# Nikon D5100 OR D3200??????????



## b_rockin_64

I am looking to step it up to a DSLR and further myself in the photography world.. I have narrowed it down to the D3200 or the D5100 for my first camera. If I had the money I would most certainly get the D7000 but yeah not going to happen at this point. I have read review after review on both cameras and yet I am still soo undecided. I know with the 24 MP the images will be sharper but on the other hand the D5100 seems just about the same if not slightly better with the 16 MP. I have never used a DLSR before and I dont mind not having a guide to help like the D3200 has, I feel without it I will learn more about my camera and what it can do if I challenge myself to learn it. 

I plan on shooting landscapes, night time photos (ex: bridges with lights, city lights, Etc..), close up of plants/flowers (ex: after snowfall going out at sunrise to catch the icicles/frost, dew/water on flower petals), photos with people in it even tho I dont have much expierence shooting people, and hopefully work my way up to action shots (ex: dogs, some skateboarding), Sunrises and sunsets, basically anything I can capture in time  With all that said I want to take into consideration that I do get that AMAZING shot I would defiantly want to blow it up even maybe as big as a poster to have on display. As well I do plan on taking a beginner photorgraphy class once I do have the camera so I can absoutly learn how to use it properly. I know there are better cameras out there but Im just breaking the tip of the iceberg for right now and plan on working my way to a D7000 or better. 

So my question is after all that said is.. What would be better for me in what I want to do... I know it will come down to more of how it feels in my hands and where all the buttons are for easy access to me.. I feel that wont really matter too much for me since I have tiny hands lol I just want to know which one will get the job done better while I learn and better myself. 

It would really help me too if you have used both or either cameras and attched some photos of the things I said I wanted to do with my camera, I know its not the camera that makes the pictures but the person behind it as well as lenses, and I dont want to get to ahead of myself with lenses just yet so Im going to stick with the kit ones the camera comes with till I know what I am doing somewhat


----------



## gardy

If you don't mind buying used strongly suggest looking around for a used d7000 as I suggested in another thread I've seen quite a few lately for pretty good prices. I went for a D90 for my first DSLR, and outgrew it way too fast for my likening (and wallet) shop around and do a lot of research. As far as for your needs, I would suggest the 3200 f you can't get something a step up, the image quality is great and good dynamic range, however I have never used a 5100


----------



## b_rockin_64

there isnt a great selection around where I am at for used ones and I do not trust ebay/amazong when it comes down to something like this.... Like I said if I could I would get the 7000 but its just not going to work out at this time. :-(


----------



## TheLost

Keep in mind the price on the D7000 is dropping fast and the price of the D5200 in the U.S has not been announced.  Rumors say it will be around $1kUS with a lens (you can get a D7000 kit for $1k right now).

ignoring all that...  I like the simplicity and price of the D3200.


----------



## b_rockin_64

Yeah Defiantly don't have $1k right now thats why I was asking about the d3200 and d5100... Im leaning more towards the d5100.. but I want to know how sharp of an image it can get.. or is the d3200 sharper.. because believe me if I could I would buy the 7000 in a heart beat..


----------



## gardy

It's all going to depend on the lens for the most part when it comes to how sharp the image is, if you get a body and a prime or two it will produce a lot sharper images than a kit lens, that being said, on a budget a body and a 35mm 1.8g would be a good choice


----------



## b_rockin_64

I defiantly planned on getting a 35mm 1.8g for sure after I have had the camera and the kit lenses for a while.. you have to understand I want to start very basic and grow and grow... IM super serious about this.. I want to learn as much as I can and retain as much as I can.... sorry if I sound stupid for wanting to stick to the kit lenses for now.. but I just dont want to jump into things to fast ya know... Im not completly in the dark when it comes to photography.. just wanting to learn is all


----------



## gardy

b_rockin_64 said:


> I defiantly planned on getting a 35mm 1.8g for sure after I have had the camera and the kit lenses for a while.. you have to understand I want to start very basic and grow and grow... IM super serious about this.. I want to learn as much as I can and retain as much as I can.... sorry if I sound stupid for wanting to stick to the kit lenses for now.. but I just dont want to jump into things to fast ya know... Im not completly in the dark when it comes to photography.. just wanting to learn is all



