Upgrading from D3200

[Jason Nandu]

I've been using my neighbor's Nikon D3200 for a while, to scope out DSLR photography. After a couple of months, I must say I'm definitely interested in it, and want to move further. The one big limitation I feel right now, is focal length. The camera I've been using only came with a kit lens (18-55) and I've often felt the need to zoom farther than that while taking photos. And another I need is a flip-out screen, for my YouTube work.

I'm considering buying a slightly better camera, the Nikon D5200 w/ kit lens, and a good telephoto lens. Is this a viable option? I think I should focus on transcending the limitations I feel right this moment, rather than spending more money on a more expensive model like the D7100. Honestly, I can't really understand what I'd be paying more for, if I were even to get a model like that.

I use the manual mode, aperture priority and occasionally the shutter speed priority. The lens I've been using doesn't auto-focus correctly (it's broken, I think), so I've gotten used to manual focusing. With all that in mind, what features do I need in a telephoto lens? VR? AF? And, for your first-time telephoto, do you go 200mm or 300mm? I don't mind using a tripod at all. Piling these features on and off the table results in considerable variations in price; I can push my budget to 300mm AF VR, but I'd rather not.

So... anyone?

 

[Tom_N]

Is this a viable option? I think I should focus on transcending the limitations I feel right this moment, rather than spending more money on a more expensive model like the D7100. Honestly, I can't really understand what I'd be paying more for, if I were even to get a model like that.

The D7xxx series has some advantages over the D5xxx series:

• Better viewfinder (pentaprism-based, rather than pentamirror-based)
• Dual control dials (for less menu diving)
• Ability to wirelessly control other Nikon CLS flashes using the built-in flash
• Ability to use auto-focus lenses that lack a built-in focus motor
• Ability to use some even older Nikon lenses that you are unlikely to encounter
• Somewhat sturdier construction

Note that many of these are about convenience features, rather than image quality. The D5xxx series have their own advantages, namely the fully-articulated LCD screen (D7xxx cameras still have fixed screens) and lower costs.

Nikon introduced the D5200 in 2012, and there have been three new models ( the D5300, D5500 and D5600) since. They have very similar specifications – but if you're buying new, it might be easier to find a good price on a D5500 or D5600 than to find someone with a new D5200 who isn't scalping it.

I use the manual mode, aperture priority and occasionally the shutter speed priority. The lens I've been using doesn't auto-focus correctly (it's broken, I think), so I've gotten used to manual focusing.

Check the switches on the lens and on the camera. Some Nikon bodies and lenses have switches to put them into manual focusing mode (so you won't be fighting a motor, and break anything). You have to set the switches to 'A' for motorized auto-focus.

With all that in mind, what features do I need in a telephoto lens? VR? AF?

VR is good to have, especially on a telephoto lens. VR stands for "Vibration Reduction", Nikon's version of image stabilization.

AF means auto-focus. On a D5xxx body, you'll want lenses with built-in focus motors. For Nikon lenses, that means AF-S or AF-P (the -S and -P stand for motor types). Plain AF means the lens does not have a built-in focus motor (so on a D5xxx, you will be supplying all of the "motor power" with your fingers). Don't get an AF-P lens unless you verify that it is compatible with the camera; compatibility is very limited. AF-S lenses are broadly compatible.

Third-party lens makers may have their own names for image stabilization (e.g., "OS"), and their own ways of specifying whether their lenses include focus motors.

 

[tedolf]

What are you taking photo's of that you need 450mm equivalent focal length for?

tEdolph

 

[Sheacash]

If you're doing video work (Youtube?) strongly consider a mirrorless camera. DSLR's are not ideally set up for video. Panasonic is strong in video and the G85/G7 and GH5/GH4 are excellent cameras. They are also good for long reach, due to the higher crop factor - a 300mm lens on a full frame is 300mm, the same lens on a Nikon APS-C camera is equivalent to 450mm and on a Micro Four Thirds sensor it's equivalent to 600mm

 

[PhotoTeach2]

What are you taking photo's of that you need 450mm equivalent focal length for?

