Nikon D3300 new camera

[old head]

It came today, D3300 from Nikon.

been 20 years since I quit using my old film SLR,  Vivitar.  Been using point and shoot cameras for awhile.  They are easy to carry, light, and easy to use.  However, the image quality was never quite what I wanted, especially for landscapes.  After a trip to Seattle last year, and reviewing my images afterwards, it was clear I wanted more than my Iphone or P&S camera were capable of.

I have been researching for about 8 months trying to decide what quality I wanted verses by wallet limitations.  At my age, I figured I wanted quality of image, and an ability to have some input into the process when I wanted to.   I was looking at Canon and Nikon for DSLR, and about 6 different brands on an upscale P&S camera, and mirrorless.

After comparing image quality vs cost, it was clear that a DSLR was the way to go.  Although, it couldn't be carried in a pocket,  and could be a little more involved than what I had been using, I felt it was the best value in my price range to get optimum image quality at this price point.  I do have my Iphone for everyday pics, but I sure wish I had a better camera when doing landscapes and special photo opportunities.  there were several P&S that I really wanted over the DSLR, but they were way out of my price range.

Luckily, Nikon replaced the D3300 with a new model this year, so the 3300 came way down in price, and since the sensor is the same in both, why leading edge technology when quality is the same.

The process begins, learning all the new settings, buttons, and developing a feeling for my new camera.

So, if any of you have suggestions for settings, books, or vids for me to accelerate the learning curve, I would be appreciative.

Old Head 

[boatdetective]

Congrats!  I shot a (film) F100, D70, and D80 for work.   The Nikon DSLRs have a very intuitive menu layout.  I would recommend the following:

The glass takes the photo. Make no mistake that the kit lens is a necessary compromise to keep cost down. It will have a plastic mount and (Im guessing) is an unimpressive 18-55. Image quality will be decent (especially for the price). However, once you've honed in on what you like to shoot- consider upgrading the lens.  Good reviews at slrgear.com and photozone.de

Get familiar with diving into the mens and knowing where to find stuff. Pro grade bodies will have more dials and buttons so a professional can avoids scrolling through screens. You won't have that luxury- so get familiar with the features and how to access them.

Do NOT set the exposure on program. For god's sake, you bought an SLR  as a more advanced tool- it's not a point and shoot. Auto everything = mediocre images.

Your lens will be fairly "slow". It may not be stabilized. Be aware that newer cameras have the ability to shoot at much higher ISO than film. When you combine this with stabilization- you will be able to hand hold shots at much slower speeds.

Asn with anything- identify your desired subject and tailor the tool to suit. I shoot mainly forensic/industrial shots for work. So, my focus is on macro images and special lighting. I ain't no good at babies and pets. 

JKK

[LowRyter]

Hope you enjoy the new camera.  Take some time to study the menus and functions of the camera.  There's tons of capability with these new digital cams.  There's no such thing as an entry DSLR given the image quality and features. 

[old head]

forgot about a lens filter when I ordered the camera, and a decent memory card, just ordered a card.
have to do some research on a filter.

yeah, its an 18-55 lens, part of the package.  it will take awhile to get the hang of the camera, but what I didn't want to do, is carry a bunch of lens around while hiking or sightseeing. It is a little daunting looking the camera with all the do dads, but can't wait to get into it

[boatdetective]

Filters don't matter much on digital. Go for decent (metal) construction.  As for cards- better to get a number of smaller 8Mb cards than one 32. They are cheap and you will have backup. Do NOT get cheap or offbrand cards- stick with Sandisk  or lexmar.   A Sandisk "pro" card means that it will transfer images to your computer faster. They are worth it.

Try not to fill a card to the brim.  After transferring images to your computer- format the card after you put it in the camera. It will truly clear the card and prevent potential card crashes (ask me how i know).

Once you figure out your shooting style- you might find that a prime lens may work out.  Do not be afraid of buying used glass or reconditioned units from the manufacturer.  I would rather buy a used Nikkor lens than a new third party lens.

[old head]

Filters don't matter much on digital. Go for decent (metal) construction.  As for cards- better to get a number of smaller 8Mb cards than one 32. They are cheap and you will have backup. Do NOT get cheap or offbrand cards- stick with Sandisk  or lexmar.   A Sandisk "pro" card means that it will transfer images to your computer faster. They are worth it.

