's not. Right now, cameras and lenses that do what you want cost thousands. (sorry!)

And if all this ISO, shutter speed and aperture stuff is gobbledegook to you, you need to get educated about "how to use the digital camera you just bought."

The magic fairy dust camera that does everything for you perfectly in all situations has not yet arrived. It will someday, but right now brain power and hardware needs to be added to the mix.



At least they let you give hints to the tome. I still hope to getting around to reading it at home, advice appreciated as usual, Radi0j0hn.

few more videos:
showing different buttons, etc.

function button

their commercial video?

If you like the "fro"

LONTIGGER


quality posts: 0 Private Messages LONTIGGER

The D3100 is on sale at Best Buy for $499 with 18-55mm lens....just saying...

LONTIGGER


quality posts: 0 Private Messages LONTIGGER

In fact, with a bag, 16g card and a 55-200mm lens it's $699... I've purchased a ton of stuff from Woot but there are some things I'd rather buy brick and mortar...

jmbunkin


quality posts: 24 Private Messages jmbunkin
charliecarroll wrote:I am confused as to what you are saying. If you are saying this offered today nikon does not have AF that is wrong. It does have AF and the included lens is an AF lens. Maybe I just read your post wrong.



A+ for diplomacy here !

walmark


quality posts: 1 Private Messages walmark

It's not a bad camera, but it is quite long in the tooth.

- This is 2 generations old. After this, Nikon released D3100 with 14MP CMOS sensor and live view/video, and just recently they released another update, D3200 with 24MP CMOS sensor and much higher ISO sensitivity.

- The image sensor on this camera is REALLY old - it first showed up in Nikon D200 in 2005! It's a 10MP CCD (rather than CMOS) sensor that can give you very nice images in good light, but sucks in low light situations due to its limited and noisy high ISO (ISO 800 is maximum you can go to get decent images, and even that is already grainy)

walmark


quality posts: 1 Private Messages walmark
charliecarroll wrote:I am confused as to what you are saying. If you are saying this offered today nikon does not have AF that is wrong. It does have AF and the included lens is an AF lens. Maybe I just read your post wrong.



It doesn't have the camera body "screw drive" autofocus motor, so it can't work with older lenses utilizing that tech. It will still autofocus with lenses with integrated AF motors (both Nikon AF-S lenses and from other manufacturers such as Tamron, Sigma, Tokina).

The downside is there are many used lenses out there that are excellent, sometimes even better than their current equivalents, and can often be had for a bargain price. However, they almost exclusively use screw drive autofocus and therefore will only work in manual focus with bodies such as D40, D60, D3000, D5000. D80, D90, D7000 and all higher end bodies support screw drive.

pmuthapp


quality posts: 0 Private Messages pmuthapp

For those of us who just want great pictures without spending as much money, a high end point and shoot may be a better deal.

The olympus xz-1 is a fantastic little camera with a lens that drops all the way down to f1.8...so you can get great Bokeh, the blurred background effect that most people associate with the difference between professional and amateur (or good and OK) photographs.

The XZ-1 is selling for $261.49 at Amazon now. The Canon S100 and Panasonic DMC LX-7 are also good choices, but a bit more expensive. All three of these you should be able to carry around in a big pocket...

Comment away!

robin731


quality posts: 6 Private Messages robin731
pmuthapp wrote:For those of us who just want great pictures without spending as much money, a high end point and shoot may be a better deal.

The olympus xz-1 is a fantastic little camera with a lens that drops all the way down to f1.8...so you can get great Bokeh, the blurred background effect that most people associate with the difference between professional and amateur (or good and OK) photographs.



It's not that simple, though - the depth of field at a given f-stop increases as the sensor size decreases, so you can't directly compare a small-sensor camera like the XZ-1 to an APS-C camera like this Nikon.

If I did my calculations right, f1.8 on the Olympus will give you about the same depth of field as f5.6 on this Nikon. The Oly's wide aperture may give it an advantage over other small-sensor cameras, but not over a DSLR with even a kit lens.

For sheer photo quality, I would take this deal over any small-sensor compact (though perhaps not a large-sensor compact like the Sony RX1). The advantage of most compact cameras is their compactness, not their photo quality.

daiuy


quality posts: 0 Private Messages daiuy

Thanks to everyone who provided advice and tips. I decided to buy this, and went to amazon for the recommended tele lens, book, and assorted accessories.
In the Dark Ages, I was a serious photographer, with a variety of SLR bodies and lenses, as well as my own darkroom. But since digitals came out, it's been more an amateurish hobby, using Panasonic Lumixes. Beautiful photos, but their shutter lag has been annoying, and after trying to get a portrait of my very active pup today, this woot offer appeared. Now, what to do with the two Lumixes?

russwjohns


quality posts: 8 Private Messages russwjohns
walmark wrote:It's not a bad camera, but it is quite long in the tooth.

- This is 2 generations old. After this, Nikon released D3100 with 14MP CMOS sensor and live view/video, and just recently they released another update, D3200 with 24MP



Agreed! The D3100 can be had found for under hundred more, or better yet look for a D5100 for a bit more. Just look around.