[jogiba]

Nikon has updated its entry-level DSLR offering with the addition of a 24MP CMOS sensor. This makes it equal to Sony's A65, A77 and NEX-7 in offering the highest pixel count we've yet seen at the APS-C sensor size, and second only to the full-frame professional-grade D800 in Nikon's entire range. The significant thing, though, is that it does so at a starting price of $699 (the same launch price as the D3100 and Panasonic DMC G3, for comparison). It may not be revolutionary, but it promises a lot of camera for a competitive amount of money.

Pixel-count aside, the changes from the D3100 are subtle but, with 1080p30 video, a 920k dot LCD and the option to add an affordable Wi-Fi transmitter, there are clear benefits over the D3100's pretty capable specification. As usual for Nikons at this level, the D3200 doesn't feature a built-in focus motor, doesn't offer auto exposure bracketing and has simplified Active D-Lighting options but beyond these, there's little missing that you could reasonably expect for this class of camera. It even regains the option to trigger the camera with an infrared remote - with the inclusion of sensors on the front and rear of the camera.

The inexorable rise of the mirrorless camera has undoubtedly put particular pressure on the entry-level end of the large sensor market. The smaller body sizes of mirrorless cameras, combined with their more compact-camera-like operation has helped win-over some people who would otherwise have bought a DSLR, as well as drawing people away from high-end compacts. However, entry-level DSLRs still offer a very attractive and polished photographic tool - and with continuous autofocus behavior that no mirrorless camera has come close to matching (aside from Nikon's own 1 V1 and 1 J1, which feature smaller 'CX' sensors). With this in mind, it's understandable Nikon would wheel-out a camera with a big headline specification to look impressive on the shop shelf.

Nikon D3200 Hands-on Preview: Digital Photography Review

D3200 vs T3

Wi-Fi option (WU-1a)

Alongside the D3200, Nikon announced an optional Wi-Fi transmitter for the camera. The WU-1a clips into the USB socket of the D3200 and allows you to broadcast its images to smartphones and tablets running a Nikon app. The unit allows the camera's live view output to be streamed to the smart device and allows images to be shot remotely (at a distance of up to 49ft, but with no control over the camera's settings).

Initially an app will be available for Android phones and tablets, with an iOS version expected in fall/autumn 2012. We're told the app will allow either full-size or VGA-resolution images to be transferred from the camera, but we have yet to see how long it would take to grab a 24MP image. We would also like to see how securely the unit attaches to the camera, given that it sticks out of the side, and looks like it might be a little easy to dislodge. It also requires the port cover that reaches all the way up the camera's flank to be left hanging open all of the time that it's in use.

12800 iso JPEG D3200 vs K-5 :


http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-18-55mm-3-5-5-6-NIKKOR/dp/B007VGGFZU/ref...5575364&sr=1-1

---

Last edited by jogiba; 04-27-2012 at 06:10 PM.

[causey]

After using the comparative tool to see what D3200 can do, I think I prefer K-5's sensor...

[JohnBee]

After using the comparative tool to see what D3200 can do, I think I prefer K-5's sensor...

Sounds very interesting.
Care to share why you feel this way?

I had a look around the studio scene(very quickly) and thought the 3200 IQ looked very good but now I'm thinking I might of missed something.

[causey]

Retracting... Looking at the raw files--the D3200 is clearly noisier than the K-5, but there seems to be enough additional detail (given the D3200 is 24mp) to make up for the noise.

[Jasvox]

I compared the the D3200 to the K-7, k-5 and NEX-5n and found the K-5 and NEX-5n to have much better quality at 1600 and 3200 when viewing raw files.

Jason

[causey]

I compared the the D3200 to the K-7, k-5 and NEX-5n and found the K-5 and NEX-5n to have much better quality at 1600 and 3200 when viewing raw files.

Jason

I had the same impression for ISO 3200, and I assumed the same conclusion applied to higher ISO, but now I think even at 3200 the D3200 is better. Much more detail...

[JinDesu]

Are we looking at JPEG comparisons, or RAW? Because in RAW, the k-5 is trumping the D3200 once you reach 1600 ISO.

Even in RAW, the k-x is beating the D3200 at ISO 3200+. At 12,800, it's laughable - I can do noise reduction on the k-x file (some luminance, barely any color) and recover it nicely. The D3200 file looks like it needs a lot more color denoising.

I wanted to play with the RAW files for denoising, but my Photoshop and Lightroom doesn't recognize the D3200 files =\

[Deimos]

I see a lot more noise (and chroma noise) in the d3200 files (RAW or jpeg). there seems to be a touch more detail in some areas, but most look noisier, less contrasty and with worse colour than the K-5.

I still prefer the K-5 output myself. But clearly a nice sensor for an entry level camera!

[joe.penn]

I don't know - if going by just the snaps above it appears the noise on the K5 image is smeared (by NR). It looks like that maybe 2 different procedures/NR Alg's were used for each image.

In any case, there is one thing to be said here - NIKON is on the ball in the DSLR realm at the moment with all of their recent and recently rumored releases, they have come out of the gate in full stride, impressive to say the least!

[JinDesu]

I don't know - if going by just the snaps above it appears the noise on the K5 image is smeared (by NR). It looks like that maybe 2 different procedures/NR Alg's were used for each image.

In any case, there is one thing to be said here - NIKON is on the ball in the DSLR realm at the moment with all of their recent and recently rumored releases, they have come out of the gate in full stride, impressive to say the least!

Comparing the JPEG high ISO shots is straight from camera, and the k-5 version has NR turned on. My understanding is that the k-5's jpeg output at high ISO isn't so great - and a lot of review sites gave it flak because they never bothered to look at the RAW.

In fact, if you look at the RAW processed ISO 3200 shot of the k-x, it beats the out-of-body jpeg from the k-5. But once we talk about RAW files, the k-5 is king of this bunch (of course), and the k-x still beats the D3200. The D3200 just has a larger resolution - it has so much more noise than the k-x.

At ISO 100, the D3200 looks lovely. So yes - it's a great sensor. But even at ISO 800, you are getting quite a bit more chroma noise. And chroma always looks uglier than luminance noise.

[causey]

Are we looking at JPEG comparisons, or RAW? Because in RAW, the k-5 is trumping the D3200 once you reach 1600 ISO.

Even in RAW, the k-x is beating the D3200 at ISO 3200+. At 12,800, it's laughable - I can do noise reduction on the k-x file (some luminance, barely any color) and recover it nicely. The D3200 file looks like it needs a lot more color denoising.

I wanted to play with the RAW files for denoising, but my Photoshop and Lightroom doesn't recognize the D3200 files =\

It surprising how good the K-x is compared to both K-5 and D3200 at ISO 800; but I still think the D3200 has enough detail to make up for the noise. Another thing: Canon T3i doesn't look bad at all. All these cameras are great. They aren't going to make a definitive photographic difference.

[ihasa]

Chroma noise is readily dealt with. The D3200 is resolving a LOT more detail - look at the hour makings on the clock! Downsample the images to K5 resolution, and I reckon they'll be decisively better. The question for me is, is such high image quality really necessary? Probably not, but it's still nice to have!

[causey]

The question for me is, is such high image quality really necessary? Probably not, but it's still nice to have!

Considering that the files will require even more space and CPU power, I don't know. For my needs, K-x is enough. But I will upgrade sometime in the not-so-near future. (A FF offer from Pentax would be a different story.)

[jogiba]

D3200 w/ 18-55mm kit lens @ 55mm, 2/5 sec, F5.6 , 12800 iso :

[Unsinkable II]

Forgetting sensors for a moment...

D3200 and 1100D dials are equally usable. K-x beats them. Far easier to operate while gripping with one hand.

On/Off switch: Nikon and Pentax are far easier to use. Simple thing, but important.

Lens release: Pentax kicks both in the teeth.

Complaint for Pentax. Focus assist is CHEAP (I make electronics). You're dicking with your customers by not implementing it in every dslr.

Complaint for everyone: Adding a second dial will cost you no more than US$1.50.