 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
naxz
|
Hello everyone...I am newbie in your forum. I am planning to buy new Nikon DSLR Camera D3100 or D3200. May I respectfully inquire from any members of this forum if which of the two cameras I should buy? Hopefully you can site the pros and cons of the two (2) cameras based on your experience. Thank you very much... |
|||||||||
jk
|
Welcome Naxz. I havent owned either of these cameras but I have a friend who has a D3200 and she make very good photos. I would say that it would be best to get the newer camera as it will allow more flexibility and have a longer support life. I think the most important thing is to actually try to get hands on with the camera and see if it suits you? Next try to get lenses that suit your photographic interests. Both cameras come with kit lenses and you can buy them with a pair of lenses for a very good price. The D3200 can be purchased with the 18-55 and 55-200 or 55-300 lenses. In the future of you find that you want a wider angle lens than 18mm then Sigma make a very good 10-20 zoom that provides great quality at a reasonable cost. The final choice is yours but most success comes with you being most familiar with your kit rather than obsessing about getting the latest and greatest new stuff. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Hello Naxz, welcome to the forum. I have a D3100 I brought the 18-105 lens for it and I am very happy with it. I use it to record my projects and family. Saving the clicks and knocking about off my precious D200. If you go online you may be able to find the feature list of both cameras but frankly from the point of view of the final photograph I defy anybody to know the difference between one taken with each camera, they will look exactly the same and that is all that matters. As JK says the lens is a bigger question than the body, either body would be good but given the choice it probably makes more sense to go with the newer design, although I can't fault the D3100 at the price. It's a tad slower than the D200 but unless you are taking motorsport pix or other high speed activities then that shouldn't be an issue. One thing to be aware of, the D3XXX cameras need an 'S' lens, The body doesn't have an autofocus motor built in so relies on the lens having the autofocus motor which the 'S' lenses have. Your choice of lens depends entirely on your subject matter, anything between 10mm right up to 300mm and beyond. It isn't a good idea to try to get a 10 - 300mm lens!!! The shorter the zoom range the better the image, I find the 18-105 OK for what I want but as soon as I want top quality photographs I reach for my 80-200 or 18-35 or one of my fixed lenses. When I went digital with a D1 back in 2005, I only kept one of my film lenses, the 60mm Nikkor Micro lens, which I used for nearly a year before getting my first zoom, the 80-200mm f2.8. A 35mm 'S' lens if you can find one at a good price would be a good starter lens while you learn the complexities of the camera. I love my 50mm f1.4 for low light candids and pix of the kids, but the 'S' version is an arm and a leg £££/$$$ !!! The main thing is to use the camera and post some photographs here for critique, if you have issues ask, somebody will have the answer, we have all been there. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Here's a side by side of the two models..... http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_d3100&products=nikon_d3200 The obvious differences are the Megapixels and the Expeed processor version. The latter MAY make the speed of focus and operation faster...but these things are often very subjective!! The biggest issue is the 14v24 megapixels. Whilst more pixels suggest a more detailed picture....it doesn't always work out. High pixel sensors really need more care when shooting as their extra detail is easily lost with camera movement. Put them both on a steady tripod and you would probably see an image improve,ent with 24mp. But hand held, unless you double your shutter speed from normal speed (eg use 1/250 instead of 1/125) you are unlikely to see any difference between the two cameras. Personally, the d3100, if the price is right, would be my choice. Hope that helps. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
24Mp??? OMG that is silly. Go with the D3100, I didn't realise the D3200 had 24Mp (Mega pixels). There is no need or reason for that many pixels unless you are planning to print images 40 foot square and examine them with a spy glass! Here is a 100% crop (pixel of image = screen pixel) off an image I have shown in another thread recently. The detail and IQ are well up to my needs. This is with the 18-105 Nikkor on the 3100. Attachment: Oakdale storm 100% crop.jpg (Downloaded 39 times) |
|||||||||
Robert
|
This is a crop of the original image mentioned above. Taken in a full gale. Attachment: The Oakdale in Choppy Water.jpg (Downloaded 38 times) |
|||||||||
Robert
|
This is the entire image as taken on my D3100 with the 18-105 mm zoom @105mm. 1/320 @ f9. Attachment: Screen Shot 2013-12-13 at 20.09.43.jpg (Downloaded 38 times) |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:
Run that by me again? I've never understood 100% crop. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
