I scratch my head so much when I look at Nikon's pricing and offerings that I'm surprised I'm not bald yet.
The following question was posed to me:
Should I get a D3200 or a Nikon 1 J3. They are both $400.
These are the basicsAll I want to know is which YOU would Pick and the main 3 reasons why.
This should be interesting.
Post edited by TaoTeJared on
D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
Larger sensor with all its benefits.
F mount - better lenses.
F mount - eventually the Nikon 1 mount will be discontinued and the lens investment will be lost.
... And no time to use them.
1. same price or cheaper
2. much bigger battery
3. great AF
4. build-in viewfinder
1. Better all around performance. Meaning better combination of speed an image quality, as soon as ISO400 or higher is required.
2. Optical viewfinder
3. More native mount lens options
But if I had to choose between the two I'd get a V3.
1. I have a D7000, I have no need for a D3200.
2. I have a D40, it didn't have enough controls on it for my tastes.
3. I want something smaller.
Pretty easy for me, but I can see how it might be weird for you.
Confuse the customer, make him/her feel small and dull, impress with tons of numbers and tell him to get a D4, best he can do anyway.
But since this is a forum about rumours and "would probably buy if..." and "Nikon would be so much better of, if they only..." anybody expecting simple advice need to reconsider that idea. :-))
If I had to pay, I'd put the money towards glass...
Second thought is if one is purchasing one of these it must be with a budget restraint, thus the only one which works is the kit available with lens. V1 comes with the 10-30mm at $400, but I believe the D3200 would be closer to $500.
so I guess you want something smaller, lighter, for every day use
How do you intend to carry it ?
Will it fit in your bag ?
Do you need high ISO? if so, then I would go for the D3200
Do you need high fps? if so, then its the J3
I would go with the D3200..
1 I could mount my lenses on it..
2 Better IQ'
3 I don't like tiny cameras..
If I was in the market I would actually have picked up a refurb D5200. It was on the bay 2 days ago as a daily deal refurbished(adorama) with a kit lens for $400 and there was a special offer for 13% back in bucks.. so total price was about 350... err I should have purchased one...
The person has a family with kids (under 10yrs old) and it is just for family/friends stuff. They just want better photos than their phone. Asking the question "what do you want to shoot?" confuses them as they don't get why that is a question. Shake your head all you want, but they are not a photographer or a hobbyist at all. That is the majority of people who buy these systems. They know how to crop and brighten an image and that is about it.
Eight posts and it is a split (I assumed the sensor size for those said something other than the choices) and I'm still on the fence of this one. It is a strange choice in the sense that the IQ certainly is with the DX but speed (focusing? and FPS) is with the CX system. Built in wifi would win for sure. They want images to be on the phone immediately. I kind of agree with that one.
Or Panasonic Lumix FZ200 / FZ72? Easily in the price range, the FZ200 a bit above. But imho with 25-600/2.8 ! a better choice, if the lenses don't have to be changed for some reasons
People are starting to sway off the mark - it is between only those two systems. (Stop asking why and yes they both have major limitations) and also please don't assume all your glass is there (because it won't) but that is what it is - straight out of the box.
There will never be any huge prints. I doubt they will be in situations where they are "on the edge" of performance of either system.
They actually buy camera's in a very logical way - they buy a new one every two years and $500 Max (with taxes & accessories) is their budget. (Don't take that as an open door to suggest other systems;) I keep suggesting a DSLR and they can get a new lens every two years - but photographer logic isn't in their bag.
Just to reiterate the goal of the thread so not to get off track:
All I want to know is which YOU would Pick and the main 3 reasons why.