Nikon D3200 or D3300?

[Miskey]

I am completely clueless when it comes to cameras, and the more I'm reading, the more confused I'm getting. Please help! I've decided between these two. The D3300 is $150 more, and I would like to know if it's worth the extra cost.

Tia!!

 

[havoc315]

The D3300 should be very slightly sharper, though you are unlikely to notice the difference.
The D3300 is packaged with a newer more compact lens. So with the lens combo, it can be a bit smaller.
The D3300 is slightly better in lots of small ways... slightly longer battery life, shoots 5 frames per second as opposed to 4 frames per second, slightly larger viewfinder, slightly better low light performance. The D3300 has some extra effects modes.

So all around, the D3300 is slightly better, but there aren't revolutionary differences. Whether those differences are worth $150 is a subjective question that only you can answer.

 

[OKW Lover]

That's quite a $ difference. I'd go with the D3200 and put the extra money into a lens.

 

[dmaxphil]

Yes, I'd say its worth it for the higher native ISO, Expeed 4 processor and no low-pass filter.

 

[jec6613]

It's not a $150 price difference for the camera; the price difference for just the camera is $50 ($500 vs. $450), and the lens is the rest of the price difference ($650 vs $500), so a quick breakdown:

Camera:
The D3300 has better software and a new carbon/polycarbonate monocoque construction, and a modestly better ISO capability, and will handle faster and with newer more intuitive menus. Also, you'll have firmware upgrades and support for a longer period of time than on the D3200.

Lens:
The 55-200 lens that comes with the D3200 bundle lacks any image stabilization, and is an old design whose main benefit is that it's cheap, and you can see that as you're only paying $50 in the bundle for it. The 55-200 VR II lens that comes with the D3300 bundle has image stabilization, a collapsible lens barrel, and has much better technical image quality and is actually constructed better so it'll hold up to more. You're paying $150 in the bundle for it, and it's worth it.

Overall, I'd say spend the money if you can afford it, the investment will more than pay off over the life of the camera, particularly as the money is going to a better lens, not really the body itself.

 

[xlxo]

I would get the newer D3300....

 

[Bucfantitan]

I own the 3200 with the two lens kit and it is a awesome. My buddy owns the 3300 and it is nice that the lens are VC lens. The issue with his 3300 is the interface I found it harder to navigate then my 3200. Plus now you can purchase the 3200 with both lens for under 500 now.

My two cents are purchase the 3200 and apply the extra to a prime lens.

Also don't forget to support a local camera shop. Might cost a little more but you are helping out a local business.