Sony Nex-5 vs Nikon D3100?
I'm not very much in to photography, but I would like to become a more serious photographer. I'm not sure weather to get the Sony Nex-5 or the Nikon D3100. I want to be able to take good quality photos where I can manually change the settings. This sounds like I'm leaning towards the Nikon, but the Sony's size factor is very convincing for me because portability is a big factor. Also, do you think it would be necessary to have an optical viewfinder? WHICH ONE SHOULD I GET!
3100 is a much better camera
Get the nikon D3100. The sony nex-5 may be smaller, but you still can't fit it in your ordinary pocket.
Well, I'm using a Sony SLT-A77, and it's electronic viewfinder is a total revelation. That said though I wouldn't recommend Sony's Nex range of cameras, it's a current design fad to have these really small camera bodies that take interchangeable lenses. The problem with the design is that you soon realize by the time the lens is in place the total package is almost as large as any other interchangeable lens camera. So they offer little advantage and yet force multiple design compromises on the user.
I'm in an odd position here; unlike many here I'm not an outrageous fan of either Nikon or Canon, my own equipment being from the former Minolta, and latterly Sony lines. Yet in this case there's no way I could recommend the sony camera in this situation. In a shoot out between the Sony Nex-5 and the Nikon D3100, most users are going to find the D3100 easier to work with.
It all depends on what you need. Do you need something compact? If so, the NEX from Sony can't be beat. Sorry but the Sony Alpha shooter is wrong about these types of cameras being a fad, they aren't going anywhere. I shoot with a Sony A700 dSLR. Nice camera, but I can't take it everywhere with me.
Sometimes it's the bulk, sometimes it's the venue not allowing dSLRs. Because the NEX uses a large aps c sensor, it's true that the lenses in general are large, often negating the whole point of a compact camera. However, pancake lenses are what make the difference here.
Do a few searches on the web and you will see that pancake lenses are all the rage, some are new, some are old manual lenses for film cameras that were around before I was born. That's what makes all the difference in the world. A NEX with a nice pancake lens can sneak into a lot of places, and it's just easier to carry around in general.
So the quality of photos isn't really an issue either way. If you compare the Nikon to the NEX 5N, the newer model, I think the NEX is better, if only slightly. The Nikon has more lenses to choose from right out of the gate without adapters, and the phase auto focus (not live view) is faster, and dSLRs in general are just quicker all around.
While some photographers make a huge deal out of an optical view finder over the LCD, I just don't get what the big deal is to be honest. I don't think one or the other holds a major advantage over the other. Sure in some tough lighting conditions it could be an issue, but in most situations, the LCD would be fine, I think it's in people's head more than anything else.
So if compact size is most important to you, go for the NEX. The best image quality for the money is the NEX C3.So skip the NEX 5 unless the deal is killer. According to the DxOmark score, the new NEX C3 and NEX 5N are nearly identical for image sensor performance.
The 5N adds full 1080p video where the C3 only goes to 720p. Both cameras image sensor wise kill all the entry level Canon dSLRs and even some of the Nikon bodies too. Ignore all the fanboys and really think about what you need and want, and then pull the trigger on that.
The D3100 is a DSLR, NEX isn't.
Sony's size factor is a bit tricky, as when you put on a lens it's almost as big as a typical DSLR. Millions of people use DSLRs and they have portability as an important factor.
Here's a DSLR Buying Guide - http://www.the-dslr-photographer.com/2009/11/which-dslr-to-buy/
Yes an optical viewfinder in the D3100 and all other non-Sony DSLRs is the best.