Try not to fill a card to the brim.  After transferring images to your computer- format the card after you put it in the camera. It will truly clear the card and prevent potential card crashes (ask me how i know).

Once you figure out your shooting style- you might find that a prime lens may work out.  Do not be afraid of buying used glass or reconditioned units from the manufacturer.  I would rather buy a used Nikkor lens than a new third party lens.

thanks, good stuff

Old head

[stevet]

Books-
Bryan Peterson, "Understanding Exposure, 4th Edition."  Use this book to understand the 3 basic functions of every camera ever made- Aperture, Shutter, and ISO (film speed from the film days).  Master these three functions and how they relate to and work with each other and your mastery is half way there.

Any of Michael Freeman's many wonderful photography titles.  He will help you master composition, and honing your interests and style, the other half of your mastery of the artform.

These authors are available at Amazon.

Visit Half Priced Books stores, many photo books coming and going all the time.  I stop in about every 4-6 weeks and take home a nugget, typically photo collection books by individual photographers that I use for inspiration.

Read all you want, but get out there and shoot like crazy.  Manual mode is best to master aperture, shutter, and ISO... like learning to ride a motorcycle, YOU are in control of the machine.

Have fun!
Steve.

[rboe]

dpreview.com is a great resource. They do lenses as well as cameras.

I'll ditto the comment about glass. I have an 18-300 private label lens I tested at the store (against a Nikon offering of all things) that performed better than the Nikon but one trip with it regulated it to the dusty shelf. At too many points it was just plain soft. A buddy bought a similar lens and his shots on Photography Club night are softer than others that use better glass. Zooms are not bad if you get the better made ones and don't cover such a wide range. I have a 70-200mm Sigma that is pretty good. A 60-250 DA* Pentax (I shoot a Pentax) that is very good. But DA* lens are built to a higher standard and in many cases is shows.

My most used lens is a 12-24mm wide angle zoom, and I think Nikon has something similar, that is very well corrected and great on landscapes and closeups of motorcycles. A 300mm telephoto is killer on hummingbirds and bugs (it focuses pretty close) and is tack sharp.

Once you experience good glass it's very addictive. But expensive. 

Filters: A polarizer can be pretty useful (I have one, should use it more). Neutral Density (full sized and graduated) come in handy when you have too much light and you need to cut down the shutter speed or open up your aperture. I have a graduated Cokin from the 35mm days and need to play with it. UV filter on all your lenses to protect the front element is pretty much a given.

A good LIGHT tripod is very useful.

This whole thing may lead to an upgraded computer. Photo software needs horse power (and lots of RAM). Decent video card too.

Software: Photoshop is the gold standard but damn it's not cheap. Elements is much cheaper and will do probably everything you will want to do. At least for now. While I normally use Aperture on the Mac, ON1 is gradually becoming my go-to tool. https://www.on1.com/products/photo-raw/  Windows and Mac versions. You can also use it as a plugin from other products (like photoshop or elements). They also have tutorials.

[rodekyll]

For a "filter" I use a HAZE or UVA or UVB, which doesn't do much filtering, but do protect the snout of the lens from dings and scratches.

Photoshop Elements does most of the work for me.  I used to buy photoshop CS but they got completely stupid with special effects and trickery that I don't use.  I have a film background.  I have a sense of the "photograph" as opposed to "photo-based pictures".  I don't want or need technologies that alter the basic frame.

You're gonna have fun with it.  Remember that the 'crop factor' dictates much wider lenses than traditional 35mm film.  I shoot an 11mm for the same effect as an 18 mm in the old money.

[Two Checks]

The best thing you can do now is bin the kit lens. its crap. Cheap plastic construction nd for the type of work youndo its not long enough.
I (through my employer) spent $250k on Nikon repairs last year.
Be careful if you use the usb cable to download pics. The connector is small and the cable can be plugged in backwards ruining the camera connector. Spendy repair.
Did you buy an extetnal strobe?

[LowRyter]

Agree that a lens upgrade is a good thing.  Usually these kit lenses have good optics but cheap construction, not a bad deal.  No one wants a kit camera have poor photos.

