Nikon D3200 or Nikon D5100?

[crystalclr77]

Hello All,

I'm upgrading from a point and shoot and have been looking at these two cameras. I'm looking for a camera I can grow into that has great macro setting and zoom. In researching, I don't see too many differences in these camera besides the D3200 having 24.2 MP and the D5100 having 16.2 MP. A store in my area has a kit for both cameras that includes a VR DX Zoom Lens, camera bag, and SD HC card. The D3200 is $699.99 American and the D5100 is $649.99. Here is the link to compare http://www.hhgregg.com/webapp/wcs/st...tentryId=12007. To be completely honest with you, I don't know what most of this means. I plan on taking a class once I have purchased the camera. The sale is only on until September 8th, 2012. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[Melkus]

Both would be fine for starting out you can't go wrong with either one. In looking at the specs and similarities I get a feeling Nikon was trying to give you the Nikon D5100 in the D3200 but without the swivel LCD. Sure the sensor is different, the ISO sensitivity is slightly better on the Nikon D5100 in the extended range by being a stop higher and the viewfinder slightly different but that's about it. For me a beginner or even an experienced amateur looking for a "light" DSLR (or even a second everyday DSLR for the pros), the Nikon D3200 is a very good camera to have. Of course if you are thinking of shooting lots of movie with your DSLR, the swivel screen will push you more towards the Nikon D5100. For the price on these two cameras, I think going for the Nikon D3200 would be the smart choice.

:Get the Nikon D3200 if you are working on improving your shooting, just want easy DSLR quality shots or want a red DSLR from Nikon rather than a "lesser" brand

:Get the Nikon D5100 if you are planning to do lots of DSLR videography and want something you won't need to put aside even after you get really good (as the pro cameras don't tend to have swivel LCDs)

[Manfred M]

In the current Nikon DSLR lineup, the 3000 series cameras are entry level, the 5000 are mid-level and 7000 is high-end amateur lines. The 3200 is a fairly new camera and has a updated sensor, but frankly, I wouldn't get too concerned about the MP count, it really does not make that much difference in day-to-day use. DSLRs do not have macro settings per se; you have to buy a macro lens to do macro photography. The D3200 was released earlier this year and has Nikon's latest sensor and image processor technology, and as a first glance I like the external control layout better than on the D5100, as it is more in line with the other more recent cameras,

If it were my money, I would probably go for the D3200, as it really seems priced and positioned as a D5100 replacement On the other hand if you want to save yourself a bit of money, the D3100 (essentially the same generation camera as the D5100) will save you a few hundred dollars. If you are worried about sale prices, consider looking at the B&H or Adorama websites. I've bought from both of these well known camera stores and highly recommend them.

[rtbaum]

Based on reviews by dpreview (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5100/), I would give the edge to the D5100. It seems to me that the 5100 has more features that would enable you to grow. There are many on this forum whom will undoubtably chime in soon which much more detailed advice.

[crystalclr77]

Wow Paul! You broke it down so I can understand and I appreciate that very much. I thought posting on a forum may have been a shot in the dark, but I am extremely impressed with your knowledge and response time. Thank you!

[crystalclr77]

Thank you so much! I'm going to check out those websites for sure.

[crystalclr77]

Thank you for the link!

[Black Pearl]

I'd go D5100:

The flip-out screen is brilliant.
Exposure Bracketing - missing on the D3200.
Better high ISO performance - its the same sensor as the D7000


Unless you're going to invest in some serious lenses then all the extra pixels in the D3200 are wasted as the 'kit' lens will never, ever, ever resolve that level of detail - in which case you're just filling up SD cards and HDD with files that aren't quite good enough.
Sony have given me a A57 to 'play with' for a while, I've to report back my impressions and I assume they think I'll sell more of them haven been given one to try. To say I hate it is an understatement, its the most frustrating camera I've used with so many auto features that simply won't go away or are deliberately difficult to override. I hate the slow EVF, I hate the AF, I hate the the thing full stop - but - the flip out screen is brilliant. I took the bairn to the beach yesterday for a play in the rock pools and shot over 300 frames, the vast majority of them had the screen out and were shot at low angles. I've a few crackers that I'd have struggled to get with the D300s. When looking at the two Nikon's that are very close in overall spec it would be major things like the screen that would swing it for me.

