Nikon Coolpix 3200

3.1 megapixels | 1.6" screen | 38 – 115 mm (3×)

User reviews

Average rating: 4.18
5 stars
(9)
4 stars
(15)
3 stars
(3)
2 stars
(1)
1 stars
(0)
Sort by
123
cnb89
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: cnb89 posted on Dec 23, 2005 UTC

Opinion: I have owned a 3200 for over 12 months, when i first got the 3200 my family and i were blown away by the image quality and how good the photos turned out. This was our first digital camera we had bought and moving from a film camera to the 3200 was absolutly amazing when it comes to the quality of the photos.

We purchased the camera to take on an over seas trip, when we returned our friends had done the same trip and when comparing that they took a film camera and not a digital camera they were amazied with the image difference between film and digital.

The Nikon 3200 is a great beginner camera, has lots of features and the quality of the photos are exellent!

Problems: The zoom in and out buttom has been used alot and therefore the paint has worn off the buttons.

After 12 months the rechargable batteries have started to die and do not last as long as they used to.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Bixarro
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Bixarro posted on Oct 11, 2005 UTC

Opinion: I was looking for a good deal, meaning a good balance between price and quality. The camera is well built, lighter than the 3100, and small enough so as to put it in your palm. It has a good image quality and reasonable features. One of the most impressive features is that it consumes much lower batteries (Ni-Metal, 2500 mAmp) than the 3100. I have been using it with a pair of brand new Sanyo batteries since 10 days ago, and the low batt signal has not even appeared yet. However, I am not an intensive user (within that time I have taken 100 photos of 2M, captured 4-5 videos of about 10-15 secs, and I have reviewed all the photos two or three times).
My opinion is that it constitutes a cheap, adecuate camera for all of us who just want to take pictures, and are not expecting very high quality (meaning professional) photos.

Problems: When using the flash, after taking a photo, the LCD display turns off while the flash is re-charging, so you have to wait about 2-3 seconds to take another shot. For that reason I have turned of the flash every time I knew it was not necessary (so as to avoid the camera having to decide to use the flash and having further to wait between pictures).

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Vincent
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Vincent posted on Jul 18, 2005 UTC

Opinion: Wow what an awesome camera. I know I have a good camera once I see the
pictures, and I've been blown highway by the images created by this camera.
Excellent color, great metering, sharp, a little bit noisy in darker situations but
doesn't bother me too much since I don't use this camera seriously, but for fun. I
like the compact size of the camera and the use of AA batteries. The unlimited
movie with sound is really cool too. Displays images quick and is very responsive.

It would've been nice if they made it waterproof :), I dropped mine in the water so
an looking for a new one now. I just wish Nikon continued making this excellent
coolpix model.

Problems: No problems, I just wish they had an option to manually select ISO sensitivity. Also I
wish when using the optical viewfinder the camera would focus faster. Last, a button
to control the monitor.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Mathieu Villeneuve
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Mathieu Villeneuve posted on Mar 4, 2005 UTC

Opinion: Excellent picture quality
Easy to operate

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
ron.s
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: ron.s posted on Jan 11, 2005 UTC

Opinion: This is my first digicam & I purchased it for a trip overseas last year, after researching the options for about 6 months on this and other websites. I was very pleased with the cameras functions as a holiday P&S. Shooting performance was quite acceptable after turning off the animation, shutter lag was there, but better than my old film camera. Its strong points for me were;AA batteries - I purchased a spare set of rechargeables & in a 4 week trip only ran out of juice once- no problems went to the nearest shop!. Battery life on the rechargeables was fine - usually good for a couple of days per set& carried the spares. Scene Modes; these were great- panorama is fantastic for scenery & outside shots and provided some memorable images in Scotland & Switzerland, Museum is excellent for inside work without flash- much better atmosphere to snaps , Night Scene- again took some great snaps- without noticeable noise. It isnt a pocket cam , but quite compact & I bought a good bag to carry on my belt- no problems. On top of this I got a good deal- Cam, spare batteries, 256 & 64 k SD cards, card reader, tripod & case for A$550- 4 months ago!. I have been using the cam since and am still very happy. (The bad review last month from Kelly Renee, was describing the old 3100 model & is unfair to this cam). I understand this is not a top of the range unit and am a happy digi-cam-per with my 3200 .