I understand completely wanting to stay simple starting out, I wouldn't see it as a hindrance though to start with a prime, it won't have the connivence of a zoom but will in most cases give you a much sharper end result, as well as being simple so you don't have to think about the zoom factor and with a kit lens the change in aperture that comes with it. Not trying to persuade either way, I personally think a lot can be learned from using primes


----------



## sapper6fd

The D700 is a dieing body thats due to be replaced in the future.  The D5100 is in the same boat (in face the D5200 has already been anounced).  Even though the D5200 isnt being released in North America yet, I would hold off on any purchase until the D5200 comes out or the  D7000 has a replacement announced.  The D5200 is rumored to have the same or similar sensor in it (This is what I've heard - I havent looked into it).  

That said, the D7000 is an excelent body.  I would spend the extra cash and jump on that before I jumped on a D5100.  But I would also wait until the new bodies are either released in NA or the D7000 replacement is anounced.  Just my 2 cents.


----------



## b_rockin_64

gardy said:


> b_rockin_64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I defiantly planned on getting a 35mm 1.8g for sure after I have had the camera and the kit lenses for a while.. you have to understand I want to start very basic and grow and grow... IM super serious about this.. I want to learn as much as I can and retain as much as I can.... sorry if I sound stupid for wanting to stick to the kit lenses for now.. but I just dont want to jump into things to fast ya know... Im not completly in the dark when it comes to photography.. just wanting to learn is all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand completely wanting to stay simple starting out, I wouldn't see it as a hindrance though to start with a prime, it won't have the connivence of a zoom but will in most cases give you a much sharper end result, as well as being simple so you don't have to think about the zoom factor and with a kit lens the change in aperture that comes with it. Not trying to persuade either way, I personally think a lot can be learned from using primes
Click to expand...


Thankyou for your help! And I believe it that a lot can be learned.. I have heard nothing but good about primes.


----------



## b_rockin_64

sapper6fd said:


> The D700 is a dieing body thats due to be replaced in the future.  The D5100 is in the same boat (in face the D5200 has already been anounced).  Even though the D5200 isnt being released in North America yet, I would hold off on any purchase until the D5200 comes out or the  D7000 has a replacement announced.  The D5200 is rumored to have the same or similar sensor in it (This is what I've heard - I havent looked into it).
> 
> That said, the D7000 is an excelent body.  I would spend the extra cash and jump on that before I jumped on a D5100.  But I would also wait until the new bodies are either released in NA or the D7000 replacement is anounced.  Just my 2 cents.



Its hard to wait when you have wanted something soo bad for years lol and that bad thing is once those new one comes out there will be talk of a better one ya know.. I just figure start simple cuz by the time I get ready for a better one and have learned some more there will be better than the D7000 ya know..


----------



## gardy

Love them too, like i said its about all that's touched my camera in the last 6 months or so (not counting when I was troubleshooting a back focus issue) when I bought the 85 1.8g I was amazed at what I was getting, I got hooked. Since my body is in for repair at the moment I shall see what I can get with it on the old lady's d3000


----------



## coastalconn

Head over to cameta.  They have d5100 with a kit lens refurbished with a 1 year warranty for about $450.  Learn how to shoot with it.  You may never outgrow it, and if you do the d7000 and next years model will be cheaper then because new models always keep coming out..  Just my humble opinion...


----------



## gryffinwings

b_rockin_64 said:


> gardy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> b_rockin_64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I defiantly planned on getting a 35mm 1.8g for sure after I have had the camera and the kit lenses for a while.. you have to understand I want to start very basic and grow and grow... IM super serious about this.. I want to learn as much as I can and retain as much as I can.... sorry if I sound stupid for wanting to stick to the kit lenses for now.. but I just dont want to jump into things to fast ya know... Im not completly in the dark when it comes to photography.. just wanting to learn is all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand completely wanting to stay simple starting out, I wouldn't see it as a hindrance though to start with a prime, it won't have the connivence of a zoom but will in most cases give you a much sharper end result, as well as being simple so you don't have to think about the zoom factor and with a kit lens the change in aperture that comes with it. Not trying to persuade either way, I personally think a lot can be learned from using primes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thankyou for your help! And I believe it that a lot can be learned.. I have heard nothing but good about primes.
Click to expand...


