is this a good deal

[persun87]

looking for a DSLR reasonbly priced but a decent camera want to be able to take good pics and also macro shots of the tank was wonder your guys input I dont know all the much about cameras thank you.

Nikon - 10.2-Megapixel Model: D3000
0.93" x 0.62" CCD sensor; 18-55mm VR lens; New $500

which is better and is it worth the extra money to go with
Nikon D5000DX 12.3MP Digital SLR with 18-55mm VR Lens and Accessory Bag new $700

 

[Misled]

Neither lens is good for "macro" shots. Read the macro sticky at the top of the forum.

 

[kilroy217]

The lens is the same in both kits, and it will not take macro shots, as Misled said. I would venture to say that since you are so inexperienced with photography and SLR cameras in general, save your money, get the cheaper one, and learn the basics on that. By the time your technique gets good enough for the technology's limitations to matter, you'll be ready for an upgrade anyway. For now, focus more on technique than technology - master aperture, shutter speed, ISO, exposure, white balance, etc. etc. etc. Understand the WHY and the HOW of photography first.

 

[persun87]

I knew the lense they came with were not for macro I more so wanted to know witch camera is better and is it really with the extra money.
Or does it really just come down to the lense that makes the picture good?

 

[kilroy217]

5000 > 3000 (which is why it costs more), but to what extent (ie, is it worth the extra $) is for you to decide. As I alluded to in my earlier post, sometimes it's neither the camera or the lens that makes the picture good - it's the photographer. Which is why I'm pushing you to learn technique before you worry about technology. To directly answer your question, though: me personally, I'd rather spend my money on good lenses over a good camera body.

Both the 3000 and 5000 are at the introductory level, and would be fine camera bodies for a beginner such as yourself, IMO.