Nikon D3100 vs D90

Nikon's latest camera, D3100 seems to be quite a performer especially due to the Nikon's latest EXPEED 2. Nikon's (almost)discontinued prosumer DSLR. The D90 won the TIPA European Photo & Imaging Award, in the "Best D-SLR Advanced" category back in May 2009. New doesn't necessarily mean it's better just like Canon's 600D compared to its predecessor the 550D. 

D3100 VS D90

1) Image quality/Resolution
Other than the new image processor, Nikon also added a brand new 14.2 megapixel sensor into the D3100. As exciting as it seems, you actually only get 2.1 megapixels more than the D90. Does it really help? Not necessarily. Nikon should've added something like an 18 megapixel sensor to compete with Canon. Winner: D3100


2) ISO Performance
This is where the D3100 truly shines. At ISO 100 till 800, results are almost the same. But when it reaches the 3,200 point, things start to get a bit noisier on the D90. Thanks to the EXPEED 2 processor the D3100 is able to get clean images all the way until ISO 6,400. Artoftheimage was really helpful to post an ISO performance comparison. Winner: D3100


3) Burst rate
Even though the D3100 is a newer camera, its still at the lower end and so Nikon just left the burst rate the same as the D3000's - 3 frames per second. The Nikon D90 has a burst rate of 4.5 frames per second. If you're looking for serious action shots, just skip this and look at the D7000 or D300S. Winner: D90


4) Lens compatibility
Both of these cameras are able to use all the lenses from Nikon. The D90 gets the slight edge here; it's able to autofocus AF-D and AF lenses whiles the D3100 can't. If you want a lens to autofocus on the D3100, you ought to be looking for an AF-S lens because it lacks an autofocus motor. However, both lenses aren't able to meter AI and AI-S lenses. Winner: D90


5) Video mode
Again, its no doubt that the D3100 has better video capabilities here. It features 1080p full HD movie recording. WOW. The D90 only does 720p movie recording(not full HD). Unfortunately, both are still limited to only 24 frames per second in HD mode. The D3100 has another trick under its sleeves; it autofocuses in video. The D90 can't. However, this autofocus feature in video mode is still pretty new and isn't really that reliable at times. Winner: D3100


6) Flash?
Both cameras support all external speedlights from Nikon. The D90 has the slight edge here because it supports Nikon's CLS or Creative Lighting System; a very easy-to-set-up-and-use wireless flash system. So, that means the D90 is able to exploit this advantage without buying any extra accessories. For the D3100, you have to buy a pocket wizard to have this feature. Winner: D90


7) Ergonomics
Its a no-brainer. The D90 has better ergonomics for sure. The grip just feels great. Its beefier, more comfortable and makes pressing the shutter a pleasure. The D3100 is OK, its meant for smaller hands. That's all I could say. Winner: D90


Conclusion
The D3100 is an awesome camera for any beginner. As long as you use an AF-S lens, you should be okay. In a long run, buying the D90 is a better investment. Using AF-D lenses is a cheaper alternative to AF-S lenses. The 50mm 1.8D(without autofocus motor) is just currently at RM400+ whereas the 50mm 1.4G(with autofocus motor) costs about RM1,700. It's more than 4 times more! Get a D90 if you're a true photographer and don't really care about Full HD movie recording. Get a D3100 if you're leaning more towards the movie side.

What a Pro would do

1) Use as few lenses as possible
A pro will use only the important ones or what he/she really needs. Planning is a must for pros as it determines what lens they'll use. Portraits? An 85mm or 105mm. Macro? A 180mm perhaps. Or wedding photography? 35mm and 50mm.

2) Plan ahead
How do you think pros get to their work place so fast? Well duh, they plan - in advance. If they're shooting for an event, they usually do their research like the venue, the best way getting to the place, the time and so on. The whole point of doing this is to ensure that you get those 'wow' shots instead of just stoning at a corner wondering.

3) Stay focussed and sharp
Because you're a pro, people expect you to take pictures and do your job instead of slacking and stoning. Being blur in an event is an obvious no-no. Maybe for an enthusiast but not for a pro.

4) Show your 'pro' skill
Well, this is more of a should than a would. But anyway, since you're a pro why not show your skill? Not show off, dude. Post your shots on sites like Flickr perhaps and people might just praise you if they are good shots.