That's because it's so much easier for a manufacture to design primes, not as many variables to contend with.

If your super serious about photography, then your going to want to have those extra controls that the D7000, D300 or even D90 have to offer. Sensor performance in terms of Mega Pixels and Dynamic range aren't as important as things like light meter capability and ISO noise.

As far buying a good camera, if you can't buy new, buy used. There are deals to be had on used D7000, D300, and D90. Just check Amazon, plenty of used cameras there as well as Adorama, KEH, and Cameta. So definitely look around. I bought a used D200 for $250 that has a little problem with the rubber grips which are replaceable, great camera, so there are definitely deals to be had. Any of the cameras will last you a while and it will take you a while.

Here's the D90 with 18-105mm lens, used at around $700:
Amazon.com: Buying Choices: Nikon D90 12.3MP DX-Format CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 18-105 mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Nikkor Zoom Lens

Another thing you will appreciate is the pentaprism viewfinder that the D90 and D7000 have, the bigger viewfinder will help you with composition, another feature these cameras have is a grid layout that you can activate which will also help with composition.


----------



## sm4him

I can't speak to the D3200, as I haven't used one. However, I do have a D5100.
Sure, if you could afford it, I'd say go for the D7000, as has been suggested. But if you can't, you can't. That's why *I* sprang for the D5100, it was the absolute max of what I could afford to do, and like you, I had to just stick to the kit lens for the first 6 months or so, anyway.

I keep hearing all the "you'll outgrow it too fast" comments or the suggestion that if you are serious about photography, you just need to have something better. Well, I guess I'm slow and not very serious then, because honestly, I'm still fine with my D5100. Sure, I'd *like* a D7000 or better if it were in the budget. But I'd *rather* have better glass, and I'm still okay with my D5100. If I were going to do this for a living, yes, I'd need the better controls, the sturdier build, and all that--but if it's a hobby, even a SERIOUS one, as it is for me--I suspect the D5100 is going to suit me just fine until I just WANT to get something else. 

Lenses--THAT's the key.  Get your 5100 or 3200 with the kit lens now, and start saving those dollars (forget the pennies, you need DOLLARS!  ) and planning your next two or three glass purchases.  Each lens I've purchased has helped improve my results.
I started with the 5100 and 18-55, nothing else for the first six months or so--then got a Tokina 100mm macro; sweet lens!! Still my favorite lens.  Bought a 50mm 1.8; nice lens, but I honestly don't use mine much; then a 55-300mm lens (which went for a swim--after that, I used a donated Tamron from pixmedic for a while; that lens is now in holding to go to my son), finally just bought a 70-300. Aiming for a 70-200 f/2.8 next--need a BUNCH more of them dollars first, though. 

My point is--get the body you can afford and as soon as you can, add the best glass you can afford. Add a flash too, even a cheapie like I've got (Yongnuo 560)--it'll make a huge difference. 
You MAY outgrow the 5100, but there is a LOT that can be done with it before you get to that point.

You can check out my Flickr page or my 500px page--all the photos on those sites are taken with either my 5100, or (the older ones, before last August), with a Canon Powershot. 
I think the largest one I've printed so far was an 18x24, but it looked fine, and I feel certain I could have printed it larger and it would still look good.


----------



## KmH

sapper6fd said:


> The D700 is a dieing body thats due to be replaced in the future.


No doubt the D700 will be replaced eventually. Saying it is a dying body is a ludicrous statement.
D700 cameras will be making professional quality images for decades to come.

I never recommend waiting for new cameras, particular new entry-level cameras because like the D700 cameras that were new years ago still make fine images when used properly.


----------



## sapper6fd

KmH said:


> sapper6fd said:
> 
> 
> 
> The D700 is a dieing body thats due to be replaced in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> No doubt the D700 will be replaced eventually. Saying it is a dying body is a ludicrous statement.
> D700 cameras will be making professional quality images for decades to come.
> 
> I never recommend waiting for new cameras, particular new entry-level cameras because like the D700 cameras that were new years ago still make fine images when used properly.
Click to expand...



