We're working on a new Slickdeals. Click here to check it out.
You last visited: Today at 05:32 PM
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|07-15-2013 11:44 AM|
|Go_Mountaineers||Price back down to $399 now.|
|07-14-2013 08:35 PM|
|07-14-2013 08:30 PM|
|cgigate||the camera is horrible IQ, contacted via eBay to return, but still not get any reply|
|07-05-2013 08:09 PM|
To check the shutter actuation count if you are using a Mac, you don't have to download anything.
Open the image with the Preview application. Then, from the Tools menu choose Show Inspector. Click on the second column (with the letter 'i" in the circle). Click the Nikon column. Then check the value for the ShutterCount.
|07-01-2013 09:33 AM|
|06-30-2013 09:21 PM|
There was a Newegg deal last week for this camera.
|06-30-2013 07:02 PM|
I want a D600 but right now they are way to expensive, I will wait to see a refurb for less than 1500 then I may bite.
or I will wait for the replacment the D610
|06-30-2013 05:40 PM|
I've already explained, it won't matter, because you won't see a difference unless you zoom in closely at a piece of the picture. Again, stop trying to justify your purchase to others. You can keep bragging to other people that D3200 is a better purchase than D3100 but your pictures won't turn out any better. I'm pretty sure if I put pictures from these two cameras side by side you won't see which picture is from which camera. I've probably spent more money than you on DSLR's and actually compared them in real world scenarios, and there really is no significant difference that justifies spending 33% more for a D3200 over a D3100 in terms of picture quality. The higher pixel density screen does come in handy on the D3200.
And again, almost every single article I've read and professional enthusiasts always suggest buying better lenses than "upgrading" your camera body.
I've gone from D3100 to D5100 to D600, and the biggest difference I've seen in picture quality is the leap from DX to FX. All the DX cameras are pretty much the same. You're still limited by the sensor size. Plus, if you are in the market for an entry-level DSLR, then you should know there's a reason why D3200 is termed "entry-level." You lose a lot of the features professional cameras have. You will eventually want more customizable features anyways, so I would just skip all of this and buy a more professional camera such as the D7100 or the D600/D800/D800e.
My biggest regret was buying an entry-level camera, because I eventually wanted to graduate to a better camera. Taking photography is a hobby, and you will want more advanced tools later on.
Plus, now there is the D7000 refurbished for $599 on Adorama eBay, and this would be a better deal than the D3200 for $405. A D3200 retails for $550, so you're really only saving $145 for a refurbished vs. new with full year Nikon warranty....you're not actually saving much here.
|06-30-2013 04:48 PM|
you need to get your head examined.......
|06-30-2013 02:21 PM|
|06-30-2013 10:45 AM|
dream on, in fact the D3200 has better PQ vs the D7000.
google is your friend
|06-30-2013 08:34 AM|
These numbers are like comparing numbers for megapixels. A consumer buying a d3200 won't see a difference. A professional might, but not your average consumer.
At this point, these performance numbers are just fuel for bragging rights. That's why the suggestion from most pros is to not upgrade camera, and to use that money for better lenses. I can probably get a refurbed D3100 with the kit lens and a used 35mm f/1.8 or 50mm f/1.8 prime for the same price as this deal and end up taking better pictures anyways. If specs of a camera matter, then every single professional out there would be using the newest and "best" cameras. Some of them still stick to an old D90 and still churn out just as good photos as the new camera bodies.
Plus, if you look at photos from D3100 and D3200, you won't see any difference at all!
Look at the differences....they're so slight to the normal eye that it doesn't matter. What they did was zoom in to a specific portion on the photo, something a consumer would usually never do. You can keep throwing performance numbers around but you won't see it.
Also, you're wrong. The D3200 does NOT have the same image sensor as the D5200 or D7100. These are not even considered professional cameras. The top of the line professional cameras are FX "full frame" sensor cameras such as D800, D4, D3x, D300s or D600. Do not even remotely compare the two. They all cost more than $2000. D3200 is much worse and making that statement means you really don't know what you're talking about.
|06-30-2013 08:31 AM|
D3200 is worth the money...
There's a good head-to-head comparison here:
|06-30-2013 08:06 AM|
A true budget minded professional would go for a refurbished D7000 or even a D90, if looking for an APS-C camera. You can probably get a D90 for about the same price as a D3200.
The only real-world difference between a D3200 and a D3100 is that higher ppi screen. You won't notice the image quality being that much different. MP doesn't mean anything unless you crop a lot of huge photos.
|06-30-2013 07:49 AM|
Any professional knows that DSLR's are still king. Maybe mirrorless cameras will take the crown in the future, but they are definitely not the best now.
I doubt your mirrorless camera produces better images than a DSLR. The only advantage to the mirrorless is that it is lighter, but that is it. I've had friends who had mirrorless cameras, and desperately want to switch to DSLR's because of lack of available options.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|