The book will tell you the card specs.  No need to buy a card faster than the camera.

Filters are always a good deal to protect the lens from being scratched.  I am not sure why someone would say the filter don't work with digital cameras. 

Digital photography is like film, since ISO, aperture and shutter speeds still define the basics but there is a heck of a lot more capability.   

[tris]

..... but what I didn't want to do, is carry a bunch of lens around while hiking or sightseeing. It is a little daunting looking the camera with all the do dads, but can't wait to get into it

I was the same so plumped for a Vivitar 35-200 zoom lens. It might not give as perfect a picture as other lenses but is convenient.

Jacking the ISO way up can be very good for shooting pictures in churches and the like where flash is banned

[stevet]

I'd suggest we cool off a little bit about suggesting upgrading lenses and let Old Head get familiar with running one of these new-fangled ee-lek-tronik cameras.  Don't forget, the best piece of photographic equipment is located immediately behind the camera.  Practiced skill can go a long way to helping with any real, or perceived, shortcomings of kit lenses.

Speaking as one hobby shooter that owns WAY too many lenses, I'd advise mastering the kit lens(es) before stepping up to better, i.e. more expensive lenses.  (And frankly, I've got a couple Pentax kit lenses that serve me very well, and I can demonstrate as much when I put ink on a 16x20 sheet of paper.)  And as time goes by, discover the types or styles of photography you enjoy most and research which lenses would serve you best and meet your budget.  Nikon has tons of lenses to choose from, and 3rd party such as Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, and possibly good used lenses may be choices to consider.

Finally, if you discover an upgraded lens that you would want to try, there are plenty of lens rental companies (local and online) that can set you up with something juicy for a few days at a modest fee.  Some skill rich/money poor pro photographers rent lenses quite often, easier than dropping 4-digit dollar amounts for something you aren't using daily to make a living.

Steve.

[Carlo DeSantis]

I'd suggest we cool off a little bit about suggesting upgrading lenses and let Old Head get familiar with running one of these new-fangled ee-lek-tronik cameras.  Don't forget, the best piece of photographic equipment is located immediately behind the camera.  Practiced skill can go a long way to helping with any real, or perceived, shortcomings of kit lenses.

Speaking as one hobby shooter that owns WAY too many lenses, I'd advise mastering the kit lens(es) before stepping up to better, i.e. more expensive lenses.  (And frankly, I've got a couple Pentax kit lenses that serve me very well, and I can demonstrate as much when I put ink on a 16x20 sheet of paper.)  And as time goes by, discover the types or styles of photography you enjoy most and research which lenses would serve you best and meet your budget.  Nikon has tons of lenses to choose from, and 3rd party such as Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, and possibly good used lenses may be choices to consider.

Finally, if you discover an upgraded lens that you would want to try, there are plenty of lens rental companies (local and online) that can set you up with something juicy for a few days at a modest fee.  Some skill rich/money poor pro photographers rent lenses quite often, easier than dropping 4-digit dollar amounts for something you aren't using daily to make a living.

Steve.

This is great advice, IMO.  In addition, I'd recommend forgetting the filters.

[rocker59]

UV filters are as much to protect the front element as doung any filtering. If a person tends to be rough with equipment, they're money well spent.

I have a rather large collection of filters. Cross filters are fun. Yellow for b&w contrast, soft for portraits.

Sure, the effects can be simulated with computer editing software, but I like the filters vetter, myself.

[Carlo DeSantis]

UV filters are as much to protect the front element as doung any filtering. If a person tends to be rough with equipment, they're money well spent.

I have a rather large collection of filters. Cross filters are fun. Yellow for b&w contrast, soft for portraits.

Sure, the effects can be simulated with computer editing software, but I like the filters vetter, myself.

I gave up protective filters many years ago.  Today's lenses have hardened coatings that protect pretty well. In addition, after all the posts praising upgraded glass, isn't it somewhat counter productive to put a mediocre filter on that great glass?  I've been shooting seriously since the late 60s and have yet to have a filter protect my lens from damage.  The one time I really damaged a lens, it was my cherished Nikor 105/2.5 AI that got bashed when I dropped my F4 onto the tarmac at an air show.  I kicked myself in the butt for quite a while after that move -- all the more because it was a complete bonehead move on my part.

