Ok, ok, I'm ready for a DSLR(which one)?

[Phot]

I currently have a Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX200V, and I am very happy with the level of detail and for the most part what it can do. But whenever I get advice on my photography(other than my composition, time of day, etc...) I am told I need a DSLR for that. So I'm finally ready.

Currently looking at the Nikon D3300 and D3200. I read that the D3300 is better at low light shots, but how much better? Money is a factor here. For under $500 it seems that I can get 2 lenses and the camera on the D3200, and only the body with the D3300.

I'm shooting people, animals, scenery, and the occasional item for sale on Ebay. I want to be able to use lenses that allow a true macro, and can focus in the cool way that make the make ground become blurred.

Is the D3200 plenty good for this? Do you recommend better for the same price?

 

[goodguy]

D3200 is plenty good for that, actually what will be more important is few things among them
1.Good lenses
2.Good skills
Difference between the D3200 and D3300 in low light is small but if you add a Nikon 50mm 1.8G you will potentially improve your low light shots by a huge margin.
More important then anything else is skills, equipment aint worth s__t without you knowing how to use it to its full potential and that means learning and shooting, shooting and learning............A LOT!!!

So if money is an issue get the D3200 and then I would recommend more glass (lenses and other accessories as you see fit) in the future.

Good luck

 

[Phot]

Yes, skills is an ongoing process.

I believe the bundle pack comes with that lens along with one other.

 

[goodguy]

Yes, skills is an ongoing process.

I believe the bundle pack comes with that lens along with one other.

Usually in bundles this camera will come with the 18-55mm and 55-200mm
These are good basic kit lenses, you can do a lot with it but in time you will find they are limiting mainly in 2 ways
1.In lower light situation they will make the camera work harder and produce grainy picture
2.They will not let you get blurry background
Nikon 50mm 1.8G is a good cheap lens that will give you good low light capabilities and help you blur out the background when you want to.
Another lens you can consider for this task is Nikon 35mm 1.8G
The reason I recommend these lenses is because they can open the aperture very wide which brings a lot more light onto the sensor then the kit lenses, this also let you get better BOKEH (blurred background) when aperture is fully open.

If you want you can tell us what exactly you are getting in this bundle and we will tell you what we think of it.
You are also welcome to PM me and I will try to help you.

 

[Derrel]

I quickly compared the two cameras, D3200 and D3300, at snapsort.com...the two bodies are pretty close to equal in most metrics. I do not see a really big advantage to the 3300, except the faster firing rate and the added 200 or so frames per battery charge that the 3300 offers. In terms of most image quality metrics, the two bodies are very,very,very close to one another. The 18-55 and 55-200mm "kit zoom lenses" are pretty standard offerings, and pretty much what both Canon and Nikon have determined are the best offerings for their entry-level buyers. Those lenses offer a combination of lightness, small size, ease of carry, and affordable price.

I would say yes, the D3200 is plenty good for a first d-slr camera. It has a pretty modern, high-resolution sensor, and it is small, light, and easy to carry, and it's affordable. it's a good value because it is not the very-latest-model, and that means prices must be discounted to make it sell; Nikon has been flooding the retail market with so much inventory that discounts on prior-generation models have become expected by customers.

 

[GDHLEWIS]

The D3200 was my first DSLR and I love it, light and easy to use, quality of the shots are excellent. I also have the 35 1.b Nikkor mentioned on this thread and those were my main paring. I would suggest the D3200, 35mm 1.8 nikkor then save for more decent glass than what will come bundled.

 

[Phot]

Yes it's the 18-55 and the 55-200. I was looking at the comparisons between the 35mm 1.8g and the 50mm 1.8g and it looks like the 35mm does better in low light and has a wider field of view on close up shots.

Is getting all this for $700 a decent buy? $500 for the camera, and $200 for the lens(comes with filters, the bundle on amazon). Is this about what everything new should cost?

 

[Phot]

Yes it's the 18-55 and the 55-200. I was looking at the comparisons between the 35mm 1.8g and the 50mm 1.8g and it looks like the 35mm does better in low light and has a wider field of view on close up shots.

Is getting all this for $700 a decent buy? $500 for the camera, and $200 for the lens(comes with filters, the bundle on amazon). Is this about what everything new should cost?

Actually I'm a little confused after looking around. Half thinking refurbished is the way to go on the camera, and maybe new for the lenses........ And then I also noticed there are different companies selling different bundles for the 35mm 1.8g lenses..... Don't know what to do, lol.

 

[goodguy]

Yes it's the 18-55 and the 55-200. I was looking at the comparisons between the 35mm 1.8g and the 50mm 1.8g and it looks like the 35mm does better in low light and has a wider field of view on close up shots.

Is getting all this for $700 a decent buy? $500 for the camera, and $200 for the lens(comes with filters, the bundle on amazon). Is this about what everything new should cost?

700$ for a D3200 with 18-55mm+55-200mm sounds a bit too much to me.
Here is a link to a Nikon D3300 with these lenses for 700$ CAN which is 25% cheaper then the USD.

NIKON D3300 BLACK W/18-55 VR II+55-200VRII 33879

 

[Solarflare]

Currently looking at the Nikon D3300 and D3200.

My suggestion for a 500$ budget would be: D5200 with 18-105mm.

The D5200 is superior to the D3300 - better sensor, better autofocus, offers a great flipscreen etc - but is cheaper right now.

And with the 18-105mm you will start of with a nice 6x convenience zoom that might still be of use later when you get better glas, like the already mentioned 35mm and 50mm. A 18-55mm would very likely be completely replaced sooner or later, for example by a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC or a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8. And you wont have to switch lenses in the beginning at all. And the optical quality is still fine, at least from about 25-60mm - when stopped down to f/8 you're very close to much more expensive glas.

I was looking at the comparisons between the 35mm 1.8g and the 50mm 1.8g and it looks like the 35mm does better in low light and has a wider field of view on close up shots.

Um, 35mm and 50mm are different focal lengths and have thus different uses. It makes no sense to compare them like you just did.

On a half frame sensor that you're going to have, a 35mm is kind of in the middle, neither really wide nor relly long, a so-called "nomal" lens, while 50mm is already slightly on the long side of the focal lengths and thus for example good for portraiture, as you can keep more distance and wont distort faces as much.

But, for the record, in close quarters the 35mmon a half frame sensor is still quite long.

And if you want closeup shots, you'll need a lens that can focus closely - a so-called macro lens. Cheapest from NIkon themselves was IIRC a 40mm micro DX lens, but IIRC there was an even cheaper alternative from Tamron (same focal length).

 

[Phot]

And if you want closeup shots, you'll need a lens that can focus closely - a so-called macro lens. Cheapest from NIkon themselves was IIRC a 40mm micro DX lens, but IIRC there was an even cheaper alternative from Tamron (same focal length).

Will the 35mm 1.8g be good for full body and chest up shots between 3-20ft? I'm pretty sure I'm gonna get a refurbished D3200 for $330. Unless there is good reason not to.

 

[Solarflare]

Refurbished is perfectly fine.

Gray market would have been problematic, because Nikon wont repair your camera anymore.

If a focal length is good for doing any shots completely depends upon your own taste. I see a lot of closeup "selfies" of people with wide angle lenses all over the net, which show very clear and strong distortions, but many people seem to not object to that.