5) He/She is always out of the box
Pros generally should think out of the box. That's how they get shots that stand out from the others. If one is able to change the composition as well as the lighting, I think that would make a great image that stands out from others. Since everyone has creativity, its a matter of how creative you are.


Conclusion
Obviously a beginner can't be a pro immediately once he takes a camera and starts shooting. You need experience, dude. And time can only be one's friend in becoming a pro. Start by taking shots from a different angle and focus more on composition and lighting. Photography is all about creativity. Its just a matter of how creative one is.

Product Photography: Without External Speedlights/Strobes

Product photography might just be the most expensive genre of photography mainly because you have to spend a lot on external accessories like speedlights or strobes and the list keeps on going. Go to Sharpics.com - they sell a whole variety of equipment just for product photography.

In this post, I'll be showing you guys how to do product photography on a (serious)budget. And what you need for this is:

• A camera(it's better if it's a DSLR, but a manual point and shoot camera will just be fine)
• A tripod that holds your camera steady while you're taking your shot.
• A place with plenty of natural light.
• A plain background(doesn't necessarily have to be white) like a table, cloth, or anything you can find in your household.

Once you have all these stuff; you're ready to start:

1. First, turn your camera to M(Manual Mode) on your mode dial.
2. Turn on your built in flash.
3. Turn down the flash compensation to about 2-3 stops.
4. Go into your menu > switch from iTTL flash to Manual > set 1/32(on my D5000, that's the fastest but if your camera supports a faster flash speed, use that instead)
5. Your fastest shutter speed should not be higher than 1/8 of a second(yes, it's pretty slow)
6. Mount your camera onto a tripod(make sure its secure!)
7. Place your product on a surface(a cloth over a table is recommended)
8. Start your product shots :)

If you do follow the steps I've just said, you should be able to get nice exposed shots. The trick is, the slower the shutter speed the better the image will be. Why? Simple. The faster the shutter speed, the more light from the flash is going to captured in that image. As I said before, if you're going on a budget like me, you should consider this 'method'.

Drawbacks:

• You might need a tripod.
• You need a rather slow shutter speed(the fastest shouldn't be higher than 1/8 second)
• Its a trial and error thing, no one setting is always perfect.
• You can't use a long zoom as it will cast a shadow in your shot.

Sample shots:

What makes a 'pro photographer' a 'pro'?

Yes, yes. People just simply say something that really annoys me some times - Hey look! There's a pro photographer there with his DSLR! Are you really a pro with the gear you have or is it the skill that counts? Go to YouTube, and you'll find a whole lot of users buying pro gear, but some how or rather they aren't pros. I find it a bit odd. Things aren't were they supposed to be. But to me, I feel pros are those who have skill.

One who is able to shoot with two primes or so, and still get amazing pictures - that's what I call a pro. To me, the more gear you have, the more 'incompetent' you are. Don't get me wrong; there are called pro gear for a reason. And buying more and more lenses isn't going to help, either.

To me, a 35mm and a 85/105mm is enough for any photographer to shoot almost anything. The 35 can handle wide angle and street or candid photography whilst the 85/105 will just handle everything else; macro, telephoto and portrait photography.

Canon 600D: Is it worth it?

600D is one of the budget DSLRs that has just been announced by Canon. It looks exactly the same. It performs exactly the same. And, it feels exactly the same. And the price ain't cheap - Canon says the price is around RM2,500. Its not that much more expensive than the Canon 550D which is also another great alternative for beginners.

Canon 550D - ignore those gold trims, they're originally white

Canon 600D - not much different to the 550D

Seeing the specs sheets, there really isn't that much difference between the 550D and its successor, the 600D.

Similarities

• 18 megapixel CMOS sensor
• DiGiC 4 processor
• ISO range of 100-6,400(expendable to 12,800)
• Burst rate of 3.7 frames per second
• Supports SD, SDHC, SDXC format cards
• Full HD 1080p movie recording

Differences

• Minor movie recording tweaks
• Tilt-and-swivel screen

Final impressions...

The 600D is like a baby 60D copying most of its features. Canon's moving to the video camera side, focusing more on video but also providing that awesome 18 megapixel shooting experience. 

Would I buy it?

No. I'd save up for lenses and other accessories. HD recording is a nice feature to have. But seeing that I'm a photographer and not a videographer, I wouldn't want to buy a camera which I won't use. The 550D has proved to be a remarkable budget DSLR. As for the 600D, it might be a worthy successor. I see no reason why current 550D users should upgrade unless they really want those video tweaks Canon just added.