A SILLY question ...

I lived for years with only 200mm max, (80-200 f/2.8). Note that I did have a 500mm but never used it because it was too heavy to always carry, and the times I did have it with me, the subject/animal was gone before I got it mounted.

But then got a Sony HX-100 and found I used the (instantly available) 800mm.

I did trade it in for a FZ-200 because the 600mm-EFL was f/2.8 and I needed it for lower light.

And now I do miss the 600 because the FZ-1000 is limited to 400mm-EFL, (and use digital-zoom all the time to 3200mm-EFL. (Fun - FuN - FUN !!!)

 

[PhotoTeach2]

I've been using my neighbor's Nikon D3200 for a while, to scope out DSLR photography. After a couple of months, I must say I'm definitely interested in it, and want to move further. The one big limitation I feel right now, is focal length. The camera I've been using only came with a kit lens (18-55) and I've often felt the need to zoom farther than that while taking photos. And another I need is a flip-out screen, for my YouTube work.

I'm considering buying a slightly better camera, the Nikon D5200 w/ kit lens, and a good telephoto lens. Is this a viable option? I think I should focus on transcending the limitations I feel right this moment, rather than spending more money on a more expensive model like the D7100. Honestly, I can't really understand what I'd be paying more for, if I were even to get a model like that.

I use the manual mode, aperture priority and occasionally the shutter speed priority. The lens I've been using doesn't auto-focus correctly (it's broken, I think), so I've gotten used to manual focusing. With all that in mind, what features do I need in a telephoto lens? VR? AF? And, for your first-time telephoto, do you go 200mm or 300mm? I don't mind using a tripod at all. Piling these features on and off the table results in considerable variations in price; I can push my budget to 300mm AF VR, but I'd rather not.

So... anyone?

I shot with dSLR's for most of my 57+ years in photography.

And dSLR's were once necessary for mounting wider & longer WA/TELE lenses.

BUT ... it is now a 65+ year technology and MirrorLess can allow the same thing with MANY more options and features that are not possible w/ dSLR's because of their inherent mirror limitations. (inc. video)

So I also recommend MirrorLess.

They are available in all sensor size ...

Sony A7R-II w/ FF

Sony a6000/6300/6500 w/ APS

Panasonic G7 / GX85 etc. w/ m4/3

Panasonic FZ-1000/2500 or Sony RX-10xx for 1"-type sensor

Panasonic FZ-200/330 for 1/2.3"

(Note that the FZ-1000/2500 has a FULLY-articulating LCD and 1/4000s flash-sync for longer range fill-flash and ability to darken background w/ closer subjects.)

 

[Fotoni]

Both sensors have fixed pattern noise issue with deep shadows and it will become visible, if you have to brighten them.

Get at least D5300 or D7200

 

[baloo_buc]

How much reach do you want. I would rather get 18-105 mm VR or 18-140 mm VR than a combo that switches at 55 mm (e.g. 18-55 mm and 55-200 mm).

Find the kit with the lens as this would be cheaper.

I would avoid Nikon D5200 because of the sensor that has some flaws. I would rather buy Nikon D3300 (an improved version of D3200) if the longer lens will restrict the budget.

My recommendation would be Nikon D5300 with 18-140 mm VR or, if budget permits, Nikon D7200 with the same lens. You may find that some convenience features have a huge impact on IQ (e.g. AF Fine Tune).

 

[Jessica M]

I've been using my neighbor's Nikon D3200 for a while, to scope out DSLR photography. After a couple of months, I must say I'm definitely interested in it, and want to move further. The one big limitation I feel right now, is focal length. The camera I've been using only came with a kit lens (18-55) and I've often felt the need to zoom farther than that while taking photos. And another I need is a flip-out screen, for my YouTube work.

I'm considering buying a slightly better camera, the Nikon D5200 w/ kit lens, and a good telephoto lens. Is this a viable option? I think I should focus on transcending the limitations I feel right this moment, rather than spending more money on a more expensive model like the D7100. Honestly, I can't really understand what I'd be paying more for, if I were even to get a model like that.

