I have a d3100. Is the d3200 worth the junp?

[goodguy]

Oops, I'm so used to the D7100 and it's built in AF motor.

Yes, Goodguy is correct, you would want the "G" version for something like the 3100/3200.

LOL it happeneds to me too, the 50mm "D" lenses are Soooo sweet its just hard not to recommend them.
As you can see in my signature I have the 1.4D version of this lens and I just LOVE this lens, its one of my most used lenses, its so small, light weight fast and frick'n sharp!!!
Oh and best is they are so affordable.

AF is not and end all to be all and all the D3xxx & D5xxx cameras have a manual focusing aid -Rangefinder mode.

Oh, I never knew that, always nice to learn a new think on this forum.
One more reason for me to love Nikon

 

[fortybrandon]

So would upgrading to a d5200 be any better? I have been looking and can get a body d5200 for 470. I didn't consider d5200 until someone on here mentioned it. I think I may upgrade to d5200. What are your opinions?

 

[Braineack]

Even a D5100 would be an upgrade.

 

[ulrichsd]

Don't get a 5200, get a lens. Seriously. I love the 35 and 50mm primes and use them all the time. Great for low light and subject isolation/narrow depth of field.

Unless you really want a 5200. But i think you are expecting too much, the 5200 is still a low end consumer camera. The picture quality is going to be pretty similar between those two cameras. The feature set is similar.

 

[goodguy]

So would upgrading to a d5200 be any better? I have been looking and can get a body d5200 for 470. I didn't consider d5200 until someone on here mentioned it. I think I may upgrade to d5200. What are your opinions?

While lenses have their importance and I will be with everybody screaming "get a better lens" but the D3100 ni my eyes is an old camera and I personally would upgrade it.
Now going from the D3100 to the D5200 will be a big step up and because of the D3100 older hardware I say GO FOR IT!!!

Excellent sensor, excellent low light performance and excellent dynamic range.

 

[Solarflare]

I wouldnt expect too many changes between the D3100 and the D5100/D5200/D5300 either. At least not enough for me to switch to them, if I already had a D3100. You get a flipscreen that is an addictive feature, though, at least to some.

To me it is like this: for a couple of years I only did photography casual-like. I bought a new camera every two years, always unhappy because I lost shots because of the camera. Then I finally had a small consumer DSLR and one day I sat down and computed how much money I had spent so far on photography - WOA !!! All these little cheap "sufficient" cameras that had not turned out to be too sufficient in the end had accumulated to a quite impressive amount of money. And all I had to show for this heap of money was a small entry level DSLR.

Thats why I oppose you buying a camera like the D3200 or D5200. Its a waste of money. Save this money and spent it later - on a camera that will be a real upgrade and will actually improve your possibilities substantly, instead of giving you only really small improvements here and there.

AF is not an end all to be all and all the D3xxx & D5xxx cameras have a manual focusing aid - Rangefinder mode.

Which is a PITA to use, since it doesnt even show you the direction in which you have to change the focus.

[...] But i think you are expecting too much, the 5200 is still a low end consumer camera. [...]

Correct.

 

[Braineack]

I wouldnt expect too many changes between the D3100 and the D5100/D5200/D5300 either. At least not enough for me to switch to them, if I already had a D3100. You get a flipscreen that is an addictive feature, though, at least to some.

The IQ between the D3100 and D5100 is significant.

The low-light quality between the D3100 and D5100 is significant.

The screen quality (both swivel and resolution) is significant (and yes that matters).

The D5100 can do easy bracketing and accepts the IR signal from the ML-L3, for easy landscape/remote shots.

The D5100 is much better at taking movies (flip screen, frame rate), and has an external mic port.

The D5100 has significant more scene modes and in-camera processing features such as: D-Lighting, HDR, etc. (for those who shoot in jpg)

And IIRC the D5100 captures 14-bit RAW files vs. the 12-bit RAW files of the D3100.


I upgraded to a D5100 from a 3100 and it was a noticeable upgrade (in both IQ, easy of use, and features); enough for me to spend the $130 to switch. (Sold my D3100 + 18-55 for $220 and bought a D5100 body for $350.)

I still miss the flip out screen.


But with all that said, a D3100 with good glass, still isn't that bad until you need all those extra features, it can still produce great images, but you need the glass...

 

[ulrichsd]

The IQ between the D3100 and D5100 is significant.

