Nikon D3000 (more info)?

Question

I am going to buy a D3000 tomorrow. I want to know some more info on this camera. And some review or feedback on it. Or what you think of it if you don't have one. This is going to be my second DSLR. My first one was a D70s.

Answer 1

There's nothing wrong with the D3000. It's a great entry level camera and in some ways, its a better camera than the D70s was. In others, the D70s is still just as good or better. The D70s offers high shutter and flash-sync speeds than the D3000, shoots just as fast, and will autofocus with any Nikon AF, AF-D or AF-S lens. From a purely photographic stand-point, the D3000 isn't much of an improvement over the D70s.



Were I replacing a D70s, I'd look more toward the D90. The D90 is as close as a direct replacement of your D70s as you can get. The D90's autofocus is improved over the D70s. The D90 also shoots faster and retains the ability to autofocus with any Nikon AF, AF-D, or AF-s lens. The D90 also offers dramitically improved high ISO image quality and adds video capability. I'm not big on video in a DSLR but, this is has become a popular feature lately.



Having said all this, the D3000 remains a great entry-level camera. It's light, relatively fast and inexpensive as DSLRs go. If you want most of the capabilities of your old D70s in a smaller and lighter package, this is a great camera.

Answer 2

Ken Rockwell is up and down. He generally knows what he's talking about but he has the objectivity of a 5-year-old. Take his recent comments on the high ISOs of the D3s, for example. Apparently they're stupid because he can shoot moonlit pictures handheld. Apparently moonlit landscapes are the only thing to use high ISOs for. Apparently everybody is the same as Ken Rockwell. I keep up to date with his site but there are better photographers than he on flickr and Panoramio. His finger is on the pulse but I'd take everything he writes with a grain of salt.



That said, with what he wrote on the D3000... well, I'd take your D70s with you and have a play around with the D3000 before buying it. It may well turn out to do exactly what you want it to do and be ergonomically sound. I just try to encourage everybody to not be shy, and ask to try before you buy.



The best reviewer for a camera for you is you. Try it. For you, the D3000 may be awesome. It may also be a terrible disappointment.



One last little point: Such is the improvement in firmware, the D5000 actually gives better image quality than the still-$1600 D300. The low-light noise performance is BETTER. By all accounts, the D5000 is a marvellous camera, and if you can save a little bit more money and buy that instead, you'd be making a good move.



I sincerely hope this helps. I just don't like the idea of people being ripped off or misled.

Answer 3

Here is Ken Rockwell's review on the D3000:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3000.htm



My question to you... Why change systems? Have you outgrown your camera. Does the D3000 offer you something you need that your D70s does not have?



My advice... spend your money on lenses and other accessories.

Answer 4

I just got my D3000 today and love it.

Ken Rockwell is an idiot. It isn't a bad camera at all.

Why get another DSLR when you already have one. You could buy a new lens instead of a camera.

Answer 5

i'm with healthcare expert Iblis, you like Nikon mount lenses with a geared up-in motor, Nikon calls them AF-S. If finding out to purchase 0.33-celebration lenses, make valuable they are in Nikon mount and have automobiles (no motor = no AF), Sigma call theirs HSM, Tamron and Tokina have their very very own designations.