Exacta35

I request your considered input, but first a bit of my background.

Many years ago when I first became interested in photography, I bought a Minolta SRT-101, then a 135 mm telephoto lens
(ultimately more lenses up to a 500 mm mirror/catadioptric lens), then a second body (ultimately the Minolta XD-11 and XK with
AE finder), then a Macro lens, then a bellows, then a Nikon F, then a Nikon FTn, then a Bessler Enlarger with Schneider
Companon lenses, and a Canon AE1, then a Nikormat EL and on and on and on. I shot a lot of motorsports including
motorcycle races, night and day events and watersports as well, with my awesome Honeywell Strobonar 880 (thyristor)
and others by Vivitar and Metz. I shot some weddings, reunions, newspaper work in varying categories and used view
cameras thus allowing Scheimpflug principle for some industrial photography. Eventually I owned Olympus pen F half frame,
Pentax ME SLR, Yashica-Mat 2 1/4 twin lens, Mamya Secor 35mm slr and C330 twin lens 2 1/4, Zenza Bronica 2 1/4 slr,
Bessler Topcon D, Contax and soooo on. I fell in love with hardware and paid for it by actually using the gear.

As you can see this was all in the film era and so I am totally unfamiliar with digital gear and that is the basis
for my question...I just bought a Nikon D5300 with two zoom lenses from Costco just to experiment a bit with DSLR
tech and take snapshots of my grandkids that will never be printed over 8"x10". I just don't want a SLR the size of a
breadbox to haul around and I don't want to be limited by my Galaxy phone's camera.

Is this Nikon such a pitifully performing camera that I have wasted my money? Please respond with any objective input you can provide.
Thank you.

alandg46 Loc: Boerne, Texas

I don't have one, but the reviews on it are good. I don't believe there is a pitifully performing camera in the market today. Some have more bells and whistles. Some do certain things better than others, but they're all pretty darn good.

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

Like myself, you have certainly been through quite a few cameras in your time with film.
Your point is well made when you say "I just don't want a SLR the size of a breadbox to haul around".
Quite a few photographers have now moved away from tradition DSLRs and gone with mirror-less
systems and the specification are now quite advanced, Fuji-film and Olympus are just two examples.
Your Nikon D5300 will serve you well and you state "never be printed over 8"x10" so no problems
there.
Having "just bought a Nikon D5300" I would stick with it for a while, then if the weight factor does
become an issue, like for myself, then look towards a mirror-less system.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

The Nikon D5300 is an excellent DSLR. 24 megapixels, with a swing out LCD. The image quality is equivalent to the D7100. It's an above entry level camera. The Nikon D7XXX series cameras have the internal focus motor. You would have to purchase AF-S lenses, or the AF-P lenses. Otherwise you will have to manually focus. Which wouldn't be new to you, since you had experience with the SRT-101. You could have eliminated the all capital letters to make your point too. It is not a pitifully performing camera. Good luck, and welcome to the forum.

Exacta35

Thank you so very much...your input is greatly appreciated. Please note the editing to remove capitalization.

Exacta35

Your comment is deeply appreciated, Thanks!

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

the 5300 will do fine but you might consider adding the inexpensive 35mm f1.8 DX lens for the speed.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Please use "Quote Reply" to reply to any specific thread. "Reply" is just a general reply to the Topic. Or you can make one reply to affect all replies. Such as "Your comments are appreciated, or Thanks.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

It's a camera capable of creating great images. It would not be my first choice for wildlife, birds, sports, but for anything else it is a worthy camera. If you know what you are doing, (I'm guessing you do), it will make your work look good.

FWIW, more megapixels are really not required for larger prints. There is a lot of confusion about that. Keep in mind that a properly exposed shot taken with an iPHone camera can be blown up to billboard size, and it will still look quite sharp. Print ppi required to look sharp is entirely dependent on viewing distance, and it is assumed that a 40x60 print are going to be viewed at a greater distance than a 5x7. You can only see so much fine detail, and that ability diminishes with distance. A 24 mp sensor is going to help you correct keystoning when you point the camera up at a subject, or allow you to straighten out a horizon or do a tighter composition without losing too many pixels.

Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains

The Nikon D5300 is not a pitifully performing camera and may in fact be overkill, for lack of a better word, for your intended uses if I understand correctly that you want a camera to photograph your grandchildren and don't intend to make prints larger that 8X10. There are many compact cameras with fixed zoom lenses and adequate pixels to serve that function very well. Of course if I misunderstand your post and you have a variety of other uses in mind that would change things. I also use a camera for that exact same purpose and sure wouldn't want the inconveniences of using my FF DSlR for that as my Lumix ZS40 performs totally adequately.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Who the heck told you it was 'pitiful'??? Kick his/her butt will you?

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Exacta35 - Like you, I owned (and loved) a wide range of film cameras beginning in the 1950 era. I have also owned a fair-sized selection of digital cameras. One of the digitals was a Nikon D5200, the immediate predessor to your D5300. The D5200 was an excellent camera, capable of many fine images, even in my inexperienced hands. As I continued to use it, I found it to be highly valuable as a learning tool. Since your post notably does not provide any elaboration regarding the exact nature of your dissatisfaction, I'm guessing you opened the box, took not more than 3 photos and decided you weren't satisfied. That's no problem - your $40k Hasselblad awaits. Enjoy it, babe.

Exacta35

Clarification
I have not opened the D5300 box in case I felt the need to return it which I would prefer to do in absolutely unopened condition. In reading various entries on this website (after ordering the camera on a time limited deal), I got the impression that the smaller image sensor had its shortcomings and that much of the tech talk preferred far more expensive cameras. So as politely as possible, I was soliciting responses from knowledgable people as to any other considerations I should be aware of. It was not my intent to defame Nikon (read my post again in light of this clarification) I just was trying to get some good intel...and I pretty much learned what I needed to know...thank you all.

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

Look up Micro Four Thirds.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

That was all fine and dandy...., but where did the Exacta fit into all of this?!?!
SS

PS, welcome to the Hog!!!