The D5200 is a great option for you. I have that camera. It takes great photos and videos. It also accepts an external microphone.

I use the manual mode, aperture priority and occasionally the shutter speed priority. The lens I've been using doesn't auto-focus correctly (it's broken, I think), so I've gotten used to manual focusing. With all that in mind, what features do I need in a telephoto lens? VR? AF? And, for your first-time telephoto, do you go 200mm or 300mm? I don't mind using a tripod at all. Piling these features on and off the table results in considerable variations in price; I can push my budget to 300mm AF VR, but I'd rather not.

So... anyone?

Can't answer the telephoto question because you haven't stated what type of photography you plan to do with that telephoto lens. In general, though, at 300mm, you'd likely need a tripod.

 

[Franglais91]

Your major problem seems to be that your kit lens has a range of focal lengths that is too restricted and that it seems to be broken. You could start just by buying a new lens for your D3200. There is a wide variety of trans-standard lenses available.

- 18-55 = tried an older version, didn't especially like it

- 18-70 = really old lens with no VR (makes images sharper in low light) plus it's hardly any longer than the 18-55. I liked it a lot.

- 18-105 = tried it didn't like it much

- 18-140 = this for me is the current sweet spot. It has a very useful range of focal lengths, it's very sharp and not very big/expensive

- 18-200 = older than the 18-140 the image quality drops off over 150mm unless you use f8-f11.

- 18-300 = two versions available. Never tried them. For me these lenses are too big and heavy for a small body.

If you want a swivel screen - the D7100 and D7200 don't have one so you're looking at the D5xxx series.

The D7100 and D7200 are more orientated towards action than the other series. They have extra wheels and buttons which allow you to change camera parameters with the camera up to your eye rather than plunge into the menus on the LCD screen.

Think carefully before making your choice. If you buy a body + kit lens then the lens is almost given away - much cheaper than buying a lens then buying the body separately.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

Your major problem seems to be that your kit lens has a range of focal lengths that is too restricted and that it seems to be broken. You could start just by buying a new lens for your D3200. There is a wide variety of trans-standard lenses available.

- 18-55 = tried an older version, didn't especially like it

- 18-70 = really old lens with no VR (makes images sharper in low light) plus it's hardly any longer than the 18-55. I liked it a lot.

- 18-105 = tried it didn't like it much

- 18-140 = this for me is the current sweet spot. It has a very useful range of focal lengths, it's very sharp and not very big/expensive

- 18-200 = older than the 18-140 the image quality drops off over 150mm unless you use f8-f11.

- 18-300 = two versions available. Never tried them. For me these lenses are too big and heavy for a small body.

If you want a swivel screen - the D7100 and D7200 don't have one so you're looking at the D5xxx series.

The D7100 and D7200 are more orientated towards action than the other series. They have extra wheels and buttons which allow you to change camera parameters with the camera up to your eye rather than plunge into the menus on the LCD screen.

Think carefully before making your choice. If you buy a body + kit lens then the lens is almost given away - much cheaper than buying a lens then buying the body separately.

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

 

[tedolf]

Your major problem seems to be that your kit lens has a range of focal lengths that is too restricted and that it seems to be broken. You could start just by buying a new lens for your D3200. There is a wide variety of trans-standard lenses available.

- 18-55 = tried an older version, didn't especially like it

- 18-70 = really old lens with no VR (makes images sharper in low light) plus it's hardly any longer than the 18-55. I liked it a lot.

- 18-105 = tried it didn't like it much

- 18-140 = this for me is the current sweet spot. It has a very useful range of focal lengths, it's very sharp and not very big/expensive

- 18-200 = older than the 18-140 the image quality drops off over 150mm unless you use f8-f11.

- 18-300 = two versions available. Never tried them. For me these lenses are too big and heavy for a small body.

If you want a swivel screen - the D7100 and D7200 don't have one so you're looking at the D5xxx series.