In lightroom, or any other image viewer, expand the image to 100%, then take a screen shot of the area of interest. On a Mac that is 'Shift + Command + 4 >drag selection and release mouse button', I am sure there will be some key chord to make a selection screen shot on a PC. 100% = one image pixel for one screen pixel. In fact it has lost some quality from me to you, when I compare the crop I made here with the same image on the forum it's not quite as good but it does convey my message, or at least I think it does... Hope that clarifies it! |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Out of curiosity I went to see how PC's do take partial screen shots, Still not a pot wiser... This is one explanation: Attachment: Screen Shot 2013-12-14 at 08.43.34.jpg (Downloaded 33 times) |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:In lightroom, or any other image viewer, expand the image to 100%, then take a screen shot of the area of interest. On a Mac that is 'Shift + Command + 4 >drag selection and release mouse button', I am sure there will be some key chord to make a selection screen shot on a PC. So...does this forum software display your embedded images at 100%? I thought it compressed them. |
|||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote: Robert wrote: Nor me. I prefer to give a magnification. In Photoshop it is shown as a percentage so a 100% is ?????? x2 magnification or what! I guess it is doing a pixel count so a rendering on screen with the same number of pixels as the raw image of 6000pixels x4000pixels (24MP image) is 100%. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Eric wrote:Robert wrote: It only compresses large images, above 1024 pixels I think. It does compress the quality (tonal range?) too of course. The '100%' image I posted is exactly the same size as my crop, which was at 100% magnification in lightroom which is exactly the same as 100% in photoshop, I can't see where the confusion lies, magnify the image to 100% ie. 1 screen pixel = 1 image pixel and do a screen shot of an area of interest? |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:Eric wrote: Probably just a mental block.  |
|||||||||
jk
|
Eric +1  |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Eric, JK, you take such lovely images, forget the technicalities, who cares, just keep making beautiful pix!!!   |
|||||||||
naxz
|
thank you very much sir for your reply. I already bought D3100, I choose it other than D3200 because of its lower price hehe!!. Honestly I don't have any idea of the said camera specially its menu functions and buttons. I look forward of getting an idea from professional photographers like to guide me. If I may ask again, what should I consider first when taking picture using D3100 in bright light and low light? Hoping for your favorable response... |
|||||||||
Robert
|
In a way it might be best to turn the top knob to the green 'AUTO' setting to start with. Despite my ability to make my own settings, when I am using the 3100 I tend to run it in auto, but once you get more used to the camera and you want to be more creative you can gain full control right up to full manual settings. On the back screen you can set a graph or histogram of your image to appear after you have made an exposure. That graph is your friend when taking photographs in bright or poor light. By checking the graph you can see if you have over or under exposed the scene. What you are looking for is an even distribution across the entire graph, with data to the left and right but NOT all bunched up at one side or the other. Check out reading and understanding histograms on the internet, here is one link which give a good explanation but there are many others: http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-read-and-use-histograms Until you understand the limits of exposure you are best working in the auto mode and concentrate on composition of your image, fill the scene. Be sure a photograph has a subject and a background, the subject does not have to be dead centre of the scene; check the light, that is what makes the photograph, sometimes really bright light is not the best, you need some contrast in the scene. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
naxz wrote: thank you very much sir for your reply. I already bought D3100, I choose it other than D3200 because of its lower price hehe!!. Honestly I don't have any idea of the said camera specially its menu functions and buttons. I look forward of getting an idea from professional photographers like to guide me. If I may ask again, what should I consider first when taking picture using D3100 in bright light and low light? Hoping for your favorable response...Personally, I wouldn't bother about camera setting in the first instance. Set it on Auto as Robert mentioned, and take a few shots over a few days....different lighting, indoor, outdoor close up, scenery....a variety of subjects. Then LOOK at each photo. Study it and ask yourself these simple questions..... What's good and what's bad about it; what would I like to change; what would improve the image????? THEN its a matter of deciding how / if the camera can be configured to make those improvements. Some of the things to look out for.... 1. Main subject(s) too dark or light when compared to its surroundings/background 2. Main subject(s) blurred or subject AND background all blurred 3. Main subject(s) / subject areas not sharply in focus 4. Grainy appearance to the photo The quickest way to understanding how a camera performs is to take photos ....and look for those ways to improve the images. There are plenty of people on the forum who will happily advise you on how best to make the changes you require. |
|||||||||
naxz
|
thank you again for your input and advice sir...I will post here some of the photos directly from my new DSLR. |
|||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |