Canon V Nikon

The D3200 and D3300 have the same sensor size and number of pixels. When you become a better photographer,

hopefully you'll realize that both models are basic and so are those kit lenses, and you'll want to upgrade. At this point,

you are probably better off saving $100 up front.

 

I see the Adorama D3300 package comes with the wifi module, a case, and SD memory card, so the real price difference

is less than $100, though.

<p>Thanks Shun...I realize that these entry level cameras and lenses will have their limitations but I am hoping that I can use these as a learning tool to advance my skill to the point that I would feel comfortable investing in more professional equipment. I know that for Ebay purposes, probably any entry level will work. That being said, do you agree with Peter that I would be better off getting the most current technology (therefore 3300 over the 3200) or am I just as well off with the cheaper camera. I can afford either one....by the way, I looked at your and Dieter's portfolios on Tennis and Wildlife and all I can say is ....Wow!!!</p>

<p>I kind of agree with Shun that there's not really $100 worth of difference between those two cameras - except that the lack of AA filter does get marginally sharper results from the D3300 - provided it's fitted with a top quality lens. And would you then get buyer's remorse for passing up a slightly better camera for the sake of 100 bucks, or OTOH wishing you'd saved 100 bucks?</p>

<p>Dilemmas like these are sometimes best settled on the toss of a coin and then sternly going with whatever the "magic 8 ball" decides for you.</p>

<p>So...with the included consumer grade VR11 lenses...I'll probably get the same sharpness and quality results? By the way...these lenses are Nikkor VR11...are they plastic? Is that what differentiates them from a professional Nikon lens</p>

<p>First of all, Nikon introduced the D3300 back in January, 2014: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cI3u<br>

Therefore, it is almost two years old, a pretty old camera in this digital, high-tech electronics era. Its successor is essentially due any time. Check DPReview for the differences between the D3200 and D3300: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d3300</p>

<p>The D3300 is a bit lighter, can shoot 5 frames/second instead of 4 and has 1080/60p video (instead of 1080/30p). If you need those features, get the D3300.</p>

<p>I would get the D3200 and take the savings up front. But that is me. In reality, I am advanced enough that I have no interest in anything in the D3000 and D5000 series.</p>

<p>I wonder how large that D3200 overstock that Nikon must have produced actually is - the camera was introduced some 4 years ago - and replaced by the D3300 almost two years ago?</p>

<p>Is there indeed a $100 value difference - that's for the OP to decide. I site with Shun's recommendation of pocketing the $100.</p>

<p>Thanks guys...One more question. Does the 3200 or the 3300 have a manual built in flash that you can shut off if you don't want it or is it totally automatic? (I.E. if using a light box with studio) lights.....maybe you don't want the camera to flash)</p>

<p>You can force the flash to be off in M A S P modes with any Nikon DSLR ever made. In green auto mode it will fire if the camera decides it's needed though.</p>

<p>In addition to the above, which allow the flash to be used when you want, flash is actually disabled in Auto flash-off mode, Landscape and Sports.</p>

<p>By the way, I must add that although I quite understand and respect the fact that Shun Cheung's level and type of work demand more than the D3xxx offers, Ralph Oshiro provides some evidence that the D3300 can make a pretty good picture too.</p>

<p>BTW that's VRII as in "2". It's the second iteration of Nikon's image stabilization system.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The Fujifilm X10 is about 100 dollars more than the NikonD3300</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Bill,<br>

Maybe confusing X10 ( or current X30) with X100 ?<br>

Over here a X30 currrently is around the same price as a D3300 BODY. but the D3300 then still requires a Lens to be mounted, and psooibly if for products on the Internet aditionally a Macro lens.<br>

The X10 ( (x30) was just an example of a point and shoot that does everything that is required for pictures ment to be posted on the internet, and gives very decent results , and it keeps things simple. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Ralph Oshiro provides some evidence that the D3300 can make a pretty good picture too.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A disposable camera can capture some good pictures also, under the right conditions; i.e. conditions that don't challenge the camera: static, non-moving subjects, plenty of light, and small web display such as those on eBay auctions.</p>

<p>When you read camera and lens reviews, if the comment is "this camera/lens is capable of taking great pictures," that is code word for a poor camera and lens, because ANY camera, including $10 disposable ones, is capable of taking great pictures in some occasions. I.e., that is a totally meaningless but somewhat misleading statement.</p>

<p>I shoot a lot of challenging, fast-moving subjects under not-so-ideal lighting in far corners of the world. That is when I need fast AF, high frame rate, fast lenses, robust construction ..., and those 55mm/f5.6 lenses with a plastic mount will come up short.</p>

<p>I'm sorry but I have to join in with my usual comment, initiated this time by the idea that eBay photography is entry level, sure many sellers have seriously substandard pictures, but as eBay always advises good pictures are very important. There isn't just one kind of suitable picture, but more along the lines of an appropriate picture for the kind of thing you may be selling, which isn't always easy to do.</p>

<p>Pretty well any camera if used well can take a good enough picture but I find that Photoshop is always the most useful additional tool, sadly not cheap.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Clive...I agree with your observation. I have been putting photos on Ebay for years using a cheap point and shoot and have found that poor quality photos are often the difference between a "sale" or "no sale". All of the Ebay instructional forums advocate taking quality photos to enhance your chances of enticing the buyer to spend his money. That is why, I decided to upgrade to a DSLR and joined this forum. I have ultimately purchased a Nikon D3300 from Adorama along with a light box setup. Now, I can begin the journey to climb the learning curve and hopefully get to the point where I can take quality photos not only for my Ebay work but other areas of interest as well. Again, thanks to all of the fine folks who offered advice. It was greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>I am a newbie, and after much research, I now have the D3300 and love the 24mp, compared to other's in same price range. I presently have the 18-55 AF VR II kit lens, and now going to purchase the nikon 55-200 DX AF-S VR II lens, Nikon refurbished. I looked at the Cannon T5, but I thought the D3300 is an all around better choice for a variety of reasons, from my research. So, it is a Personal decision each person must make, but to be satisfied with your decision, do your "RESEARCH".</p>