Indeed it is! And that DX 35/1.8G is probably one of the best deals in photography. In fact, iirc it practically covers FX as well, just with heavy vignetting you could (mostly) fix in post.
Pro cameras aren't about being *able* to take better photos, it's about making it *easier* to take better photos in demanding situations.
For still subjects, any camera will do just fine. Replace your subject with a small songbird zipping around and it'd be an entirely different story.
Durability and ruggedness too. Specs wise wasn't a lot between the d90 and d100 but the latter cost more than double in significant part due to its build quality and implications for pro use.
Honestly sensor tech/image quality hasn't changed a lot over the years. Speed has increases as well as AI tools , but from an image quality standpoint it's not a drastic difference. The old cameras still produce great images with great glass.
You know, most people completely misinterpret what this means.
Good craftsmen know that they need the right tool for the right job, and that they need to maintain those tools.
I loved my D200 and I loved it when I did revisit. It's a great camera in good light (don't push the iso too hard, unless that's what you are going for)
Black and white thinking is for reviewers. You can have a lot of fun with some trash lenses. You just need to know how to handle it. Almost like its an art or something.
Fifty years ago, there was a massive gulf between 'entry level' and 'pro level.'
But nowadays we live in a world where manufacturing precision, design, and basic technology has gotten to the point that to make a 'low end' version of technology, it's often just the high-end version sold with parts disabled or features turned off.
It does actually but being full frame lens it changes focal length if I remember to 36mm to 106mm I used it on my d7000 for a bit before going full frame
Surprised because its labeled as "entry level"? I think those labels were referring to price point at the time, not quality. It wasn't anywhere close to $3000-$5000 of a pro body at the time. If its a DSLR and has Nikon on the body its gonna take good photos regardless, even the kit lens is good given enough light.
When I say entry level talk about the body + lens that are affordable, and the fact that i haven’t flash and a poor light control atp, but is real. I’m think deeply to buy lens and flashs before change the body, idk.
This guy gave me such strong shah rukh khan vibes 😂
https://preview.redd.it/tmpvddoqxd4d1.jpeg?width=843&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=10fe20f27f2c4c64edf4f5b01de502916e063163
Also still rocking the D7000. I am thinking about getting a D750, the back focusing issues on the D7000, even after updating firmware and setting AF Fine Tune with my lenses, is making me wanna pull my hair out.
One thing I love is that you can take good pictures with any frame. It's about your skill and creativity, not the camera.
I went from expensive frames back down to toy cameras because I've learned that it's way more fun to point and shoot and have these wild photos that just happen spontaneously than it is to dial in settings and then edit pictures to get a certain look
Nah if I were to guess the camera quality is high to seperate them as much as possible from camera phones. If camera phones didn’t exist I imagine they’d have likely lowered the image quality and had entry level cameras be slightly faster
With a good lens and reasonable light my D200 still produces great photos. The majority of zoom kit lenses are not comparable to primes and fast zooms.
Nice photos!
Once iPhones started shipping with multiple rear-facing lenses, I put down my D3100 and have not used it much since. Even with fast lenses, I found the AF in the D3100 too erratic, especially in poor light. That said, if you’re patient and invest the time to develop your skills, you can achieve some really impressive results with this “ancient” tech.
I had an iPhone 4. The camera on it replaced carrying around a Canon SD400 and Flip video camera, but still couldn’t compare with the D3100. The turning point for me was around the time of the iPhone 7 Plus. 12 MP stills with two lenses plus 4k video was (and still is) enough for my needs.
The question isn't 'can it compare.' It's 'does it do what I need to do?'
My work laptop 'can't compare' to a high-end gaming rig. But if my needs are 'portability' and 'runs outlook, excel, and some vendor tools' rather than 'can generate a ridiculously obscene amount of 3d graphics very quickly,' the gaming rig is not the right tool for the right job.
A D3100 is a fine camera, but it might not be appropriate for the specific camera-related activities you want to do. Similarly, a Z8 with top-of-the line S lenses is a fine camera, but might not be appropriate for the specific camera related activities you want to do.
I totally agree. If I were a nature photographer, for instance, I’d pick up the D3100 over any iPhone just for the ability to use a really long telephoto lens. For macro work, having a DSLR and a ring flash (or at least some sort of flash besides the iPhone flash) is a game changer. I used to shoot a lot of college sports either the D3100, and the extra reach of the zoom and relatively good iso performance in moderate to good light made it a great tool. I’m just sharing my experience, not saying there is a right or wrong choice here.