The D7100 and D7200 are more orientated towards action than the other series. They have extra wheels and buttons which allow you to change camera parameters with the camera up to your eye rather than plunge into the menus on the LCD screen.

Think carefully before making your choice. If you buy a body + kit lens then the lens is almost given away - much cheaper than buying a lens then buying the body separately.

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

Your major problem seems to be that your kit lens has a range of focal lengths that is too restricted and that it seems to be broken. You could start just by buying a new lens for your D3200. There is a wide variety of trans-standard lenses available.

- 18-55 = tried an older version, didn't especially like it

- 18-70 = really old lens with no VR (makes images sharper in low light) plus it's hardly any longer than the 18-55. I liked it a lot.

- 18-105 = tried it didn't like it much

- 18-140 = this for me is the current sweet spot. It has a very useful range of focal lengths, it's very sharp and not very big/expensive

- 18-200 = older than the 18-140 the image quality drops off over 150mm unless you use f8-f11.

- 18-300 = two versions available. Never tried them. For me these lenses are too big and heavy for a small body.

If you want a swivel screen - the D7100 and D7200 don't have one so you're looking at the D5xxx series.

The D7100 and D7200 are more orientated towards action than the other series. They have extra wheels and buttons which allow you to change camera parameters with the camera up to your eye rather than plunge into the menus on the LCD screen.

Think carefully before making your choice. If you buy a body + kit lens then the lens is almost given away - much cheaper than buying a lens then buying the body separately.

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

Many (most) people, (especially beginners), with dSLR's still feel they are "best" and don't know about the advantages of MirrorLess.

This is a "beginners" forum and our responsibly to as fully inform as possible.

 

[Tom_N]

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

Many (most) people, (especially beginners), with dSLR's still feel they are "best" and don't know about the advantages of MirrorLess.

This is a "beginners" forum and our responsibly to as fully inform as possible.

Which, as 'tedolf' implies, means NOT bashing DSLRs. It means acknowledging that DSLRs have strengths and not merely weaknesses, and that beginners can make better choices (for themselves) if they know strengths and weaknesses of both sides.

Another issue: if a beginner is looking at DSLRs, and asking about lenses, then presumably the mirrorless alternative that would be most relevant would be MILC (e.g., Four Thirds System cameras). The Panasonic FZ-1000 and FZ-2500 are fixed-lens cameras, and not in the same category as DSLRs and Four-Thirds System cameras for anyone who might be looking to build a collection of lenses.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

Many (most) people, (especially beginners), with dSLR's still feel they are "best" and don't know about the advantages of MirrorLess.

This is a "beginners" forum and our responsibly to as fully inform as possible.

Which, as 'tedolf' implies, means NOT bashing DSLRs. It means acknowledging that DSLRs have strengths and not merely weaknesses, and that beginners can make better choices (for themselves) if they know strengths and weaknesses of both sides.

Another issue: if a beginner is looking at DSLRs, and asking about lenses, then presumably the mirrorless alternative that would be most relevant would be MILC (e.g., Four Thirds System cameras). The Panasonic FZ-1000 and FZ-2500 are fixed-lens cameras, and not in the same category as DSLRs and Four-Thirds System cameras for anyone who might be looking to build a collection of lenses.

I am trying hard to not "bash" dSLR"s, (I really am).

They have longer battery-life, and (FF) OVF"s can indeed look more "natural" and have "0" lag so can be better for BIF.

 

[tedolf]

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

Many (most) people, (especially beginners), with dSLR's still feel they are "best" and don't know about the advantages of MirrorLess.

This is a "beginners" forum and our responsibly to as fully inform as possible.

Which, as 'tedolf' implies, means NOT bashing DSLRs. It means acknowledging that DSLRs have strengths and not merely weaknesses, and that beginners can make better choices (for themselves) if they know strengths and weaknesses of both sides.

