Had D5100 Before, Saw Cheap D3200
I spotted a good deal (less than $380) for a refurbished Nikon D3200 kit (less than 100 shutter uses). I previously had a Nikon D5100 and 18-105mm VR and 50mm 1.8G. I currently have a Sony NEX-F3 and a Nikon J1 (50mm 1.8 OSS and kit with Sony, 10-30 with J1).
Seeing the D3200 for so low a price tempts me for some reason, although anymore I use mirrorless anyway. Coming from a D5100, if I get a D3200, I know I'd give up the tilt LCD, but that doesn't bother me. (I'd also give up 1/3 ISO steps, bracketing, a JPEG size options in RAW+JPEG mode, among a few other things. I'm fine with that.)
My thing is, with the D3200 having a huge 24mp sensor, the word is that you need a decent lens to not reveal lens flaws. Would an 18-105mm VR be sufficient for this with landscapes? Or would I really need to spring for at least the Nikon 16-85mm or Tokina 12-24II? Also, I assume the image quality difference would really be neglible unless I printed huge? How is the high ISO compare between the two? (Granted, I don't shoot at ISO 3200 or 6400 much.)
Another side of me says "why bother, just spend the money on Sony NEX stuff," but lately for casual shooting I just use the Nikon J1 anyway and am thinking maybe for more "serious" occasions where I use the Sony F3 I might prefer using an SLR again (maybe because I've become spoiled by the fast AF of the J1)--if it turns out I don't, I shouldn't have a problem getting the money back from selling (so long as people don't have some weird thing about refurbished units).
|IMG_8168ABCD by citori525|
|McKinley meadow by TimR32225|
from Natural meadows
|_DSC2146 by jerste|
from Helios-44 II
|Leopoldsteinersee by RaCor|
from Landscape - Colour #3