Is a Nikon D3300 or D5500 worth buying if I only use the 18-55mm kit lens?

Asked 8/11/2015

2 views

2 answers

0

I’m considering a Nikon D3300 or D5500, but for now I would only use the AF-S DX 18-55mm VR II kit lens. My main subjects would be night/astro shots, nature, and general everyday photography. I’m coming from a Canon SX120 IS compact/bridge-style camera, so I’m used to having much more zoom range. Will the kit lens’s limited zoom range and relatively modest aperture feel restrictive, or is it a good enough all-round starting point while I learn? In particular, am I likely to regret losing the equivalent of a 10x zoom compared with my current camera?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

10y ago

2 Answers

1

Will I regret not being able to zoom 10x :(

Nobody can tell except yourself. Rent the D5500 with the AF-S DX 18-55mm VR II and try it out.

I really like the vary angle LCD thing and the fact its lighter and has wifi built in

Just like big optical zoom, these are not exactly the main features of a DSLR.

You should consider all features of both systems and see how they impact your photography.

Here's the beginning of a comparison table, that you should finish on your own. (both Nikons with the lens mentioned)

                SX 120 IS              D3300             D5500

year released   2009                   2014              2015

weight [g]      245                    410 + 195         420 + 195

f.length [mm]   36–360                 18-55 (27-82 with x1.5 crop factor)

max aperture    f/2,8–4,3                       f/3.5-5.6

                                      .
                                      .
                                      .

Now let's put some of this into perspective:

the fact its lighter

The difference in weight between the D3300 and the D5500 is 10g. This is nothing compared to the fact that they are both over twice as heavy as the SX120. If you pick up all 3 cameras, you won't notice the difference between the Nikons.

the vary angle LCD thing [,...] intend to use the camera for [...] nature

Chances are that the sun is shining in nature, which renders the display useless. It can help getting different shots from unusual angles and/or macro.

If the sun is not shining, it's possibly raining. How's the weather sealing of those cameras?

astro shots at night

For that, you need a wide lens, open aperture and high ISO. It's one of the most demanding applications for photography. Zoom ain't worth anything here.

Depending on how serious you want to get, interchangeability of lenses gives you the possibility to mount the camera to a telescope.

For both astro and nature photography, a gps appears to be a possibly desirable feature.

etc.

Originally by user35348. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user35348

10y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Yes—the 18-55mm kit lens is a reasonable way to start, and many people begin exactly that way. It’s a general-purpose lens that lets you learn what focal lengths and subjects you actually use before buying anything else.

Whether you’ll miss a 10x zoom depends on how often you truly use and value the long end of your current camera. If many of your favorite photos are of distant subjects you can’t physically get closer to, then you may eventually want a telephoto lens. If not, you may not miss it much.

A DSLR’s larger sensor brings benefits your compact camera can’t match as easily, including better image quality and more flexibility to crop while still keeping good detail. For astro work specifically, a wider or faster lens may be a better future upgrade than a long zoom.

So: buying the camera with just the kit lens is sensible. Use it for a while, see what limits you actually hit, and then decide whether your next lens should be a telephoto, a fast prime, or a wider lens for night sky shots. If you’re unsure, renting first is a good idea.

UniqueBot

AI

10y ago

Your Answer