Found a typo.  I meant D7000 - not the D700.  And by dieing I mean its on its way to being replaced.  Its still a great camera and will be for years to come.  But why purchase it if a replacement should be announced in the nearr future.  This is what happened with me.  I bought my D90 and a month and a half after the D90 was replaced by the D7000.  I swore and cursed myself for months after I learth this and wished I'd been told what I was saying earlier in this thread before I made the purchase.


----------



## sm4him

sapper6fd said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sapper6fd said:
> 
> 
> 
> The D700 is a dieing body thats due to be replaced in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> No doubt the D700 will be replaced eventually. Saying it is a dying body is a ludicrous statement.
> D700 cameras will be making professional quality images for decades to come.
> 
> I never recommend waiting for new cameras, particular new entry-level cameras because like the D700 cameras that were new years ago still make fine images when used properly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Found a typo.  I meant D7000 - not the D700.  And by dieing I mean its on its way to being replaced.  Its still a great camera and will be for years to come.  But why purchase it if a replacement should be announced in the nearr future.  This is what happened with me.  I bought my D90 and a month and a half after the D90 was replaced by the D7000.  I swore and cursed myself for months after I learth this and wished I'd been told what I was saying earlier in this thread before I made the purchase.
Click to expand...


I'm with KmH on this one. If the OP has decided to buy a DSLR, why wait for the NEXT new thing to come out? Because all the current models are really great choices--whether they get a D5100 or a 3200 or a D90 or a D7000, they are gonna get a really good DSLR to learn on.

There is ALWAYS a replacement on its way soon. I had a friend who spent 5 years--YEARS--"planning" to buy an iPod/mp3 player, but they were constantly researching and anticipating what was "about" to be released. Five years later, I still had my mp3 player that I spent about a week choosing, and they still hadn't bought one.

My theory with all things electronic--camera, computer, mp3 player, smartphone--is this: I don't *need* the newest, the best, the one with the most bells and whistles. I need the one that has everything *I* need. And if I buy it, and then something else comes out that's even "better"--so what, I STILL have what I actually needed. I don't require more than that.


----------



## b_rockin_64

sm4him said:


> I can't speak to the D3200, as I haven't used one. However, I do have a D5100.
> Sure, if you could afford it, I'd say go for the D7000, as has been suggested. But if you can't, you can't. That's why *I* sprang for the D5100, it was the absolute max of what I could afford to do, and like you, I had to just stick to the kit lens for the first 6 months or so, anyway.
> 
> I keep hearing all the "you'll outgrow it too fast" comments or the suggestion that if you are serious about photography, you just need to have something better. Well, I guess I'm slow and not very serious then, because honestly, I'm still fine with my D5100. Sure, I'd *like* a D7000 or better if it were in the budget. But I'd *rather* have better glass, and I'm still okay with my D5100. If I were going to do this for a living, yes, I'd need the better controls, the sturdier build, and all that--but if it's a hobby, even a SERIOUS one, as it is for me--I suspect the D5100 is going to suit me just fine until I just WANT to get something else.
> 
> Lenses--THAT's the key.  Get your 5100 or 3200 with the kit lens now, and start saving those dollars (forget the pennies, you need DOLLARS!  ) and planning your next two or three glass purchases.  Each lens I've purchased has helped improve my results.
> I started with the 5100 and 18-55, nothing else for the first six months or so--then got a Tokina 100mm macro; sweet lens!! Still my favorite lens.  Bought a 50mm 1.8; nice lens, but I honestly don't use mine much; then a 55-300mm lens (which went for a swim--after that, I used a donated Tamron from pixmedic for a while; that lens is now in holding to go to my son), finally just bought a 70-300. Aiming for a 70-200 f/2.8 next--need a BUNCH more of them dollars first, though.
> 
> My point is--get the body you can afford and as soon as you can, add the best glass you can afford. Add a flash too, even a cheapie like I've got (Yongnuo 560)--it'll make a huge difference.
> You MAY outgrow the 5100, but there is a LOT that can be done with it before you get to that point.
> 
> You can check out my Flickr page or my 500px page--all the photos on those sites are taken with either my 5100, or (the older ones, before last August), with a Canon Powershot.
> I think the largest one I've printed so far was an 18x24, but it looked fine, and I feel certain I could have printed it larger and it would still look good.



