D3200 vs d5100

[nick_thorley]

I am buying my first slr and narrowed the choice to the d5100 or the d3200. I was favouring the 5100 but then various people have

mentioned the 3200 may be the smarter choice as its virtually the same camera but with more pixels

 

Could everyone give me their opinion on which they would get - my budget is £500 ish including 18-55mm lens

 

Thanks

[LenMarriott]

<p>Nick, Go to Ken Rockwell's site and read his article on 'Recommended Cameras'. It may help you decide. Let us know what you decide & how things are working out for you. Many others on PN will be interested in your experience. Best, LM.</p>

[Hector Javkin]

<p>You could start with this comparison that I set up for you <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_d3200&products=nikon_d5100"><strong>here</strong></a> using DPreview's comparison tool. It's only a way of having most of the specifications next to one another, you should see how each camera fits in your hands, whether the lack of an articulated screen (which on the 5100 has) is acceptable, etc. and whether other controls will make a difference for you.</p>

<p>And don't follow Ken Rockwell's advice. Sometimes, his advice happens to coincide with the best thing to do, sometimes not. It's a random thing, you might as well flip a coin. Rockwell used to warn people, on his "About" page, that they should only use his site if they have a good BS detector. It was the most honest statement on his site. I don't know if it's still there, but he still admits he makes things up, calls what he writes a "work of fiction." </p>

[Two23]

<p>The D3200 has more resolution and is lower cost. The D5100 has that nifty fold out screen. Depends on what you will use the camera for. When I was in London & Glasgow last month, I carried the D5100 with me. I liked shooting down in the subways and on the streets. I would fold out the LCD, hold the camera at my waist, and then take photos looking down at the camera instead of holding the camera to my face and pointing it at people. This worked well. If you are just wanting a camera to take family photos, you might be better off with the D3200 and spend the money on two lenses 18-55mm VR and 55-200mm VR. It all comes down to how you'll be using the camera and lenses you need.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[bob_flood1]

<p>The major manufacturers haven't introduced a camera in years that didn't have enough megapixels to produce satisfying photos - the difference in mpix between the 5100 and 3200 isn't going to be much of a factor unless you intend to make huge prints.</p>

<p>I have the D7000, which uses the same sensor as the D5100. The sensor has a very justified reputation for low noise at higher ISO settings, and from what I've read online, the D3200 isn't as good at those same ISO settings. So I recommend you look into noise levels as compared to how much you expect to use the camera in low light situations.</p>

<p>Likewise, both cameras are more entry-level than the D7000, D300 etc, with the D3200 more so. I suggest you look at the functions the two cameras offer from a perspective of which you might outgrow as you learn to take advantage of what each offers.</p>

 

[nick_thorley]

The fold out screen doesn't make any difference to me. Just to confirm I also want to add a 55-300mn lens and hence I

wondered if the higher iso of the 5100 would be better

[elliot1]

<p>According to the DXOMark site, the two cameras are pretty much the same all around (slight differences but too close to really see a difference). You likely won't see any differences in the pictures between the two of them, even at high ISO.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/801%7C0/(brand)/Nikon/(appareil2)/698%7C0/(brand2)/Nikon">http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/801%7C0/(brand)/Nikon/(appareil2)/698%7C0/(brand2)/Nikon</a></p>

<p>I suggest you hold both of them and get the body that feels best in your hands.</p>

[Jerry_]

<p>Having the D5100 body (picked up refurbished...) and having used it with a AF-S VR 55-300mm DX Nikkor lens a bit, you should be in good shape. One thing about the fold-screen: if you wish to shoot without the nice glare of your most recent image, one can almost shoot like *film* and not chimp your image while shooting. Good for dark places where less light from the photographer is better.</p>

<p> </p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>If it were me, I'd buy the newer one (the 3200) and live without the fold-out screen.</p>

<p>And I'd never rely on Rockwell for advice.</p>

[AlanKlein]

<p>Has anyone found the fold out screen handy for Landscape shots?</p>

[dave_wilson1]

Check this guy out on YT at digitalrevcom, he's very funny and has some really good practical camera reviews to watch.

[Two23]

<p>Yes, I have found the fold out screen useful for landscape shots. I often use it when I'm shooting very close to the ground to get a different perspective than the standard eye level vantage you always see. Combined with an ultrawide lens the fold out screen let's you do some really different stuff. When a camera or other gear gives you a unique feature, try to visualize how you can use it creatively, to do something you couldn't do before.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[Hector Javkin]

<p>One advantage of that flip-out screens share with waist level finders and right angle viewers is that they can make it reasonably comfortable to use shorter tripods, which are generally lighter for the same degree of stability.</p>

[superinc]

<p>yes, I MISS that dang screen ! its the *only* thing I miss about my D5000 ..</p>

<p>D5100>D3200</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>The fold out screen by itself would be enough for me to get the 5100. Once you use a camera with one, you don't want to go without. Especially for low to the ground tripod shots, or waist level shots. I use Nikon equipment, but did buy a Canon G1x, and the fold out screen was one of the major reasons I did (that and the big sensor). It's very handy - keeps you from having every single shot at the same old "eye level" perspective. I actually used to lie on the ground with my D300 sometimes! Now I use the G1x and the fold out screen.</p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>Have you considered the D3100? You can get a very good deal on a package with the D3100, 18-55 VR, and 55-300 VR. I have a D90 and a D3100 and I love the D3100. My Nikon Acquisition Syndrome tells me to get a D3200, but my sensible side tells me that my D3100 is so good that I don't need another 10MP.</p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>I just got my copy of Popular Photography and it has a full write up on the D3200. I've been reading their tests for over 40 years and I find them to be pretty good. What I found that I didn't expect was that the D3200 has lower noise at high ISO's than either the D3100 or D5100. If that is important to you you may be best off with the D3200. It is very important to me, so now I probably will get one.</p>