Another issue: if a beginner is looking at DSLRs, and asking about lenses, then presumably the mirrorless alternative that would be most relevant would be MILC (e.g., Four Thirds System cameras). The Panasonic FZ-1000 and FZ-2500 are fixed-lens cameras, and not in the same category as DSLRs and Four-Thirds System cameras for anyone who might be looking to build a collection of lenses.

I am trying hard to not "bash" dSLR"s, (I really am).

They have longer battery-life, and (FF) OVF"s can indeed look more "natural" and have "0" lag so can be better for BIF.

They also have better tracking AF than most mirrorless cameras and are thus often better at sports photogaphy-something a beginner might be interested in.

So, saying that the "only real upgrade is to mirrorless" is not only wrong, it is disingenuous because you know better.

You are purposely misleading the OP.

You should be ashamed.

tedolph

 

[Rich Rosen]

I've been using my neighbor's Nikon D3200 for a while, to scope out DSLR photography. After a couple of months, I must say I'm definitely interested in it, and want to move further. The one big limitation I feel right now, is focal length. The camera I've been using only came with a kit lens (18-55) and I've often felt the need to zoom farther than that while taking photos. And another I need is a flip-out screen, for my YouTube work.

I'm considering buying a slightly better camera, the Nikon D5200 w/ kit lens, and a good telephoto lens. Is this a viable option? I think I should focus on transcending the limitations I feel right this moment, rather than spending more money on a more expensive model like the D7100. Honestly, I can't really understand what I'd be paying more for, if I were even to get a model like that.

There are a couple important upgrades in the D7xxx system over the D5xxx system. Just a few first observations; In looking thru the viewfinders, I found the D7100 to be less claustrophobic than the D5200; you have better controls on the D7100 than you do on the D5200. What I mean by that is you don't need to go into the menus as much with the D7100. The grip of the D7100 is slightly better than the 5200. Now to the major spec differences: The 51pt AF system, the AF motor, the frame per second frame rate; are all features that can be a real advantage of the D7100 over the D5200. On this site you can do a comparison of the two cameras for feature differences. If you still find that the Differences don't move you, then maybe the D5200 is your camera. If you haven't already, I would see, touch, feel the two cameras for personal comfort.

I use the manual mode, aperture priority and occasionally the shutter speed priority. The lens I've been using doesn't auto-focus correctly (it's broken, I think), so I've gotten used to manual focusing. With all that in mind, what features do I need in a telephoto lens? VR? AF? And, for your first-time telephoto, do you go 200mm or 300mm? I don't mind using a tripod at all. Piling these features on and off the table results in considerable variations in price; I can push my budget to 300mm AF VR, but I'd rather not.

Another big difference between the D7100 and the D5200 is the ability to be able to auto fine tune focusing on the D7100, a menu feature I was not able to find on the D5200.

So... anyone?

 

[PhotoTeach2]

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

Many (most) people, (especially beginners), with dSLR's still feel they are "best" and don't know about the advantages of MirrorLess.

This is a "beginners" forum and our responsibly to as fully inform as possible.

Which, as 'tedolf' implies, means NOT bashing DSLRs. It means acknowledging that DSLRs have strengths and not merely weaknesses, and that beginners can make better choices (for themselves) if they know strengths and weaknesses of both sides.

Another issue: if a beginner is looking at DSLRs, and asking about lenses, then presumably the mirrorless alternative that would be most relevant would be MILC (e.g., Four Thirds System cameras). The Panasonic FZ-1000 and FZ-2500 are fixed-lens cameras, and not in the same category as DSLRs and Four-Thirds System cameras for anyone who might be looking to build a collection of lenses.

I am trying hard to not "bash" dSLR"s, (I really am).

They have longer battery-life, and (FF) OVF"s can indeed look more "natural" and have "0" lag so can be better for BIF.

They also have better tracking AF than most mirrorless cameras and are thus often better at sports photogaphy-something a beginner might be interested in.

So, saying that the "only real upgrade is to mirrorless" is not only wrong, it is disingenuous because you know better.

You are purposely misleading the OP.