THANKYOU!!! someone who got that I cant afford the D7000 lol thats why I was asking about the d5100 and 3200!! I have been leaning towards the 5100. at first it was the 3200 just because when I saw the 24 MP I was like WOW thats going to make the pictures amazing.. BUT like you have come to realize its mostly about the glass and the photographer. Plus all the review about the sesnor in the 5100 being very close to the 7000. Anyways dont say your slow or not serious those spider pictures you have are freaking sick!! I cant wait till im to that stage! What lense did you use? and for the one where there is like light coming from the bottom of him was it flash or was he on a lighted platform? AMAZING!! All your other photos are great too!! 

Yeah that was my other concern was the large prints.. as I may want to print poster size one day of that one amazing shot ya know..


----------



## b_rockin_64

coastalconn said:


> Head over to cameta.  They have d5100 with a kit lens refurbished with a 1 year warranty for about $450.  Learn how to shoot with it.  You may never outgrow it, and if you do the d7000 and next years model will be cheaper then because new models always keep coming out..  Just my humble opinion...



I agree when I am ready for a better camera there will either be better than the 7000 out there or the 7000 will be soo much cheaper!


----------



## b_rockin_64

I completly agree with you.. there wil always be better when it comes to electronics.... look at cell phones these days there always coming out with a new one...


----------



## sm4him

b_rockin_64 said:


> sm4him said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can't speak to the D3200, as I haven't used one. However, I do have a D5100.
> Sure, if you could afford it, I'd say go for the D7000, as has been suggested. But if you can't, you can't. That's why *I* sprang for the D5100, it was the absolute max of what I could afford to do, and like you, I had to just stick to the kit lens for the first 6 months or so, anyway.
> 
> I keep hearing all the "you'll outgrow it too fast" comments or the suggestion that if you are serious about photography, you just need to have something better. Well, I guess I'm slow and not very serious then, because honestly, I'm still fine with my D5100. Sure, I'd *like* a D7000 or better if it were in the budget. But I'd *rather* have better glass, and I'm still okay with my D5100. If I were going to do this for a living, yes, I'd need the better controls, the sturdier build, and all that--but if it's a hobby, even a SERIOUS one, as it is for me--I suspect the D5100 is going to suit me just fine until I just WANT to get something else.
> 
> Lenses--THAT's the key.  Get your 5100 or 3200 with the kit lens now, and start saving those dollars (forget the pennies, you need DOLLARS!  ) and planning your next two or three glass purchases.  Each lens I've purchased has helped improve my results.
> I started with the 5100 and 18-55, nothing else for the first six months or so--then got a Tokina 100mm macro; sweet lens!! Still my favorite lens.  Bought a 50mm 1.8; nice lens, but I honestly don't use mine much; then a 55-300mm lens (which went for a swim--after that, I used a donated Tamron from pixmedic for a while; that lens is now in holding to go to my son), finally just bought a 70-300. Aiming for a 70-200 f/2.8 next--need a BUNCH more of them dollars first, though.
> 
> My point is--get the body you can afford and as soon as you can, add the best glass you can afford. Add a flash too, even a cheapie like I've got (Yongnuo 560)--it'll make a huge difference.
> You MAY outgrow the 5100, but there is a LOT that can be done with it before you get to that point.
> 
> You can check out my Flickr page or my 500px page--all the photos on those sites are taken with either my 5100, or (the older ones, before last August), with a Canon Powershot.
> I think the largest one I've printed so far was an 18x24, but it looked fine, and I feel certain I could have printed it larger and it would still look good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THANKYOU!!! someone who got that I cant afford the D7000 lol thats why I was asking about the d5100 and 3200!! I have been leaning towards the 5100. at first it was the 3200 just because when I saw the 24 MP I was like WOW thats going to make the pictures amazing.. BUT like you have come to realize its mostly about the glass and the photographer. Plus all the review about the sesnor in the 5100 being very close to the 7000. Anyways dont say your slow or not serious those spider pictures you have are freaking sick!! I cant wait till im to that stage! What lense did you use? and for the one where there is like light coming from the bottom of him was it flash or was he on a lighted platform? AMAZING!! All your other photos are great too!!
> 
> Yeah that was my other concern was the large prints.. as I may want to print poster size one day of that one amazing shot ya know..
Click to expand...


