NIKON D3100 W/ 2 KIT LENS or D3200

[archiee]

So a little background , I started out with a d40 back in high school and finally have saved up enough to get a newer camera.

My options are a D3100 kit with an 18-55 mm and 55-200 mm lens, or a D3200 with a standard 18-55 mm.

I have the basics of photography down (dabbled with 35 mm film), and want to stick with Nikon.

I'm not really interested in buying used and have pretty much settled on buying a D3100 or 3200.

Thanks for reading guys!

 

[robbins.photo]

I guess for me it would depend on the price difference between the two kits, the 3200 has the 24 mp sensor, shoots just a touch faster (4 fps as opposed to 3) and has a bit better lowlight performance but the differences between the two cameras are not huge by any means. So if the 3100 kit has both lenses and is close to the same price, well that might be a pretty good option. I'd probably price the lenses separately and see what the difference in price would be if you bought the 3100 with the two lenses or the 3200 withe both lenses, then ask yourself if that difference would be worth it for you to get the 3200.

 

[ratssass]

I wouldn't let the 55-200 lens be the dealbreaker...

 

[robbins.photo]

I wouldn't let the 55-200 lens be the dealbreaker...

Never used one myself, haven't heard a lot of really positive reviews of them but I guess some telephoto is better than no telephoto at all. I could be wrong there though.. lol

 

[ratssass]

I wouldn't let the 55-200 lens be the dealbreaker...

I guess some telephoto is better than no telephoto at all..

I guess that best sums it up for me...

 

[SquarePeg]

Unsolicited advice alert: don't totally rule out buying used if you intend to stick with this hobby/profession/obsession, especially when you're young or just starting out and money is tight. If used is not for you, maybe factory refurb? Some online retailers even offer warranties similar to those for new products with their refurb sales.

 

[CaptainNapalm]

How long before you can save up a little extra for another lens? The D3200 is the obvious choice but if you're like most, after getting into it and starting to shoot, especially if you are into nature and wildlife shots, you'll soon crave more reach. If you won't have any opportunity to invest into photography within the next 6-12 months, I'd go with the 3100 + the two lenses. However, if it was me I'd get the 3200 + the kit lens, you can always scrape up an extra 100-150 in a few months to pick up the 55-200 if you need it, and if you are willing to save up a little more, you'd be much happier with the 70-300 down the line. Yeah I say keep your options open and buy the better body with one lens for now.

 

[Derrel]

I wouldn't let the 55-200 lens be the dealbreaker...

Me either....I would go for the D3200 myself. The 55-200 is a low-cost lens and there are tons of them available on the eBay market.

 

[goodguy]

I wouldnt want the D3100 and I wouldnt want the 55-200mm.
The obvious choice here is the D3200, better IQ, better low light performance, double MP and when you are ready to get a telezoom then get the Nikon 70-300mm VR which is much better then the 55-200mm

 

[archiee]

Well the D3100 kit costs around $450 while the D3200 with one lens costs $500, so the difference is just a matter of $50. I was pretty set before posting to get the D3100 simply because it was cheaper and had an extra lens.

As you can assume I am a student with a part time job, so I could save up enough to get more lens, but the convenience and price of the D3100 sounds pretty sweet to me.

Although, reading through these replies have made me consider the D3200 a little more seriously.

I guess you guys just made me even more on the fence ha.

 

[apvm]

D3100 with Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and upgrade the body to D7xxx after you outgrown the D3xxx.

 

[archiee]

Yeah, I was thinking the two lens would be a good start, and I can just upgrade the body in a couple years.

I've been looking into 50mm's and wide lens.

I am looking to photograph portraits and rock climbing, probably some landscape as well.

The D3200 is $50 more, with only the 18-55.

I'm figuring 14 mp with be fine, I'm just entering the hobby. Still, the D3200 is very tempting, but I really want the tele.

Keep the comments coming!

 

[goodguy]

Yeah, I was thinking the two lens would be a good start, and I can just upgrade the body in a couple years.

I've been looking into 50mm's and wide lens.

I am looking to photograph portraits and rock climbing, probably some landscape as well.

The D3200 is $50 more, with only the 18-55.

I'm figuring 14 mp with be fine, I'm just entering the hobby. Still, the D3200 is very tempting, but I really want the tele.

Keep the comments coming!

Its not just the MP, the D3200 has better low light performance.
Dynamic range is another very important issue and the D3200 has a big advantage there.
You are getting an extra FPS which might or might not be important for you.

You are tempted by a lens that isnt so good.
If you will get the D3100 and 55-200mm and get serious with photography you probably upgrade in the future not only the camera but that telezoom lens.
When I started photography I also didnt think lenses quality was such a big deal, I didnt see much different between cheap lens and mid level lens but in time my standard changed and today I will not compromise about the camera or the lenses I use, I rather have less but good quality then more but base quality.

 

[ratssass]

...one more thing to keep you balanced on the fence:I own the 55-200mm.I own the 50mm 1.8g.When I bought my D7000 kit,it came with the 18-105.So,the same day I purchased the 55-200.As I recall,I paid $299.00 for the 55-200,then.Maybe 3 weeks later I bought the 50mm.Those 3 weeks were the only time I had ever mounted the 55-200.Literally,less than 10 times.The 18-105 covered most of my needs at the time,and I still use it often.
My point,I guess,is if I had to do it all over again,I would have skipped the 55-200 entirely.As Robbins said,tho,it's better than nothing,but if it were me,I would go with the 3200.

 

[archiee]

To be completely honest, I see myself buying lenses off of craigslist and such after my initial buy of the DSLR.

I mean, I do have an art background and such, but I don't exactly see myself buying lenses over $200.

I do want to have a variety of lenses, although these needs might change in the future.

So many options!

If I do purchase the D3100, I might have enough to spend an extra $200 on a used wide lens.

I wish i had more experience with the 55-200 mm just to see if I would actually use it.

Ratass, you mmake a solid point on wanting a lens and never using it again, but then again, my style may be completely opposite of your artistic eye. Know what I mean?

But yeah, I don't mind you guys persuading me either way, I enjoy hearing what more established photographers think.