Why does a 24.2 mp Nikon sell for only $599 when a 12.2 mp Canon sells for $449?

[JimTrail]

Hello The Photo Forum!

Question: How can Nikon sell a 24.2 megapixel camera for $599.95 when Canon sells a 12.2 megapixel camera for $449.00?

I am looking around for a new camera. On Walmart's website they are offering for sale a 24.2 megapixel Nikon camera for $499.95 (regular price $599.95).

Walmart is offering a 12.2 megapixel Canon camera for $449.00.

Something doesn't seem right. I am wondering why there is not more of a price difference between a camera that takes pictures at 12.2 megapixels and a camera that takes pictures at 24.2 megapixels. Could it be a difference in quality?

Note: I was in a business for 20+ years where I took pictures with a Pentax K1000 camera. I got to be really and expert with the K1000 35mm camera. However, these digital cameras are altogether different than the 35mm film cameras.

Per Walmart's website:
$499.95
List Price: $599.95
You Save: $100.00 (17%)
Heading: Nikon Black D3200 Digital SLR Camera with 24.2 Megapixels and 18-55mm Lens Included

Per Walmart's website:
$449.00
Heading: Canon EOS Rebel T3 Black 12.2MP DSLR Camera, EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS II Lens, 2.7" LCD, EOS Full HD Movie Mode

(p.s. I would have included links to Walmart's website but I was not sure the administrator would approve)

 

[wyogirl]

I have no idea why. I shoot Canon but would never buy the T3......

 

[480sparky]

Megapixels are not the only thing needed to make a camera.

There's a reason a Ferrari sells for $270,000 and a Kia can be had for $14,000, but they both only have four tires.

 

[TheFantasticG]

Price =/= Megapixel

Not only that, but pretty sure the T3 and the D3300 are not direct competition. The T5i and the D3300 are direct competition.

 

[Patriot]

Depends on which is newer or not. The D3200 has already been surpassed by the D3300 so the price has been dropped most likely. The canon also has been replaced by a new model.

It could also be that is how much the camera is worth in the minds of those that built it.

 

[molested_cow]

So the Nikon sounds like a better deal, then buy it instead!

Sometimes pricing has little to do with the product itself. Nikon may want to move that particular model more quickly, so they cut a deal with Walmart and give them the advantage to sell it at a lower price. Or that Walmart has too many in stock and need to move them quickly in time for the next batch to come in. Who knows? Either way, you be the judge to choose the more suitable product for yourself.

 

[lambertpix]

I'd absolutely skip the T3 at that price, but aside from that, you probably don't want to buy a camera based only on MP / $$. There was a period of time when more MP was generally considered better, but we're well past that point. There's more to sensor quality than MP these days, and the sensor is only part of picking the right camera for you. I know it's probably frustrating to learn that camera shopping is a little more complicated than you'd hoped, but if you spend a little time learning about camera features now, you're much more likely to wind up with a system that you can be happy with for years.

 

[KmH]

Yep. It's about a lot more than how many MP a camera has - Everything you need to know about buying a camera | The Verge

 

[minicoop1985]

When you start comparing the 7D to the a77 and D7100 (and further on up), it becomes VERY clear that pixel count isn't everything. I get where the mentality comes from-camera manufacturers are shoving that number at us at any opportunity they can in an attempt to obtain superiority over another product, so we get a bit fixated on that number. I also agree with skipping the T3 at that price. That's not much of a discount, if I remember correctly.

 

[Solarflare]

Thanks btw for the laugh. Because the thread title is REALLY funny.

FYI, the upcoming brand new Sony A7s will have 12 Megapixels, too. That doesnt mean its a bad camera.

Megapixels are not good per se. They mean additional data, they mean increased demands on optics, they mean slower operation, they mean more demands on the photographer, they mean less quality per pixel, they mean smaller pixels, etc.

And 12 Megapixels are frankly already pretty much sufficient for anything.

 

[Braineack]

Something doesn't seem right. I am wondering why there is not more of a price difference between a camera that takes pictures at 12.2 megapixels and a camera that takes pictures at 24.2 megapixels. Could it be a difference in quality?

could it be the Canon is simply overpriced?

 

[Dao]

The camera manufacturers determine the price of a particular camera based on a lot of factors. Megapixel is only one of the them. In fact, I strongly believe it is not even a major factor as long as the camera has at least 8 to 10 megapixels.

Other factors such as:
- Camera build
- Additional camera functions
- Durability
- Speed (such as AF speed or burst speed)
- Camera Sensor
- Market (where it sells)
- Competitions
...
...
...

 

[Civchic]

There's also the thing about minimum price. The T3 may be outdated and low-end of the market (still a good camera though - I'm happy with mine!) but you're not going to find ANY new DSLR with a kit lens for much less than $450. So while it may be half as good as the D3200, it won't be priced that way.

Do your research then go second hand. That's what I would do if I could do it again (and likely will for the next body).

 

[Braineack]

You can find a D3200 kit, used, for between $350-$415. A used T3 kit will set you back roughly $300..

The D3100 kit, which probably compares more directly to the old T3, can be found for $275.

Both of those Nikons have a better image sensor than the T3.

 

[JerryLove]

Both of those Nikons have a better image sensor than the T3.

Unless you want to be able to view the image you took at 6400 ISO, where the 3100 is considered "extended ISO" and the T3 is not.

There's more to image than MP, or even measured DR (which is not the same as useful DR).

Canon Rebel T3 / EOS 1100D Review: Digital Photography Review