Thank you for the compliment--the point of the links was just to demonstrate that the D5100 is a quite capable camera body.  Those spider pictures, and most all of my macros, are taken with the awesome Tokina 100mm macro lens--which I got used for about $350.  I did use an off-camera flash on some of them; the one you are talking about is probably one of the ones where I set the flash on the porch steps and aimed it up at the spider. The spider was in its natural element--which was in a highly inconvenient place for a photo shoot.   (Side note: if you're interested in more about the spider, I wrote a blog post about it; check out the blog in my sig...</end shameless self-promotion>)


----------



## TheLost

The D3200 has the 13th highest DxOMark sensor score... Ever.  Cameras 1-12 on the list are ones like the D800 ($3k), D4 ($6k), Phase One IQ180 Digital Back ($45k!!).

For a $600 camera+lens kit and one of the highest ranking sensors it seems to be an easy choice


----------



## LCAPhoto

Well, do you want to do videography or photography? If you want to do photography then D3200, and if you want to do videography then D5100. You can still do great videos with the d3200 and still do great photos on the d5100. The d5100 doesn't decrease the quality of photos, nor does the d3200 decrease quality of videos. It is just that the d5100 has a camera body more specifically built for videography. Oh and megapixels and picture quality is over-rated. Also, the D3200 is stupid. Get the D3100 for a ton cheaper and buy an extra lens.


----------



## Derrel

I would wait a few months and buy the D5200...it has a significantly upgraded autofocusing system, and the higher-specification metering system of the D7000. The D5200 ought to be here in early 2013.
The D5100 is no longer being recommended by Thom Hogan...it has lost that qualification, except for those shopping for a highly-discounted body.


----------



## Solarflare

IMHO the D3200 sensor is inferior to the D7000/D5100 one.

Its one advantage is color depth. The difference here is that the D7000/D5100 are already very excellent and the D3200 is even a bit better. And this advantage is gone the moment we talk about ISOs higher 100. Thanks to the way DxOMark rates color depth (in a linear way and its a massive weight on the final rating, too), thats why the D3200 "wins".

The other advantage is resolution. Again, gone with ISO 800 and higher. Since Tom Hogan has been mentioned - I would like to add that Hogan claims the kit zooms (AF-S DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR and AF-S DX 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 VR) no longer have enough resolution for a 24 Megapixel sensor, while they still can manage on a 16 Megapixel sensor. I wouldnt take Hogan too seriously either, though.

The other two categories of interest with a sensor are dynamic range and performance at high ISOs. Since the D7000/D5100 is quite a lot superior in this respect, I prefer it.

I would like to point out, though, that I havent read that the D5200 gets the same sensor as the D3200. And the better AF of course is a nice addition, especially for action. BUT the price went up from the D5100, too.

And I would like to add that I liked Ken Rockwells comment on the D5200. While Tom Hogan produced endless masses of text about that the D5200 will not be available in the USA until after xmas, when the rest of the world gets it earlier, Ken Rockwell simply wrote: "The D5200 is so boring Nikon didnt even bothered to add it to its website".

Btw, according to the rumor mill, the D7000 will probably be upgraded at the beginning of next year, too - either with a D7100 or with a D400.


----------



## b_rockin_64

I have decided to go with the D5100. Im buying it next week. And I choose it because of the sensor. I cant afford the D7000 right now so I figured why not get a camera with the same sensor and I have been hearing so many good things about the D5100 plus I have seen amazing photos done with it.. so my decision is made... Thankyou all for the input.


----------



## starnesc

b_rockin_64 said:


> I have decided to go with the D5100. Im buying it next week. And I choose it because of the sensor. I cant afford the D7000 right now so I figured why not get a camera with the same sensor and I have been hearing so many good things about the D5100 plus I have seen amazing photos done with it.. so my decision is made... Thankyou all for the input.


I am in the exact same boat you are and after this helpful thread, I will be buying the same soon.


----------

