Choosing between Canon T3i or Nikon D3100

[Nitrouspizza]

Hey guys. I'm sorry this is just another "wich camera" thread. I'm getting a DSLR and I'm between the Canon t3i and the Nikon 3100. I'm looking not for tons of features or MPs, I prefer image quality over that. The T3i comes with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens and the D3100 with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR Nikkor Zoom Lens.

I've tried to look in the common "Camera comparison" sites but I want an honest, experience-based review!

I'll appreciate your time guys!

Thanks

-Pizza

[Andrew76]

Hello. To make things simple - you're comparing entry level Canon to entry level Nikon. There is no difference. Try them both, see which one feels better, which one is better for YOU ergonomically, do you have any friends that also shoot a dSLR that you could share/borrow lenses from? All of these should be considerations, but not which camera is better.

If you were comparing the T3i to a 5DMKIII, then my response would have been different.

[Manfred M]

I totally agree with Andrew on his advice and would give you exactly the same. You really won't see any difference in image quality out of either camera. Frankly, image qualtiy has a lot more to do with the photographer than with the hardware he or she is using.

When I bought my first DSLR it came down to ergonomics. Canon and Nikon have different design philosphies in terms of how they layout their camera and their controls. One brand just "felt right" in my hands when I held it up to shoot, while the other was a bit more awkward to use.

[CP140]

As the other gents have mentioned, you'll get similar performance from the two and it really does come down to feel and what feels right to you.

Having said all that, I'd like to toss another model into the mix... the Pentax K-30...which to my hands at least, felt better than the comparable Canon and Nikon models.

[arslanturegun]

They both (D3100 and T3i) are good as entry level DSLRs.
I must agree with Martin anyway. You might also want to consider K-30. As a Pentax user I can write here some of the cons instead of pros of the K-30 (the pros for me can be a long list ).
* it has less lenses available if you don't like to shoot in manual focus and manual mode.
* X sync is slower (1/180 max)
* color depth is less compared to other two.
* if you'd like to shoot videos, contrast detection AF can be painful especially in low light.
* price is higher.

Cheers,

[AB26]

Hi A,

The Nikon D3100 is an old camera. In SA you can pick up a brand new D3100 for about $200.00 less than a Canon 600D (T3i).
The Nikon D3200 is about $100.00 more than a T3i - brand new with an 18-55mm lens.

Choosing between a D3200 and T3i, I would go for the D3200. Between the D3100 and T3i I will probably go for the T3i.

Like Andrew said, handle both cameras, only then make a choice between the two.

[tclune]

On a technical level, the difference between the entry level APS-C Nikons and Canons is pretty simple -- the Canons have better features and the Nikons have better sensors. If you shoot JPEG, the Canons are a no-brainer, as you'll not get much value from the greater dynamic range of the Nikons. If you shoot raw, it is a bit trickier -- do you value the improved dynamic range over things like high-speed synch flash, DOF preview, etc? It's a matter of what is most important to how you work at that point. If the choice were between a D5100 and one of the Rebels, I would personally lean toward the Nikon (I am a Nikon shooter anyway.) But I think the D3100 is just a bit too bare-bones for my taste, so I would probably be tempted to give in to the dark side of the force and get the T3i.

In truth, the thing that would make that tricky is that I think Canon is stuck so far behind in sensor technology that I would not want to invest in Canon glass -- they are years behind now. From all outward appearances, they will only be another decade behind in ten years -- they have shown absolutely no interest in upgrading their sensor technology. Buying into their system just seems like a chancy proposition from where I stand. All the Canon shooters that I know are feeling like Canon is letting them down and they are agonizing about whether it's time to jump ship. But my guess is that a great many folks here would vociferously disagree. You pays your money and takes your choice...

[CP140]

They both (D3100 and T3i) are good as entry level DSLRs.
I must agree with Martin anyway. You might also want to consider K-30. As a Pentax user I can write here some of the cons instead of pros of the K-30 (the pros for me can be a long list ).
* it has less lenses available if you don't like to shoot in manual focus and manual mode.
* X sync is slower (1/180 max)
* color depth is less compared to other two.
* if you'd like to shoot videos, contrast detection AF can be painful especially in low light.
* price is higher.

Cheers,

Very true... I just have a soft spot for Pentax (my first SLR was a 1980's vintage MV). From my point of view, the weather sealing and the ability to use AA batteries were key points in the Pentax's favour. I also handled the Canon/Nikon models before I bought my K-r (since upgraded to the K-30) and the Pentax kit lens just felt smoother and the body more solid than either of the other two.

As an aside, the local store's regular prices are... in Canadian $$

Canon T3i with 18-55 IS... $750
Nikon 3200 with 18-55 VR...$699
Pentax K-30 with 18-55... $799... with the WR version...$999. Although there is a sale on for the WR version right now at $849

[Southern Dad]

Have you considered the Sony? The a37 or a57?