# D5200 vs D3300 - Big dilemma to choose for beginners.



## rramath (Jun 4, 2014)

Well, Confused about which one to go for. the evenly priced new D3300 or last years D5200

Saw a couple of questions out here itself, but couldnt find an answer. My question is just for these two cameras .. (Please do not include D5300 or D7100 because they are way above the price range of these two, nd budget is quite limited).

Well .. according to me D3300 fairs way better in low light cos of better ISO range, Also the new EXPEED 4, No OLPF would give better imaging (not sure though).

D5200 has more AF points (39 compared to 9 ) , has features like bracketing with In Camera HDR, More dynamic range and slightly better image quality (not sure again.. just following web research). It has slower processor Expeed 3 than 3300. Swivel screen is a bonus too.

(Mostly ppl say this is a better camera than D3300 without giving explaining properly )

The price out here in India is exactly the same for both these cameras.

I really need to know which one would fair better. Mostly for beginners for Still photography. I am not much interested in videos. Better the photographs, better the camera for me.

And also how much does the advantage of one feature over the other matter. Does OLPF make a huge diff ? Is EXPEED 4 way better ?? or is higher number of AF points way important ?? Is Bracketing something really useful for beginners ??

Please HELP !!!!!!!!! Let me know in detail why one over the other .. everywhere ppl give mixed opinions about these two.


----------



## nac (Jun 4, 2014)

Quoting Ken,
D5200


> The Nikon D5200 is a swell little camera, but I wouldn't pay $800 for a D5200 when I can get the pretty much identical Nikon D5100 new or refurbished for about half price as of the beginning of 2013. I don't see anything significant to make it worthwhile to throw more money at the newer D5200 if you can still get the D5100 instead, but if you want the newest, sure, the D5200 is a great camera.
> 
> If you're a seasoned photographer who wants more knobs for faster control, go for the far superior D7000 for only about $100 more. If you don't need the flippy screen, the D3200 and D3100 are essentially the same thing for even less money. All will make the same superb photos if you know what you're doing, and if you're not an expert photographer, no camera is going take any better or worse pictures for you.



D3300


> As of April 2014, this D3300 is brand new and not discounted. Avoid the awful old D3000 at any price, while the older D3200 and even older D3100 are also almost as good for less money if you can find them left over. For instance, you can get the older D3100 for only $349, with lens, refurbished, which is almost the same camera as the D3300, for half the price.



I mean you can't go wrong with either. Every camera do have their own share of plus and minus. You can always find one is better than other. That won't be a big deal for a beginner. If you're still confused, you try them in local shop or your friend's, colleagues, relatives DSLR.


----------



## raja manuel (Jun 4, 2014)

I don't use either of these cameras (or any Nikon for that matter) but generally speaking, rather than asking which camera is better it would be better to ask which camera would suit you better, which is entirely dependant on you and your preferences in photography. For e.g., I find the articulating screen on my camera to be invaluable but I know others who have never used it. Similarly, no. of focus points is not something that impresses me for the kind of photography I do – I usually keep only one focus point active and it is often the central one.
Image quality and sensor performance are the sort of thing that armchair experts on the internet agonise over - it has been quite a while since it has been proved that even professionals cannot make out the difference in many cases between photos taken with a very expensive camera and a relatively cheap one. Would a little bit of additional dynamic range make a big difference to your photography? It wouldn't if the first thing you do is turn up the contrast in your photos and crush the dynamic range (which is what so many users actually do). Equally, you might actually prefer a camera with a limited dynamic range if you like to blow or clip the background – there is no right or wrong here, just your artistic expression. I don't care for in-camera image processing tools like HDR, but again  that is just me. I shoot only in raw and prefer to process patiently on  my desktop, but there are others who want their images to be good-to-go  straight out-of-camera.