You should be ashamed.

tedolph

But the beginning level dSLR's do not have much better AF, (and there is no question that CD is more "accurate").

So that can be a wash unless you are talking a "big" upgrade, (and then the A7R-II has shown to be equal to PD, and so was the Samsung NX-1 until it was dropped).

But you know the "list" of MirrorLess advantages and options not possible w/ dSLR is much longer

 

[Franglais91]

But the only REAL "upgrade" is to MirrorLess for their many more options & feature.

I now have 10X more shooting opportunities than I ever had w/ dSLR and having 100X more "FUN".

I simply HATE it now when I am forced to "downgrade" and shoot w/ dSLR again.

Many (most) people, (especially beginners), with dSLR's still feel they are "best" and don't know about the advantages of MirrorLess.

This is a "beginners" forum and our responsibly to as fully inform as possible.

Which, as 'tedolf' implies, means NOT bashing DSLRs. It means acknowledging that DSLRs have strengths and not merely weaknesses, and that beginners can make better choices (for themselves) if they know strengths and weaknesses of both sides.

Another issue: if a beginner is looking at DSLRs, and asking about lenses, then presumably the mirrorless alternative that would be most relevant would be MILC (e.g., Four Thirds System cameras). The Panasonic FZ-1000 and FZ-2500 are fixed-lens cameras, and not in the same category as DSLRs and Four-Thirds System cameras for anyone who might be looking to build a collection of lenses.

I am trying hard to not "bash" dSLR"s, (I really am).

They have longer battery-life, and (FF) OVF"s can indeed look more "natural" and have "0" lag so can be better for BIF.

They also have better tracking AF than most mirrorless cameras and are thus often better at sports photogaphy-something a beginner might be interested in.

So, saying that the "only real upgrade is to mirrorless" is not only wrong, it is disingenuous because you know better.

You are purposely misleading the OP.

You should be ashamed.

tedolph

But the beginning level dSLR's do not have much better AF, (and there is no question that CD is more "accurate").

So that can be a wash unless you are talking a "big" upgrade, (and then the A7R-II has shown to be equal to PD, and so was the Samsung NX-1 until it was dropped).

But you know the "list" of MirrorLess advantages and options not possible w/ dSLR is much longer

I have a good friend who decided to "upgrade" from an amateur Nikon D5xxx DSLR to the latest Sony A7R ii with 24-240 lens. She does mainly travel photography.

Her first results were catastrophic. She does grab shots, quickly seizing the opportunity to do a shot. The Sony autofocus was not getting focus on the subject instantly, something that the Nikon did every time, out of the box.

Since things have improved. I think that she has learnt to give the Sony more time to get the focus. But she now takes the Nikon with her as well on holidays for those grab shots.

 

[bobn2]

I've been using my neighbor's Nikon D3200 for a while, to scope out DSLR photography. After a couple of months, I must say I'm definitely interested in it, and want to move further. The one big limitation I feel right now, is focal length. The camera I've been using only came with a kit lens (18-55) and I've often felt the need to zoom farther than that while taking photos. And another I need is a flip-out screen, for my YouTube work.

I'm considering buying a slightly better camera, the Nikon D5200 w/ kit lens, and a good telephoto lens. Is this a viable option? I think I should focus on transcending the limitations I feel right this moment, rather than spending more money on a more expensive model like the D7100. Honestly, I can't really understand what I'd be paying more for, if I were even to get a model like that.

I use the manual mode, aperture priority and occasionally the shutter speed priority. The lens I've been using doesn't auto-focus correctly (it's broken, I think), so I've gotten used to manual focusing. With all that in mind, what features do I need in a telephoto lens? VR? AF? And, for your first-time telephoto, do you go 200mm or 300mm? I don't mind using a tripod at all. Piling these features on and off the table results in considerable variations in price; I can push my budget to 300mm AF VR, but I'd rather not.

So... anyone?

If you use manual mode , the D7100, D7200 and soon to be released D7500 have the huge advantage of two control wheels, which allow you to adjust both shutter and aperture together.