[Melkus]

Useful page about this.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon-D5100

[ricarecare]

Useful page about this.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon-D5100

also, http://comparecamera.org/c/nikon-d3200-vs-nikon-d5100/
their price comparison might be handy

[Dave Humphries]

I'd beware both those comparison sites (or any others), they sometimes contain factual data errors and some of the highlights/conclusions/comments they make can really mislead the inexperienced (and amuse others)

e.g. Comparecamera says the D5100 doesn't have fine tune of WB, but p.83 of the Nikon manual says it does, I know which I believe

e.g. Snapsort:
"24.1 MP vs 16.1 MP Capture around 50% more detail in your photos" - no mention of the part the lens might play in this!

"Almost the same", or my preferred suggestion "irrelevant difference", should be used far more often

e.g. Snapsort:
"Larger sensor (on D5100) APS-C 23.6x15.6mm vs APS-C 23.2x15.4mm Almost the same" - so why give it as a reason to buy the D5100?

Not to mention there's shortly to be a D5200 (as I type mid-November 2012), is due out in UK on 6th December 2012.

Cheers,

[AB26]

Hi,
If your budget allows it, get the new D5200.

[lamo]

hi,
m lamo, newly joined member....
comparison between Nikon D5100 and Nikon D3200 specification and performance it is quiet similar. so, i want to know which one is better and which one to purchase. could you please help me out?? thankyou.

[Manfred M]

hi,
m lamo, newly joined member....
comparison between Nikon D5100 and Nikon D3200 specification and performance it is quiet similar. so, i want to know which one is better and which one to purchase. could you please help me out?? thankyou.

This is a question only you can answer, because we don't know your shooting requirements. From an image quality standpoint, you are unlikely to notice any real difference. What one gains in a more expensive camera are additional features that will help under some specific shooting condition. The 5200 has an articulating screen (people either love it or hate it), slightly better low light sensitivity, one more stop in the ISO range. I also believe it allows for exposure brackets, which the D3200 does not, etc, etc.

It really depends if these are features you might need and use and that they are worth the money. If you area a casual shooter, the D3200 might be just fine. If you are looking at getting into photography in a more serious way, then the D5100 (or D5200) might be more for you. If you are already a serious photographer who has been out of it for some time, you might want to look beyond these entry level (D3200) or mid-range (D5100) cameras.

[nimitzbenedicto]

hi,
m lamo, newly joined member....
comparison between Nikon D5100 and Nikon D3200 specification and performance it is quiet similar. so, i want to know which one is better and which one to purchase. could you please help me out?? thankyou.

Hi lamo,

I suggest you backread previous posts right here on this thread.

I'm sure they'll give you ideas.

HTH

[lamo]

This is a question only you can answer, because we don't know your shooting requirements. From an image quality standpoint, you are unlikely to notice any real difference. What one gains in a more expensive camera are additional features that will help under some specific shooting condition. The 5200 has an articulating screen (people either love it or hate it), slightly better low light sensitivity, one more stop in the ISO range. I also believe it allows for exposure brackets, which the D3200 does not, etc, etc.

It really depends if these are features you might need and use and that they are worth the money. If you area a casual shooter, the D3200 might be just fine. If you are looking at getting into photography in a more serious way, then the D5100 (or D5200) might be more for you. If you are already a serious photographer who has been out of it for some time, you might want to look beyond these entry level (D3200) or mid-range (D5100) cameras.

then i should go for D5100, thankyou so much...

[MKins]

I really think for the price difference the D5100 is the way to go. I did a quick review on both of these camera's D5100 vs D3200 I even looked into the Canon t4i.

I think it will help.

[jassminnadia]

Nice Question, Nikon D3200 is new than Nikon D5100 and it can provide a good image quality, while Nikon D5100 have a rotate screen that allow you to take pictures in places where you can't go behind your camera.
i suggest For who are new to DSLR technology, this article (Is Nikon D3200 the best DSLR for beginners? ), it can point you to the right DSLR camera that Meets your needs.

[Manfred M]

Nice Question, Nikon D3200 is new than Nikon D5100 and it can provide a good image quality, while Nikon D5100 have a rotate screen that allow you to take pictures in places where you can't go behind your camera.
i suggest For who are new to DSLR technology, this article (Is Nikon D3200 the best DSLR for beginners? ), it can point you to the right DSLR camera that Meets your needs.

Welcome to CiC. If you wouldn't completing your profile (access this functionality via the "My Profile" tab on this page) and update your name and where you are from? We are a fairly informal group here and tend to go on a first name basis.

I would also like to draw your attention to the start date of this thread; it's around 18 months old, so your comments are a bit late in coming...