Which would be better for a newbie? D5100 or D3200?

Tee1up said:

Tee1up said:

One could get banned for telling you how ridiculous that sounds in more forceful terms. Suffice it to say that the D3200 is the lowest consumer camera in the lineup with state of the art technology in almost every area. A serious camera for any competent shooter.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

What area? Lack of essential features??

Paul Hirst said:

Well Saturday I went to Jessops and asked for a demo of the 5100 I wanted them to demonstrate the auto bracketing function and despite 2 salesmen coming over neither of them knew how to do it the knowledge of the staff was poor to say the least....

I then asked them if my lenses would work with the 3200 and again they did not know the answer. It's such a thin line between each camera and I am swinging to the 3200 but could you advise on if my current range of lenses will all work with the camera as if they don't it will be the 5100 I'm of to Greece on Saturday so want to get the camera in the next couple of day.

Nikon 20mm Prime
Nikon 50mm Prime F1.8 52mm
Nikon 18-200mm VR DX F3.5 to F5.6
Nikon 16-85mm VR DX F3.5 to F5.6
Tokina 11-16mm (IF) (DX) F2.8 Wide Angle
Nikon 105mm AF-S F2.8 Macro

Click to expand...

Only AFS lenses work. So ... I marked the ones that should work ...

You can manually focus the others.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Thanks Kim.....

Actually your posts were very helpful in helping me make my choice. In the end I went for the D3200 ...

Reason is how I would use the camera... I agree that not using a tripod and then trying to bracket shots is not ideal and most of the time will probably result in a misaligned set.

Also for the level of HDR I want to do taking one good well exposed RAW shot would allow me to create 3 images in the software that would give the type of image I am happy with. The camera is also light and simple to use. The lack of features in this respect is a benefit for my type of shooting and finally I also own the D90 so in effect I have a camera that has most of the features of the 5100

I'm of to Kefalonia this weekend for a week can't wait to see how it performs

Thanks again....

--
Chap......
http://blog.paul-hirst.com/

Paul Hirst said:

Thanks Kim.....

Actually your posts were very helpful in helping me make my choice. In the end I went for the D3200 ...

Reason is how I would use the camera... I agree that not using a tripod and then trying to bracket shots is not ideal and most of the time will probably result in a misaligned set.

Also for the level of HDR I want to do taking one good well exposed RAW shot would allow me to create 3 images in the software that would give the type of image I am happy with. The camera is also light and simple to use. The lack of features in this respect is a benefit for my type of shooting and finally I also own the D90 so in effect I have a camera that has most of the features of the 5100

I'm of to Kefalonia this weekend for a week can't wait to see how it performs

Thanks again....

--
Chap......
http://blog.paul-hirst.com/

Click to expand...

Even though my D5100 has bracketing I hardly ever use it. One RAW file exposed to the right and then processed in Lightroom 4 can give me all the HDR effect I want. I can't imagine the D3200 being any different.

Good luck on your trip, post some shots when you get back.

--
Shooting for fun and memories.

Definitely the D5100:

1) MP count doesn't really matter unless you're printing for huge size posters or billboards. If that's the case, 24MP is not even enough!

2) You'll realise someday the convenience of flip screen as it allows you to shoot in various conditions without having you to climb or sleep on the ground to reach the same level of the camera; not to mention taking "blind" shots until you get the right angle.

3) From what i've learned, focus speed and problems are not directly and shall not be blamed on the camera body itself. It has something to do with the lens and available light as well.

4) D5100 has many other features that outdoes the D3200 and again I'll stick to what I always say: It's all about the photographer that take good pictures, not the camera.

Let us know when you have bought your camera, happy shooting and welcome to the club!

hajime93 said:

Definitely the D5100:

1) MP count doesn't really matter unless you're printing for huge size posters or billboards.

Click to expand...

....or just want a lot more resolution and detail in your photos, and the ability to crop more and still retain the same detail you would get from the aged 16MP sensors.

Paul Hirst said:

Thanks Kim.....

Actually your posts were very helpful in helping me make my choice. In the end I went for the D3200 ...

Reason is how I would use the camera... I agree that not using a tripod and then trying to bracket shots is not ideal and most of the time will probably result in a misaligned set.

Also for the level of HDR I want to do taking one good well exposed RAW shot would allow me to create 3 images in the software that would give the type of image I am happy with. The camera is also light and simple to use. The lack of features in this respect is a benefit for my type of shooting and finally I also own the D90 so in effect I have a camera that has most of the features of the 5100

I'm of to Kefalonia this weekend for a week can't wait to see how it performs

Thanks again....

Click to expand...

Sounds great. Good luck ... that place is stunning!

Just remember one thing ... hand held shots at 24mp will require excellent shot discipline. At the last moment, brace yourself, gently stop breathing on the outward breath, and squeeze the shutter gently, much like a trigger. Even with VR, this increases the keepers measurably ...

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Both are very similar, buy whatever you want of the two, and start to take pics, then learn hands-on how to compose, framing and exposure adjust, also get a Nikon flash and learn how to use it.
For the above you could even use a D50 or D40.

--

I clicked on the OP's name and if you do the same you will see that this individual purchased the Sony A65 with kit lens (24 MP camera, I believe) a couple of weeks ago!!

I almost bought a Sony DSLR a few years ago. I bought a NEX 3 instead which proved disastrous. If I'd gone with the other model who knows what my ultimate experience might have been.

BostonAaron said:

I clicked on the OP's name and if you do the same you will see that this individual purchased the Sony A65 with kit lens (24 MP camera, I believe) a couple of weeks ago!!

Click to expand...

I have read all 90 posts and nobody has mentioned which camera would be better for video.

I have a friend looking at these two cameras for primarily using it for video. Does one focus better than the other?

Please avoid commenting personal opinions about video in a still camera. It's rediculous. Video in a DSLR (for the money) gives much more professional results than a dedicated video camera in the $700 price range.
--
http://www.jodyleonardimages.zenfolio.com

I have no idea how is the video on the d3200... but Nikons are not the best at video in general. Sony´s are... My friends that do this for a living, all use Canon 5D´s... On this budget cameras, your friend is going to have a hard time unless he´s dealing with slow moving subjects the whole time. Rolling shutter, manual focus, fixed aperture, etc...

Paul Hirst said:

Thanks Kim.....

Actually your posts were very helpful in helping me make my choice. In the end I went for the D3200 ...

Reason is how I would use the camera... I agree that not using a tripod and then trying to bracket shots is not ideal and most of the time will probably result in a misaligned set.

Click to expand...

The group can correct me, but I seem to have read that the bracketing in the D5100 separated each shot by at least a couple of seconds anyhow, meaning that without a tripod it too will likely misalign.