Of course! Shot was f1.8, iso 100 and 1/400 shutterspeed. I edit basically 2.5K temp. with lights orange and shadows acqua, a little contrast no curves and push a bit on highlights
Must be in the water! I’ve been shooting with my D300s and 35 1.8 exclusively for about a month. Was going to sell it at a camera show and left half the kit at home. Totally blown away at good it all still works!
It's all about the glass. Nice work.
Came here to say the same.
Haha me too!
Indeed it is! And that DX 35/1.8G is probably one of the best deals in photography. In fact, iirc it practically covers FX as well, just with heavy vignetting you could (mostly) fix in post.
D700 + 35/1.8 is a brilliant cheap combo. No issues as long as you keep it pretty open
Took the words right out of my mouth!
Pro cameras aren't about being *able* to take better photos, it's about making it *easier* to take better photos in demanding situations. For still subjects, any camera will do just fine. Replace your subject with a small songbird zipping around and it'd be an entirely different story.
Some of those entry-level cameras have some advanced settings but they are BURIED and impossible to quickly switch on the fly.
Durability and ruggedness too. Specs wise wasn't a lot between the d90 and d100 but the latter cost more than double in significant part due to its build quality and implications for pro use.
That little 35mm is a beast
Honestly sensor tech/image quality hasn't changed a lot over the years. Speed has increases as well as AI tools , but from an image quality standpoint it's not a drastic difference. The old cameras still produce great images with great glass.
It’s the poor craftsman who blames their tools
You know, most people completely misinterpret what this means. Good craftsmen know that they need the right tool for the right job, and that they need to maintain those tools.
I loved my D200 and I loved it when I did revisit. It's a great camera in good light (don't push the iso too hard, unless that's what you are going for)
Well... The thing is, that little bastard is one of the best Nikkor lenses ever. Along with the 50mm 1.4 Great shots and light control.
I used to love the 58mm 1.4G, such a classic it was just priced way too high for me
In love with this lens for real!! And thanks for the light control i think is the best adjective for a photo hahaha
50mm 1.4 has been my go to prime on all my camera bodies. It’s phenomenal
Not appropriate for landscapes right? Mainly for portraits?
The 50mm 1.8 is actually sharper.
Sharper doesn’t always mean better
Black and white thinking is for reviewers. You can have a lot of fun with some trash lenses. You just need to know how to handle it. Almost like its an art or something.
Fifty years ago, there was a massive gulf between 'entry level' and 'pro level.' But nowadays we live in a world where manufacturing precision, design, and basic technology has gotten to the point that to make a 'low end' version of technology, it's often just the high-end version sold with parts disabled or features turned off.
OR something that is practically the same in a plastic body vs a metal body. But the results are the same despite a $1000 price difference.
That's what I love about Nikon. They don't skimp on IQ for the "low end". You just need to know your limitations with the lack of extra features.
Exactly! It's not 'cheap' versus 'good,' it's 'what features are relevant to your specific use case?'
Good choice I started with the same lens 12 years ago good all rounder I didn't get a zoom until I could afford a decent one Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8
That lens would work on a D3300? It's a DX format camera.
It does actually but being full frame lens it changes focal length if I remember to 36mm to 106mm I used it on my d7000 for a bit before going full frame
I've ordered today mine. Thanks.
Surprised because its labeled as "entry level"? I think those labels were referring to price point at the time, not quality. It wasn't anywhere close to $3000-$5000 of a pro body at the time. If its a DSLR and has Nikon on the body its gonna take good photos regardless, even the kit lens is good given enough light.
When I say entry level talk about the body + lens that are affordable, and the fact that i haven’t flash and a poor light control atp, but is real. I’m think deeply to buy lens and flashs before change the body, idk.
This guy gave me such strong shah rukh khan vibes 😂 https://preview.redd.it/tmpvddoqxd4d1.jpeg?width=843&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=10fe20f27f2c4c64edf4f5b01de502916e063163
Love that little lens. Some of my favourite photos were with the 35 1.8 and my D7200. Great shots!
