Four years ago, Nikon redefined the entry-level DSLR with its D40.It may not have been the first model targeted at the beginner, but its diminutive form, simple operation and educational graphic interface set a blueprint for similar cameras
, not just for Nikon but also its rivals.As its strongest competitor, Canon has worked just as diligently to keep the novice user happy. While its triple-digit EOS line has
evolved towards a more intermediate feature set, a newer range now sits beneath it. The EOS 1100D is that range’s newest member and the closest match for Nikon’s most junior model, the D3100. Both appear as capable tools for those cutting their photographic teeth, but are they as good as each other?
"THE 1100D INCORPORATES MANY DIRECT CONTROLS, WHILE THE D3100 OFFERS A MORE BASIC LEVEL OF PHYSICAL CONTROL, HOUSING MOST OPTIONS WITHIN ITS MENU SYSTEM"
PERFORMANCE
Although the 1100D’s nine-point AF system seems a little behind the D3100’s 11-point system, it’s actually slightly snappier in terms of speed. This is particularly noticeable when the lens needs to focus from one end of its range to the other, where the D3100 dawdles a little in comparison. Otherwise, the central points on each camera’s system are equally sensitive, and no major differences could be found in terms of the sensitivity of the peripheral points, with both cameras failing to focus in areas of low contrast when only these were called upon.
When it came to continuous shooting, I found the 1100D could manage only three RAW and JPEG frames before slowing down, while the D3100 typically managed around triple this figure, at a slightly faster rate. These figures were obtained with a fast Class 10 SDHC card too; with a slower card it became even more difficult to shoot consecutive images with the 1100D. The two cameras were assessed for colour and white balance performance under both controlled studio conditions and more generaeveryday scenes. In the studio, when set to the same custom white balance the 1100D’s
RAW output displayed a tendency for more neutral colour next to the D3100’s more saturated results. In more general shots, however , things were the other way around, with the D3100’s auto white balance system leaning more towards neutrality and the 1100D being considerably warmer , neither system being inaccurate as such, just showing a slight preference one way or the other .
In terms of exposure, Canon’s 63-zone iFCL system proves to be the more sensitive of the two, being easily led to over and underexposure. Noise levels from the two cameras are remarkably similar , although the D3100’s extended Hi2 option does allow for greater flexibility (although results are, unsurprisingly, very noisy by this point). The only difference between the two is that the D3100’s noise appears a little coarser , which can occasionally make it a touch more noticeable. Finally, the image stabilisation systems of each camera’s kit lens were found to be effective, with usable results down to around 1/10sec at the 55mm, which represents a benefit of around four EV stops each.Results at slower shutter speeds could also be deemed ‘usable’ by some, although that would depend on how exactly they would be used and at what size.
"ALTHOUGH THE 1100D’S NINE-POINT AF SYSTEM SEEMS A LITTLE BEHIND THE D3100’S 11-POINT SYSTEM, IT’S ACTUALLY SLIGHTLY SNAPPIER IN TERMS OF SPEED"
VERDICT
For the first-time user neither camera is a bad choice, and each is compatible with an exhaustive collection of lenses and accessories. Anyone looking at these should also consider adding the Pentax K-r to their shortlist, which has a number of advantages over either tested here for roughly the same price. Nevertheless, for those looking specifically towards one of the two on test, the Nikon is perhaps the better choice. Its AF system may not be quite as speedy and its menu-based operation may not please everyone, but it is considerably better specified and a slightly better performer . It is surprising, therefore, to find it also being the cheaper of the two.
www.photographymonthly.com
