Reading mode: Light Dark

Is the D3200 better than the D7000?

Go to last post
It's overall IQ might be better but it's missing functions will make it uninteresting to many.

So yes, it might be better in some ways but not as good in others. If it had exposure bracketing I'd sell my D5100 and get it instead. I sure hope the auto focus is more reliable than the D5100.
snapper1967 said:
Why do the specs and reviews seem so much better for a cheaper camera?
--
Just enjoy what you do.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.photomfleury.com
 
snapper1967 said:
Why do the specs and reviews seem so much better for a cheaper camera?
Click to expand...
One camera is new, one is old. One is lighter, one is heavier. One has many of the features of a pro camera, one has few. One comes in pretty red, one only in black. Look closer and the answer will come to you. It actually has less to do with the cameras and more to do with how people read specs and reviews :)
 
Put that D3200 sensor in a D7000 body. We may have something to look forward too later this year/next. The disasters in Japan & Thailand may have Nikon a little behind their plan.
--
I Shoot RAW
 
xenon-mkd said:
nothing wrong in the 16mp d7000 d5100 sensor. its better
Click to expand...
Maybe...but how so ?

Too many people use that technique. 2 word responses... "it's better".

?!

It's 2 years old, and its less megapixels, meaning less detail.

Sensor is definitely not what you want to compae your D7000 to.
Features are a different story though.
 
D7000 is a badass. Way better body build, screw motor for older lenses(can save you money in the long term), dual card slots, bracketing, 6 shots a second vs 4, slighty better in low light and dynamic range, settings on the top of camera, more focus points etc etc. (probably another 10 features I missed)

D3200 more MEGAPIXELS! Better movie mode, lighter, guide mode to help beginners, optional wifi for remote shots using cell phone.

Basically D7000 has almost everything going for it, but I got the D3200 over the D7000. Why? The sensor, I am a Lightroomaholic and I love to crop.
 
snapper1967 said:
Why do the specs and reviews seem so much better for a cheaper camera?
Click to expand...
I don't know about the reviews, I am yet to read one where there is a comparision made between the two cameras.

The way I read the specs tells me that in most aspects the D3200 is some way off from being better than the D7000. Resolution is not one of those aspects. However, resoluton is but a tiny part of the overall picture.

What specs do you specifically have in mind?

By the way are you still happy with your new D7000?

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas
 
It's like saying is a shovel better than a spade, the answer depends on what you want to use it for.
 
lovetotravel said:
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon_D7000
Click to expand...
Thanks fo the link.

That review concluded that the D7000 was still a (much) better purchase. Therefore, it was obviously not the one the OP was refering to.

I am still interested to find out from the OP what specifications he had in mind when he concluded the D3200 was the better camera.

Once again this comes down to individual priorities. If the OP must have a 24MP camera and the OP absoulutely cannot spend more than say about $700, then FOR THE OP the D3200 is way better than the D7000, and noone could argue with that.

What we could discuss with the OP is, if it is a wise thing on his part to make such an importand decision based on such a highly restricted criteria. I think most of us would think that it would be more beneficial to him in the long run, if he considered a more balanced set of priorities before he made up his mind about his next camera purchase.

The spec sheet itself should not be the only thing one takes into account when assessing a camera, but yes, among other things, it should be part of the process.

The spec sheet is about two pages for both these cameras. Go thorugh it for one of the cameras, and highlight the stuff that you think is important to YOU. Then check out the same specs for the other camera. Then you compare, consider and conclude. Then go and do all the other things one does before a purchase.

However, before we dive too deep into the subject, it would be nice from the other person to let us know if he is genuinely confused or concerned about this, or if he just wants to stir up some emotions around here.

Looking forward to his further comments.

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas
 
Probably not.

Cameras are reviewed in deference to the target market for the camera, and a D3200 is aimed at a different market to a D7000. If all cameras were reviewed on an equal footing, every P&S would rate very poorly because they are nowhere near as good as a D4 or a D800. But that comparison would be pointless because people don't go to a camera shop and choose between a D4 and a Coolpix L26.

A D3200 can be reviewed better than a D7000 and still not be as good a camera because it is being judged against other cameras in its own class, not as an outright score.
 
snapper1967 said:
Why do the specs and reviews seem so much better for a cheaper camera?
--
Just enjoy what you do.
Click to expand...
Its really only better in pixel count, but the same in most everything else, except for dynamic range in which the D7000 still appears to hold an edge. Also, you have to remember the D3200 is one generation newer than the D7000. From what I've seen so far, I prefer the D7000 IQ.
 
Read the specs again. Apart from 24mp on the sensor I can't imagine how it seems so much better than a D7000
 
D3200 only has more megapixels. I am very satisfied with my D7000 and am glad I don't own a 3200. In fact, I'd never buy a DX camera with more than 16 MP unless it had some revolutionary new sensor technology (better than the Bayer array) because the pixels just don't seem to have the same quality anymore. I used to own a D90 and loved the images, but the D700's FX images with both at base ISO still looked nicer, which I could only attribute to pixel size. Signal-to-noise ratio on the 3200 will be noticeably lower and I would love to see how much extra noise the 3200 has when really pulling up shadows.

Besides, on my D7K, only my 50mm f/1.8 outresolves the sensor, as far as I can tell. My pro level Sigma 100-300mm looks almost as good, but my 18-105 doesn't come close in terms of true resolution, even though the images aren't bad. More megapixels won't mean more TRUE detail.
 
Michel F said:
It's overall IQ might be better but it's missing functions will make it uninteresting to many.

So yes, it might be better in some ways but not as good in others. If it had exposure bracketing I'd sell my D5100 and get it instead. I sure hope the auto focus is more reliable than the D5100.
Click to expand...
Why do you need exposure bracketing on a camera with such a high Dynamic Range?

Exposure bracketing is a non essential feature when a sensor has so much DR. All you have to do to be safe in bright and contrasty light is underexpose slightly to protect the highlights and lift the shadows in PP to suite your taste.
Michel F said:
snapper1967 said:
Why do the specs and reviews seem so much better for a cheaper camera?
--
Just enjoy what you do.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.photomfleury.com
Click to expand...
--

S100 (MIA), S6500, S5, F300, F200, F70, F11 (Retired), F31 (deceased), Z5, V10, D40, EX1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top