Advantages of D5100 over D3200.

spmakwana

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 16, 2013
Messages
58
Reaction score
1
Location
Gujarat, India
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Hello,

I've read many comparision of D5100 vs D3200. Both are same in most of aspects.
Advantages of D3200 is its 24 Megapixel. and Advantages of D5100 is swivel LCD and exposure bracketing.
Image quality I find both about same for general usage.
I read in many site that D5100 have larger feature set then D3200, but not able to find what that feature set D5100 offer over D3200 feature set.
 
The only noticeable differences are the 3200 is cheaper and has better picture quality. If your into HDR the the 5100 has an auto HDR feature that will allow you,in one go, to set how exposure varied shots you want the camera to take. I have a D5100 the swivel LCD screen is a good feature. There is already D33, D53 and D73 range new models come out every year and spec sheets become irrelevant.
 
The D3200 gives you more cropping power.

All reviews that test the two say the IQ actually goes to the D5100, especially at higher ISOs. It has a bit more color depth and DR as well.

The D3200 still saves 12-bit RAW file where the D5100 saves a 14-bit RAW file. That means the D5100 can capture/save 16,384 shades of color per pixel vs 4,096.

The swivel screen is pretty darn handy.

The D5100 has a better battery.

And the D5100 can do bracketing if you're into that sort of thing.
 
According to DxO Mark scoring the two cameras seem to have pretty close image quality. I know the numbers on 14-bit and 12-bit raw look impressive, but from what I have seen, and from what experts have written, the actual real-world processing advantages of 14-bit raw files over 12-bit are almost entirely theoretical. For the beginning shooter, I think the choice is much more about price, and the body feature,like the swivel screen, which is the main difference. The color depth, the high ISO performance, and so on all seem very close. If the D5100 has a better battery, that would be a much bigger benefit than many other things. I have shot the D5100 a little bit; it's an okay camera. I used it with and without my SB 800 flash. It did very well on flash shots. I think either one would be acceptable. I might be tempted to get the one I could buy more affordably, or the one that shoots faster, or the one that has a feature I think might be better for me.
 
Not to complicate things, but is it really that much more to just get the D5300?
 
These two are just too close image quality wise to really warrant buying one over the other in my opinion. Now if you plan to shoot HDRs, the D5100 would be nice since it offers bracketing. Personally, I would skip them both and shoot for a refurbished D7000. You can pick up a refurbished D7000 for the cost of a D5100. The D7000 offers: weather resistant, bracket shots, larger view finder, longer battery life, built in AF motor, 6fps vs 4fps, slightly better dynamic range, twin memory cards, 1/8000 shutter speed vs 1/4000, two dial wheels ( I'm not sure but believe the D5100 only has one).

Refurbished Nikon D7000 Digital SLR Camera 16.2 Megapixel Body Only - Refurbished by Nikon 25468 B
 
As Derrel alludes to the nuances between most entry-level DSLR cameras will not have any effect on the image quality of photos an new to photography amateur will make.

Nikon entry-level DSLR cameras are divided into 2 tiers - the small 'compact' entry-level DSLRs (D3XXX and D5XXX) and the 'normal' size entry-level DSLRs (D7XXX and D6XX).
The compact DSLRs don't have an internal auto focus motor and screw-drive, second command wheel, a Control Panel (top LCD), CLS Commander mode, etc, that the normal size entry-level DSLRs have.

The usability of the normal size Nikon entry-level DSLRs is a significant advantage, but they produce essentially the same image quality of the compact DSLRs.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top