Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
DSLR help: D3200 v. D5100
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
Hey guys, I am looking to purchase my first DSLR and have narrowed it down to these two cameras. I am a fairly expeirienced DSLR user (school course). I need to buy a Nikon because my school uses Nikon lenses and I will need to borrow them for various projects. The camera will be used for 90% photo and 10% video. I think that the D5100 will be the better camera for photo, but I am wondering about the new sensor on the D3200. My other concern about the 5100 is the lack of 60fps video. What do you guys think is the better choice? Any other recommendations in the same price range?
Also, i have a quick lens question. The Tamron 17-50 gets a lot of love on here but is it much better than the kit lens for photo? Obviously it is faster, but is it much sharper for pictures?
Thanks in advance, and please excuse any spelling errors, I'm on mobile.
Posts: 61261
-
Karma: 120,324
If you're doing mostly pictures, id get the d7000 if you can afford it. The d5100 vs d3100/3200 is such a small gap.
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
the 7000 is really out of the picture unfortunately...I know that the 5100 and 3200 are very similar, what it seems to come down to is tilt screen vs. 60fps. if you had to choose, what would you go for? and any input on the tamron vs. kit lens for photo?
Posts: 61261
-
Karma: 120,324
It seems that 60fps isn't an issue for you? you said 10% video which is why I recommended the d7000. If it was me and my camera was only for 10% video, id get the d7000 and a tamron 17-50.
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
the 7000 is just far out of my price range. I am looking to spend around 600 right now (more down the road) and it doesnt seem possible to get a d7000 for that price. whereas a 5100 can easily be found for that cost.
Posts: 767
-
Karma: 426
I would def go with 60 frames but like eheath said since your only doing a lil bit of video neither of those cameras are gonna be that good for photo I would save up if you can and get the d7000 your gonna have alot more to work with and you wont have to worry about upgrading for a while with the 7000
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
I would love to be able to afford a 7000 but right now the cheapest i can find with a lens is 1100 bucks...i cant swing an extra 500 dollars.
Posts: 3245
-
Karma: 2,328
the compromise if you can't afford the d7000 is to get the d90. it's wayyy better than the d5100 or d3200 and you can find it used for like $500.
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
is the d90 actually a better option than the 5100? the sensor is much older
Posts: 3245
-
Karma: 2,328
yes the sensor is older, but the body is much better and it has the AF motor in the body which imo is almost essential. the d5100 might have some better specs, but it's pretty much still a soccer mom camera. the d90 is a lot better suited for a serious hobbyist. i have a d7000 and my dad has a d80 which is even older than the 90 and i don't mind using it at all, just get good glass.
Posts: 24725
-
Karma: 29,927
Get a used D90. Still has good quality 720p/24fps, but works with all of Nikon glass.
Posts: 1325
-
Karma: 477
A new D90 costs the same as a D5100, so if you are 90% photo, go with the superior D90. If you get a D3200/D5100 and are into photography, you will end up upgrading anyway. The tiny pentamirror viewfinder and lack of AF motor are annoying on the D3200/D5100. They are very nice starter cameras, but most people will want to upgrade after a short while.
The Tamron is not sharper than the Nikon kit lens. What it offers over the kit lens is low light performance and shallow depth-of-field (out of focus backgrounds). However, you can also get that using a prime lens like the inexpensive Nikon 35mm f/1.8G prime. That is a really nice prime lens to have when starting out.
If all you need is sharpness, the Nikon 18-55mm kit lens is outstanding.
If you are shooting Nikon, it is really worth it to hold off buying mediocre zoom lenses like the Tamron, and saving up for a Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 in the long run.
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
Thanks for all the help guys, looks like it is time to start shopping around for a d90!
Posts: 3031
-
Karma: 175
love my d5100 more than enough for everything i need-call me a soccer mom if you like.
Posts: 1166
-
Karma: 465
used d90 i would be nice, I really liked mine when I had it. Although I was pretty impressed with the d3200 after playing with it, video is nice on it and it has a much newer sensor compared to the d90.
Posts: 24725
-
Karma: 29,927
Which means fuck all really.
Posts: 1325
-
Karma: 477
Potential benefits of a D3200 are the newer sensor, additional video modes and the compact size. However, the sensor of the D90 is top notch.
Benefits of the D90 are:
- AF motor
- better viewfinder: pentaprism, larger and brighter (the D3200 viewfinder is tiny)
- better ergonomics (body shape, number of buttons)
- top LCD screen
Those are all features most people will end up wanting. There are many nice Nikon and Tokina lenses that require an AF motor to auto focus. I'd only get a D3200 if compact size is a priority: paired with a 35mm it's a hell of a camera in a very small package.
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
My concern about the 3200 is that it is an entry level camera. I know that the 5100 and 90 are marketed at a more advanced audie
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
Also, video may be more of a priority as time goes on. I will try to upgrade eventually to a D7000, but for now I want somethig that can do alright int that area. The D90 has no external mic
Posts: 1325
-
Karma: 477
If you will upgrade anyway, go with whichever you can get the best deal on.
Don't worry about the D3200 being entry-level. Nikon does not cripple their cheaper models like other brands do. Each Nikon model is a great camera in it's own respect. The D3200 swaps large viewfinder and focus motor for an incredibly compact design.
Posts: 227
-
Karma: 90
Does the 3200 lack some of the photo-fearures of the 5100?
Posts: 3245
-
Karma: 2,328
i know it doesn't have bracketing
Posts: 24725
-
Karma: 29,927
The 5000 series is REALLY not anything of what I'd call "advanced" in almost any way compared to the 3000 series. It's still very basic when it comes to photo stuff.
Posts: 1858
-
Karma: 86
All times are Eastern (-4)