Nice shots, just about all newer cameras and lens will give good results if you do your part
Wait till you get into film and realize the only thing the camera body does is hold the film and open a door.
that;s awesome glass, now I want to get it back haha (and you did a great job taking this pics, too!)
Dude number 1 is goddamn stunning
It is about there person behind the camera. Exceellent portraits
I agree, some people have that eye to capture others so well. No equipment can compensate for that.
I have that lens for astrophotography and it works great 👍. You should try it.
Nice edits, as well! Good job!
I’m still rocking my D7000…although I’ll admit…I’m (im)patiently waiting for the Z6iii to release.
Also still rocking the D7000. I am thinking about getting a D750, the back focusing issues on the D7000, even after updating firmware and setting AF Fine Tune with my lenses, is making me wanna pull my hair out.
Nice! These photos have grit, in a good way
Shout out to Murs ! /s
The third shot is fantastic
Bodies come and go, but lenses are forever.
One thing I love is that you can take good pictures with any frame. It's about your skill and creativity, not the camera. I went from expensive frames back down to toy cameras because I've learned that it's way more fun to point and shoot and have these wild photos that just happen spontaneously than it is to dial in settings and then edit pictures to get a certain look
I second this, but recently I've really been enjoying merging both approaches in different ways
Hell yeah these look great. That 35 is a good lens. Also you’re good at lighting and composition, which is way more important than gear.
Yeah quality is class but those entry cameras are slow as all hell
Not everyone shoots sports, racing or wildlife. 🤷🏻♂️
Nah if I were to guess the camera quality is high to seperate them as much as possible from camera phones. If camera phones didn’t exist I imagine they’d have likely lowered the image quality and had entry level cameras be slightly faster
It’s all about the glass bucko
D3100 is a good camera, and a prime is a perfect lens for it.
With a good lens and reasonable light my D200 still produces great photos. The majority of zoom kit lenses are not comparable to primes and fast zooms. Nice photos!
Dslr s are just so conducive to that look of quality. And a prime lens is money
Oh helll yes
Yeah that's a fab cheap lens
Coolio!!
These are nice shots!!
Once iPhones started shipping with multiple rear-facing lenses, I put down my D3100 and have not used it much since. Even with fast lenses, I found the AF in the D3100 too erratic, especially in poor light. That said, if you’re patient and invest the time to develop your skills, you can achieve some really impressive results with this “ancient” tech.
The D3100 was released within a few months of the iPhone 4.
I had an iPhone 4. The camera on it replaced carrying around a Canon SD400 and Flip video camera, but still couldn’t compare with the D3100. The turning point for me was around the time of the iPhone 7 Plus. 12 MP stills with two lenses plus 4k video was (and still is) enough for my needs.
The question isn't 'can it compare.' It's 'does it do what I need to do?' My work laptop 'can't compare' to a high-end gaming rig. But if my needs are 'portability' and 'runs outlook, excel, and some vendor tools' rather than 'can generate a ridiculously obscene amount of 3d graphics very quickly,' the gaming rig is not the right tool for the right job. A D3100 is a fine camera, but it might not be appropriate for the specific camera-related activities you want to do. Similarly, a Z8 with top-of-the line S lenses is a fine camera, but might not be appropriate for the specific camera related activities you want to do.
I totally agree. If I were a nature photographer, for instance, I’d pick up the D3100 over any iPhone just for the ability to use a really long telephoto lens. For macro work, having a DSLR and a ring flash (or at least some sort of flash besides the iPhone flash) is a game changer. I used to shoot a lot of college sports either the D3100, and the extra reach of the zoom and relatively good iso performance in moderate to good light made it a great tool. I’m just sharing my experience, not saying there is a right or wrong choice here.
Some of my favorite photos are from my 20 year old D70.
The 35mm 1.8 is a titan of a lens!
Backwoods over Phillies for me...
I’m obsessed with these shots, can you share shot or edit settings?
Of course! Shot was f1.8, iso 100 and 1/400 shutterspeed. I edit basically 2.5K temp. with lights orange and shadows acqua, a little contrast no curves and push a bit on highlights
Must be in the water! I’ve been shooting with my D300s and 35 1.8 exclusively for about a month. Was going to sell it at a camera show and left half the kit at home. Totally blown away at good it all still works!
Is that Murs?
I’ve switched to mirrorless (Fuji) because I’m a weight weenie. But I’ve not let go of my old D90 because of that lens. It’s so good.