Problems: As others have noted, images seem soft, however a bit of work with MS Photo-editor & I could sort out most of these issues. Except for the Panorama Maker, software provided is basic but does the simple stuff & I have access to other software as well .Video function is not so good in low light but fine for day work, birthday parties etc.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
smrj
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: smrj posted on Jan 8, 2005 UTC

Opinion: I purchased two of these cameras for use by a pair of young photographers, after an unfortunate experience with the cheaper Olympus D-535. The Olympus cameras were exchanged for the Nikons. I had hoped to get Canon A75s as replacements, but the dealer had sold out.

I compared the image quality with our family Canon A70 and found the colour balance to be slightly cooler with the Nikon. The images when enlarged showed significantly greater noise on the Nikon, and areas of flat colour in the images were more broken up and showed some fringing effects. So the sensor in the Canon would appear to be generally superior.

However for normal photographic needs and postcard type prints the differences would really be negligible, and the Nikon has definite advantages in its elegant, compact design, and ease of use (particularly the ease of navigation through the menus). The macro facility is excellent, allowing focussing on objects a matter of centimetres away.

The scene modes are well set up for a novice photographer, presetting white balance, flash operation, macro settings and sensitivity to suit a range of different shooting conditions. The framing guides aid learning about composition, and the manner in which camera uses the guides as the basis for its automatic focussing is clever and effective.

There have been comments about noise in low light situations, this is true to an extent but images taken of Christmas lights using the night scene setting, a tripod and the self timer have yeilded some pleasing results.

Battery life is as expected for a camera with only two AA batteries, certainly better than the Olympus but not approaching the remarkable battery performance of the Canon A70.

Overall, I am very happy with the cameras and though they lack the degree of manual control of the Canon A70 (and I assume, the A75) and the ultimate image quality, this is more than outweighed for our particular needs by ease of use and size factors.

Problems: None of significance to date. The images sometimes take a while to save to the internal memory (the LCD goes black for a period).

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
jmcarp
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: jmcarp posted on Jan 4, 2005 UTC

Opinion: I bought the CP3200 as a pocket-size back-up for my D-70 to take on a vacation to Hawaii. I normally don't like cameras that use AA batteries, but in this case was specifically looking for that feature because I knew the camera would sit in a drawer unused for long periods and I didn't want to worry about keeping batteries charged and ready. The CP3200 met all my expecations, although battery life with alkalines could be better (I averaged ~50 shots per battery set).

I used the camera most of the time in P&S Auto mode for quick shots, and was generally pleased with the images. I'm sure many would have been better if I had taken the time to use the appropriate Scene modes. I was especially pleased with the close-up photos of flowers I took in the Botanical Gardens. Most of these were excellent, and those that weren't were because I didn't allow the camera to autofocus on really quick shots.

A subjective observation: My wife was shooting many of the same subjects with a Canon S-100 Digital Elph, and when comparing images, it appears the depth of color is greater in the Canon images. This was especially true for landscapes in bright sunlight conditions. The difference was not that great, but was noticable.

I would recommend this camera for casual use by photographers of any experience level. Just be sure to keep a couple of spare AA batteries handy, and be sure they are FRESH.

Problems: None

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Ron P
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Ron P posted on Jan 3, 2005 UTC

Opinion: I got a 3200 for my wife for Christmas,on the 27 th she went to Paris. With about a half hour or less of instruction on the use of her new 3200. We got a 256 card, and set it on auto, with extra batterys, and a camera bag, we allready had and off she went to visitor Son. Well I have to say I am really impressed with pictures she got, Regardless of the setting indoors, outdoors,night time, bright sun or cloudy they are really good.Yes point and shoot she isn't a pro at all, but she is really proud of the pictures, the best she ever took with any camera, her first ditigal.

Problems: None

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
frankiekhor
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: frankiekhor posted on Dec 26, 2004 UTC

Opinion: i was using olympus C-450 since May 2004, that camera automatics switches to slow shutter each time i turn off the flash(indoor), that result blur picture 10 out of 10 , i force to give up taking picture in that situation or fix it on a tripot to solve the weekness. After a short survey through this website, i had bought this camera coolpix 3200 for 799.00(Ringgit malaysia). Since then i have use it to take about 100 photo indoor, it performed a little bit batter than the olympus , the shutter is faster witout flash but the picture are very dark, i think i have gone to a wrong camera. All the other features are ok.

Problems: 1) Dark picture indoor without flash
2) Have to open the lens while transfering the picture to computer.
3) digital zppm function can't be disable.

If u are a biginning seaching for an outdoor shutting camera & low in price , this is a good choice!
But if u use it for indoor without flash , don't try this!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
123