I'm not saying the D5100 isn't a better camera, because it is, but I think the OP is expecting a little too much from the camera and not enough from the lenses. Buy some lenses that are an improvement over your kit lens. A fast prime, a wide angle, a macro lens, whatever. Go use your camera. And then in a year or two you'll know what camera body you want and you can upgrade then. The lenses you've bought will still work on your new camera (unless you buy DX lenses and go FX, but you'll still get a better return selling your lenses than selling and old body).

I just don't think it is worth chasing the new camera body until you have something better than a 18-55 kit lens. And the D5100 is still lacking a lot of features. Otherwise, he's going to buy a D5100 and decide he really wants the higher frame rate and improved autofocus of a D7100. Or the bigger sensor of a D600. Or whatever.

The OP said he wanted to do cars (ultrawide angle comes in handy here) and wildlife (telephoto for birds/animals or macro for the smaller wildlife). Either of these types of photography would be better served by a lens upgrade than a camera upgrade.

 

[fortybrandon]

Thank you everyone for your opinions. I do realize that a lot of the shot comes from the lens. I have decided to go with the Pentax K-30.

On snapsort it out ranks a lot of other cameras and the weather proof is pretty cool. I also like the option of white and blue.

 

[Braineack]

pentax makes a lot of camera for the price.

 

[robbins.photo]

pentax makes a lot of camera for the price.

If their lowlight capabilities were just a bit better I'd be sorely tempted to pick one up myself. They shoot fast and produce pretty good results in good lighting.

 

[PBlais]

I just upgraded from the D3100 to the D5200. It was worth it for some of the features. The double pixel count wasn't really that big a deal (still nice). Higher bit rate on the NEF files was. Better ISO and some of the advanced focus features as well as actually very good video are nice. I really wanted some of the shooting features for tethering (D5200 and D7100 rock best tethered). BUT, I also had already bought a few nice lenses, tripod, large bag o'tricks and did a big bunch of Photoshop / Lightroom training and shot a lot of pictures first. To do a body upgrade is really more about having found the direction you really want to go for and maybe also purchased support gear and gained more shooting time and technical knowledge. You'll be best able to know you are ready before doing the right upgrade. I only regret that I didn't have enough money to go for the D7100 but the D5200 is going to do all I have on the list and do it well. Most of the features I would have used on the D7100 were more ease of access to features and just a few technical things (still would have been nice). There are a million things you can do with cameras and exploring them is fun and finding the things you love most takes time. Time well spent.

 

[robbins.photo]

So would upgrading to a d5200 be any better? I have been looking and can get a body d5200 for 470. I didn't consider d5200 until someone on here mentioned it. I think I may upgrade to d5200. What are your opinions?

I use the D5100 myself and I really love it, the D5200 is pretty close as far as layout and features but it does have the higher 24 mp sensor. All in all of the two I'd recommend the D5200 over the D3200, you'll be getting a lot more camera for your money.

I'd recommend though that first you take a good look at the D5200 and compare it to the camera you already have, and decide if the features it offers are really worth the expense for you personally. I'd also take a look at the D7000 and D7100, and again ask yourself, if I buy the D5200 now will I just be thinking about upgrading again to the D7000/D7100 or will I be happy with the D5200 and what it offers for at least a few years?

There is certainly no harm in putting the money aside and purchasing something in the 7x series if you don't think the 5200 will be well suited to your needs. On the flipside of course if you think the D5200 will suit your needs and give you some capabilities that your current camera doesn't it would be a good investment for you, the 5x series are very capable cameras and produce very usable images. At their price point they are very hard to beat, and while the 7100 certainly offers more features than the D5200 the question is are those features worth the additional $500 or so in cost?

For a lot of people the answer there is yes (it is for me, I'm saving my money for an eventual D7100 upgrade), but for you the answer may well be no - it's all about chosing the camera that's right for you.

 

[fortybrandon]

Hello everyone! I made my decision while purchasing a Pentax K-30 tonight! I got it with the original everyone and the 18-55mm lens for $488.00 I realized there are many great cameras out there and the K-30 really caught my eye. It may sound dumb to most, but I opted with the 30 over the 5 because it was newer and I will mostly shoot jpeg for the ease of posting and printing. I did like the fact that it is newer. If the k5 was newer and possibly a different color I might have went with it. I picked white as well. I did like Nikon, but I think the feel of the 30 will be much better. Thanks everyone!