Camera technology has evolved to the point where the differences between models matter only in increasing niche applications. If you are a beginner, you will be better off getting whichever model you would actually carry with you and enjoy using more - if you travel a lot, for instance, you might prefer the lighter and smaller model.


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 4, 2014)

As raja rightly pointed out ...image quality , better ISO , fast processing all these difference are just negligible between these two...but you may find bracketing, better grip, articulated screen (for macro), more focus point (for birding) more useful

I would say just go to a shop and hold them one after other...you will surely find out the better one


----------



## kaz (Jun 4, 2014)

Pros of D5200
-39 AF Points vs 11 on D3300
-In camera HDR
-Articulated Screen
-Higher Dynamic Range

Pros of D3300
-Higher Native ISO 12800 vs 6400 on D5200
-1080/60p vs 1080/60i on D5200
-Easy Panorama
-Lighter
-Higher Shots in a Single Charge
-New Kit Lens which is smaller, lighter and faster
-Cheaper
-No OLPF (Optical Low Pass Filter)

The winner is D3300


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 5, 2014)

no kaz ...nikon is not fool do bring a better camera then next segment one....D5200 is on higher segment then D3300 ...soo its just obvious that it have better photographic features...D3300 may be just slightly better sensor and ISO


----------



## kaz (Jun 5, 2014)

[MENTION=39722]sujoyp[/MENTION] yeah Picture Quality might be better of D5200 but on specs sheet D3300 is ahead...Just added no OLPF in the D3300 pros list..


----------



## nomad47 (Jun 5, 2014)

ISO 6400, ISO 12800 does not matter. You will start getting noise above 800. Autofocus points is a big thing for me and 39 of it is a huge advantage. And on camera HDR is not as good as the manual ones. You will use it rarely.
I can't comment on the 3300, but after using the 5200 for almost a year now, I say you can't go wrong with it.


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 5, 2014)

If I were to buy I would definitely go for D5200...I find articulated screen very helpful for macros...


----------



## nomad47 (Jun 5, 2014)

sujoyp said:


> If I were to buy I would definitely go for D5200...I find articulated screen very helpful for macros...



+1 for that screen. You can't stop once you use it


----------



## kaz (Jun 5, 2014)

[MENTION=39722]sujoyp[/MENTION] I use Viewfinder only.....Live view is soooo slow 
  [MENTION=154031]nomad47[/MENTION] never clicked an HDR image...I dont have a tripod 
good to have another D5200 user on the forum


----------



## nomad47 (Jun 5, 2014)

[MENTION=121890]kaz[/MENTION] try HDR without tripod also. In normal lighting you should be OK. 
Live view is slow, but that screen helps when aligning the camera near ground level


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 5, 2014)

[MENTION=121890]kaz[/MENTION] try to soot a macro someday with viewfinder  ....I always shoot macros with live view only...its much easier that way


----------



## kaz (Jun 5, 2014)

[MENTION=154031]nomad47[/MENTION] ok I will 

- - - Updated - - -



sujoyp said:


> [MENTION=121890]kaz[/MENTION] try to soot a macro someday with viewfinder  ....I always shoot macros with live view only...its much easier that way



I don't have macro lens  and shooting real close with 18-55 is no problem


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 5, 2014)

kaz you think 18-55 can shoot real close  from 1 meter ....with macro lens I have to shoot upto 3 inch close...that becomes difficult


----------



## kaz (Jun 5, 2014)

sujoyp said:


> kaz you think 18-55 can shoot real close  from 1 meter ....with macro lens I have to shoot upto 3 inch close...that becomes difficult



Real close means the closest for 18-55


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 5, 2014)

[MENTION=121890]kaz[/MENTION] I know  I was just trying to tell you the importance of articulated screen in macro...and live view in macro ...this mansoon start doing macros and you will get to know the importance


----------



## kaz (Jun 5, 2014)

Lets see


----------



## rramath (Jun 7, 2014)

Thanks a ton guys !! That was really really helpful   !!


----------