Best, 

Carlo

[boatdetective]

I've had filters save several lenses. You want a decent metal ringed filter because it can be removed more easily. Another thing to consider is that witha filter, you are cleaning the filter- not the front element of the lens. I almost never use lens caps- they always seem to fall off. If you clean a front element regularly, you will damage the coating. If you over clean a filter- it will not harm the lens or produce flare.

Use the 18-55 for a while. Do NOT...repeat do NOT upgrade to a wide to super tele "do everything" lens. They are pretty mediocre. If you like architecture, street, and landscape, consider a 12-24 (the Tokina has decent optics and excellent construction- will be inexpensive used.  If you like sports and wildlife- go for a dedicated tele. Portrait- get a dedicated  portrait lens.

There are wide to tele lenses that are excellent. They are also pro grade and cost accordingly. narrowing your range requirements (or even getting a prime) id one way of saving money on glass.

[rocker59]

I spent money on good filters.

I don't do mediocre...

Nikkor and B+W...

[Carlo DeSantis]

Hey, if using filters works for you -- more power to you.

They don't for me.

Vanilla and chocolate, eh?

Best,

Carlo

[chuck peterson]

Lower your ISO to increase sharpness and detail and move your camera onto a heavy tripod, using a timer to trip the shutter with no vibration ...then learn un sharp masking techniques in Photoshop from a local...understand your printer is defining how much sharpness, detail, color gamut you'll get

A cheapie point and shoot can make stunning 4x6 prints in the right hands during post processing, but I'd like that Megavision camera that that captures a 16x20 inch image at 300 dpi with one push of the finger.

John Paul Capinigro will bury you with all the information you need to know in the digital age, and the cameras in the new phones are just stunning...

1995 we were starving for 6mp and willing to spend $20k to get it for commercial work.

I'm actually impressed with the max black density of the metal prints available thru photobucket and shutterfly

Soooo many different approaches....

[PeteS]

Congrats on the new Camera. I picked up a Nikon D5000 a few years ago. The first lesson learned its not the camera, its the guy behind it. I still take lousy pictures but now they are in focus thanks to image stabilization.
Second lesson, keep your point and shoot in your pocket when taking a trip. There were many times on our cross country trip last year when I just want to pull over and take a few shots but having to unpack to get to the big SLR got to be a PITA.

Pete

[Gliderjohn]

Great info here. About two years ago I bought a lower end Sony DSLR with an additional 300mm lens all for about $800. This was just to see if I really wanted to get into this further. Well I do. Will be at least upgrading lenses and getting a remote and a QUALITY tripod. All fun!



GliderJohn

[rocker59]

Hey, if using filters works for you -- more power to you.

They don't for me.

Vanilla and chocolate, eh?

Best,

Carlo

Currently shooting a D7100 with 17-55 f2.8 lens and it wears a B+W all the time.

When I was shooting film, I kept UV filters on the lenses, but would remove them on certain shoots.

My box included F2, F3HP, two F4s, and an F100.  Lenses?  Everything from 20mm AI up to a monster 80-400 AF zoom.

I enjoyed the F3HP and F4s the best.  Never have warmed to digital.  Images just aren't the same, but it sure is quick and easy to see your results...

[rodekyll]

I agree that a sturdy tripod is a must.  I have a stack of SLIK u212 variants I use for field work and up to old-school, gear driven movie camera tripods for my large format and studio shooting.

I have a simple, wireless remote for my Nikon D7000.  Works good and keeps the camera shake during cycling to a minimum.

I'm in the UV and haze filter camp.  I'd much rather take a scratch or ding on a quality filter than a quality lens, and I spend more for a lens than a camera body.  The math is easy.

[old head]

well I have a tripod for my old Hi8 camcorder.   I did see a single stalk camera support that looks pretty neat and light. 

I really plan on shooting landscapes and architecture.  That is usually what we do on vacation and day trips on the Guzzi.  I had bought a new P&S before a vacation trip last year, but it proved to be less than stellar for quality shots for landscapes.

I have the adobe suite, pretty much a must have for an architecture grad.  As an older student, I was always amazed at what some of the kids could do with their cameras and photoshop.  On a trip to Seattle on year, we all took shots of the sunset on the beach.  Once we got home, I was blown away with the difference of  their DSLR's and my point and shoot Kodak.

So I go out and buy a 12MP Panasonic super zoom yada-yada camera, thought I was doing a good thing.  Did pretty good close, but landscapes nope.

That brings me to the Nikon 3300.  I ordered a Hoya warm lens, still might get a poloarizer and gradient lens cover at some point.

I have been reading Ken Rockwell's web page, and he makes it seem so simple.  Baby steps, baby steps.  took a few shots yesterday, menu is going to take awhile to get used to.  Hopefully, will get it set up where I will only have to make minor changes.

thanks for the suggestions so far.

Old Head

[rocker59]

Bogen tripod has served me well for the past dozen years.

[rodekyll]

A warming lens is a specific-purpose filter.  It makes dead people look better.  Not used for landscapes.  It casts a yellow-to-orange hue over the frame.

I use an 11 - 18mm lens for landscapes and crowd scenes.  since most of my work is done at night I use a 2.8 f-stop.  That wide and that fast = spendy. It's nice to get a group shot from across the short  side of the table, though.





free image hosting


Guzzi content -- can you ID the photobomber in the back?


I think you existing tripod is a good starting point.  From there you can decide what works best.  I have a one-legged "monopod" support.  It's not real useful as anything but a telescoping walking stick.  I mounted a synthetic rifle stock to mine and the camera to that.  With a 200 - 400mm 2.8 lens and a remote release where the rifle trigger should be it gets on jumping whales and charging bears pretty fast, but it's limited purpose -- nothing I'd pack on a trip.

[old head]

A warming lens is a specific-purpose filter.  It makes dead people look better.  Not used for landscapes.  It casts a yellow-to-orange hue over the frame.

I use an 11 - 18mm lens for landscapes and crowd scenes.  since most of my work is done at night I use a 2.8 f-stop.  That wide and that fast = spendy. It's nice to get a group shot from across the short  side of the table, though.





free image hosting


Guzzi content -- can you ID the photobomber in the back?

thanks for the heads up, I bought it for the holiday season coming up, usually lots of picks taken of family during this time of the year.
After reading some more sites, it appears I will need a polarizing lens and graduated lens for landscapes for some shots, so that will be after the holidays.  Watching a few youtube instructions also, lots of information.

Do you need a different color lens if you are shooting under incandescant, flourescent or led lighting?   I use LED bulbs and few incandescant, my mom uses CF bulbs.



I think you existing tripod is a good starting point.  From there you can decide what works best.  I have a one-legged "monopod" support.  It's not real useful as anything but a telescoping walking stick.  I mounted a synthetic rifle stock to mine and the camera to that.  With a 200 - 400mm 2.8 lens and a remote release where the rifle trigger should be it gets on jumping whales and charging bears pretty fast, but it's limited purpose -- nothing I'd pack on a trip.

[LowRyter]

caution, Turnip content

[rodekyll]

most DSLRs either autocompensate for light source or have different menu settings to set the type.  If all else fails, the color correction of photoshop can trim it out.  IMO the 81/83, etc warming lenses are used more for portraits than for warming a scene -- although there are schools of thought that maintain using them in other settings, for sure.  I'm not one.  I think it makes an unnatural tint over eeverything. 

I'd start out working with the camera's abilities and features before getting too many add ons.  Remember -- screw-on filters come in specific diameters to fit specific lenses.  If you buy one for your 62mm front end, it's not going to fit any other diameter lens.  Making the wrong lens/filter pairs can get expensive.  If you want to get filter-happy, look into Cokin and clones.  Those go old-school, setting up "acetates" or square sheet filters, in a standard frame.  Then you buy the different diameter screw-in adaper for the acetate frame, which lets you use a single, high-quality filter over a wide array of lenses, and make graduation changes, quick changes, or removing the filter very quick.  I carry a set of cokin graduated neutral density filters to balance bright landscapes and a polarizer for my most-used lens.  I seldom if ever use them.

$0.02