# First dslr - D5100 Vs. D5200 which one ?



## BluePhoton (Jul 7, 2013)

Hi All,

So I am in the market for my first dslr. Till now I have had many point and shoot cameras and have played around with manual mode at times, this got me interested in some more advance stuff and have decided to get a decent dslr which I will not upgrade for a long time.

Want to take up photography as a hobby.

I did lot of reading and comparing different models between Cannon and Nikon and have decided to go with Nikon, as far as model goes, I did some reading and youtube reviews of D5100 and D5200 and I am confused as to which one should I go with?
D7000 and D7100 is out of my budget so I am not even looking at them 

from the reviews, I guess the main differences between D5100 and 5200 is the focus points and the superior video capabilities of the later.. 

so my question is, is the focus points that important ? do they improve the image quality ? currently the price difference between the two is $200.

any suggestions from you experts would really help me fall over the fence.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Gavjenks (Jul 7, 2013)

Yes, pretty much what you said.  Focus points and movies.

The focus points DO matter, but only if you expect yourself to be shooting a lot of moving objects that the camera needs to constantly re-focus on.  If you are going to shoot mostly still subjects like people portraits, landscapes, still lifes, products, wildlife that is not moving, etc., then the AF points arent a very necessary expense, because they won't do a better job of focusing on a static object.  If you are shooting sports, birds in flight, etc., then they are probably worth the extra money.

Also, if shooting sports and fast moving things, 5 FPS vs. 4 FPS doesn't hurt, either.


Also, note that the extra focus points do not matter in live view mode, which includes movies, because when the mirror is up, no light gets to that autofocus system (live view uses a different one).  The 5200 is still better for movies for a variety of other reasons, but the AF points and movie do not COMPOUND on top of one another as benefits, because they happen to be mutually exclusive at any one given time.


----------



## BluePhoton (Jul 8, 2013)

yeah that makes sense..

I will be shooting mostly still pics and not sports.. so I guess the 5100 looks like the winner !


----------



## Solarflare (Jul 8, 2013)

The D5200 is a bit weird. Nikon made it a lot more expensive and upped its Autofocus and Metering, but didnt improved the rest of the camera. So now we have a quite expensive camera that however doesnt fit the bill when it comes to features like second command wheel, second card slot for backup, or advanced flash features.


----------



## BluePhoton (Jul 8, 2013)

Solarflare said:


> The D5200 is a bit weird. Nikon made it a lot more expensive and upped its Autofocus and Metering, but didnt improved the rest of the camera. So now we have a quite expensive camera that however doesnt fit the bill when it comes to features like second command wheel, second card slot for backup, or advanced flash features.





leona589 said:


> I have D5100 and I'm happy  I think d5200 is too expensive and doesnt offer anything interesting.




I am new to photography so I am still learning those great technicalities but since you both have the 5100, how does it perform shooting moving objects ?

I want to get an good allrounder camera since I am very sure that I am not going to upgrade it for a good amount of time... the only investment I might do would be on lenses..


----------



## BluePhoton (Jul 11, 2013)

There are two versions available for this model:

Body plus 18-55 vr lens
Body plus 18-55 and 55-200 vr lens

Which kit should I go with?

Thanks


----------



## DanielLewis76 (Jul 12, 2013)

I have the D5200 and am very pleased with it. I shoot a fair bit of sports and have found the camera itself great. 

For me though it seems more down to the lens(s) you have than the camera and I can't comment to much as I cannot compare against the 5100.


----------



## StandingBear1983 (Jul 15, 2013)

BluePhoton said:


> There are two versions available for this model:
> 
> Body plus 18-55 vr lens
> Body plus 18-55 and 55-200 vr lens
> ...



I would definetly go with the D5100. if you have the cash get the kit 18-55 and the 35mm 1.8G. if you don't just get the regular kit 18-55 and save for the 35mm 1.8g or the 50mm 1.8g depending on what you like to shoot...the kit lenses are quite alright to start with...though once one shoots prime lenses they never go back,  that's my opinion anyway


----------



## sashbar (Jul 15, 2013)

I do not know about the movies, I do not care about it, but other than that I think the only real difference for a beginner is 24Mp against 16Mp. 
24Mp give you a lot more freedom to crop, which is important for a beginner. This is the thing you will face most of the time in post processing with your fist DSLR - you make a shot, open it in PS and realise it had to be much closer. Unless of course you are a genius or already worked on your compositions with your point and shoot... Focal points, metering - I would not really care - D5100 is more than adequate, never had any problems or any need for more focus points etc. 
If you want to shoot fast moving objects, then probably yes, as pointed here it may be a factor. But it is not a deal breaker IMHO.


----------



## TMHahn (Jul 15, 2013)

I second what sashbar said. I have a D5100 and I love it. I also have a D7100, which is a completely different camera compared to the D5100, but the one thing I can comment on is the 16Mp D5100 versus the 24Mp D7100. If you can afford the D5200, I would go with that simply for the Mp. If you decide to go with the D5100, I think you'll be happy with it. Again, I love mine.


----------



## broadbean (Jul 23, 2013)

Been using a D5100 for a couple of years, and mainly bought it for the wife. We're both still learning the technical stuff, otherwise most photos shot in P or Auto with the occasional dabble into manual settings.

Decided a deal on the D5200 was too good to pass up, so will be selling the well loved D5100 soon. The improved autofocus is interesting. The 9 point on the D5100 was anaemic compared to "equivalent" Canons, and if it's easier to focus on moving objects then I'm all for it! Not as fussed going from 16MP to 24MP. In all honesty, the D3200 is also worth a look if you're thinking D5100 but not fussed with the articulated LCD.

I haven't used the 18-55mm that came with my D40x. I only got the kit lens with the D5100 and D5200 only because I thought it would be easier to sell the cameras later. In its place our main "go to" glass is the 18-200mm VR as I dislike having to change lenses when out. I also have the 18-70mm for indoors when I wanted sharper, and the 35mm f/1.8. Will want a longer lens than 200mm.

So, if you can stretch it, I reckon go for the D5200. If not, check out the D3200 vs D5100.


----------



## apvm (Jul 23, 2013)

If you can stretch your budget, forget the D3xxx or D5xxx, get in this order either D90, D7000 or D7100. you won't regret the extra control and the auto focus motor.


----------



## MKins (Jul 25, 2013)

I love the D5100.  I actually did a comparison using the D5100  vs Canon T4i and I still say go with the D5100.  Now for the price difference between the D5100 and D5200 I think you are better off going with the D5100 kit.  It is still less than the D5200.


----------



## btraven (Jun 15, 2014)

There's no right answer; "if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him". Welcome to DSLRWorld.


----------



## bigal1000 (Jun 15, 2014)

D3300 is what you should get only my opinion though.


----------



## Afshin55 (Jun 30, 2014)

5100 and 5200 are at same level in many things but sensor which is very important the fucusing points and mega pixels and more speed and etc... all comes from the sensor
if you want st cheeper by d3200 that has many spcs of 5200.
good luck.


----------



## greybeard (Jun 30, 2014)

The Nikon store has refurb D7000 for $619.00, just say'en


----------

