Nikon D3300 vs D5300?

[Renegade7369]

Trying to decide which DSLR camera to get the wife for christmas. Want to stick to Nikon because that is what she has used for years and the UI is easy for her, rather than trying to figure out a new UI from Canon or Sony or something.

 

I know they can both use the same lenses and accessories.

 

I know 5300 has more autofocus points that 3300 but is it enough to make a difference or will a good lens compensate?

 

Any advice at all will be great.

 

Which one should I get?

 

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/nikon-d3300-dslr-camera-with-18-55mm-vr-ii-and-55-200mm-vr-ii-lenses-red/4412300.p?id=1219749550593&skuId=4412300

 

OR

 

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/nikon-d5300-dslr-camera-with-18-55mm-vr-lens-red/3394001.p?id=1219091218879&skuId=3394001

[Jacktastic-Mofo]

I have the D3200 and have worked with the D5200 and would recommend the D5300 for its rotating screen and slightly better sensor and better video abilities. However if you want more lens options then get the D3300 as it comes with two lenses and a bag (same one I own) at an awesome price.

[Renegade7369]

I have the D3200 and have worked with the D5200 and would recommend the D5300 for its rotating screen and slightly better sensor and better video abilities. However if you want more lens options then get the D3300 as it comes with two lenses and a bag (same one I own) at an awesome price.

The biggest question I have is, do the extra focus points make enough of a difference to where using the same lens on the 3300 would produce a better image than on the 5300?

[ALwin]

It won't make a big difference on image quality, but having more AF points can assist when taking a photo.  Either camera should take good photos, and to the naked eye the if both cameras were using the same lens the image quality will be the same.

 

If you can afford both, compare which camera has the features you need or which offers more features for the price.

[Jacktastic-Mofo]

The biggest question I have is, do the extra focus points make enough of a difference to where using the same lens on the 3300 would produce a better image than on the 5300?

No, it'll just focus ever so slightly faster. Also here is a photo I took with the D3200 and a 300MM lens- you can expect similar results from the D3300.

 

[Renegade7369]

My budget is roughly $1000 for the camera and maybe some accessories, so would I be better off getting the 3300 bundle and another $3-400 lens or something? Or would it be smarter to get the 5300 and get another lens later and roll with the stock one for a couple months?

[ALwin]

The biggest question I have is, do the extra focus points make enough of a difference to where using the same lens on the 3300 would produce a better image than on the 5300?

 

There are two parts to focus points.  First is how many focus points the camera has, the second is how many of of which type.

 

There are two types of focus points. Line and Cross types.  Cross types are more accurate for AF so a camera with more Cross types is generally better.

 

More Focus points mean that they make life easier if the main subject of focus is not in the center but more towards the outer edges.  You don't have to focus and recompose as much.

 

Read this article

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-autofocus.htm

[Renegade7369]

There are two parts to focus points.  First is how many focus points the camera has, the second is how many of of which type.

 

There are two types of focus points. Line and Cross types.  Cross types are more accurate for AF so a camera with more Cross types is generally better.

 

More Focus points mean that they make life easier if the main subject of focus is not in the center but more towards the outer edges.  You don't have to focus and recompose as much.

So would it be smarter to go with the 5300 for more focus points to be able to take shots that you might not be able to line up twice or something?

 

For example: Children who don't stand still for longer than a couple seconds. Haha

[ALwin]

So would it be smarter to go with the 5300 for more focus points to be able to take shots that you might not be able to line up twice or something?

 

For example: Children who don't stand still for longer than a couple seconds. Haha

 

As I said earlier, it's up to you.  Both cameras produce more or less the same image quality.  So compare the features they each offer and see which is more important.

 

I personally like having many focus points in my camera.  They are useful when taking photos of subjects in motion and keeping a fast moving subject centered on a selected point is hard.

 

Anyway read the link in my previous comment.

[Renegade7369]

As I said earlier, it's up to you.  Both cameras produce more or less the same image quality.  So compare the features they each offer and see which is more important.

 

I personally like having many focus points in my camera.  They are useful when taking photos of subjects in motion and keeping the subject centered on a selected point is hard.

 

Anyway read the link in my previous comment.

Reading it right now. Thanks

[ALwin]

Here is a comparison of the two cameras

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3300-vs-Nikon-D5300

[Renegade7369]

Here is a comparison of the two cameras

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3300-vs-Nikon-D5300

I read that but it doesn't seem to explain what each individual stat affects, such as the dynamic range or how much of a difference the extra focus points make, etc.

[ALwin]

I read that but it doesn't seem to explain what each individual stat affects, such as the dynamic range or how much of a difference the extra focus points make, etc.

 

ok give me a few mins and I will explain

[Renegade7369]

ok give me a few mins and I will explain

Sorry if this is turning into a big task for you. Just trying to learn myself so I can make the best decision for my wife's new camera.

[ALwin]

Nahh, was just playing a co-op match with some people.

 

OK first of all, the main features you need to look at are the physical features. Like flip out back LCD, AF points, battery life, etc.

 

Things like dynamic range and low light capability stats, while they can appear useful, when it comes down to real world usage they can end up meaning very little.  A good photographer with experience and skill can compensate or even go beyond the limitations of the camera (what I call, just a tool). 

 

So what if a camera can go up to ISO102,400, no one uses that high ISO in the real world.  My two main workhorse cameras are considered among some of the best cameras, and capable of very high ISO.  But I never go above 3200, and even setting it to 3200 is very rare.  If I need more light, I either switch to a faster lens or use a flash.

 

Dynamic range?  I shoot in RAW and use various techniques or various types of filters when I need to capture scenes with a wide dynamic range.

 

The difference that the number of focus points will make will depend on the type of photo you are trying to capture.  If you're taking family portraits and everyone is standing still posing, it doesn't really matter. But go to a basketball game and try to take photos of your favorite player performing a slam dunk.  A camera with more focus points will give you a better chance of capturing the moment.  Same thing with wildlife photography, when I try to photography wild birds flying in the sky I am glad my camera has 51 focus points.

 

It would take me a long time to go over every point in that comparison, but perhaps you might not have seen the detailed list.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3300-vs-Nikon-D5300/detailed

 

I'm looking at the detailed list myself and I think the differences in the measured values are very marginal for most of them.

[Renegade7369]

Nahh, was just playing a co-op match with some people.

 

OK first of all, the main features you need to look at are the physical features. Like flip out back LCD, AF points, battery life, etc.

 

Things like dynamic range and low light capability stats, while they can appear useful, when it comes down to real world usage they can end up meaning very little.  A good photographer with experience and skill can compensate or even go beyond the limitations of the camera (what I call, just a tool). 

 

So what if a camera can go up to ISO102,400, no one uses that high ISO in the real world.  My two main workhorse cameras are considered among some of the best cameras, and capable of very high ISO.  But I never go above 3200, and even setting it to 3200 is very rare.  If I need more light, I either switch to a faster lens or use a flash.

 

Dynamic range?  I shoot in RAW and use various techniques or various types of filters when I need to capture scenes with a wide dynamic range.

 

The difference that the number of focus points will make will depend on the type of photo you are trying to capture.  If you're taking family portraits and everyone is standing still posing, it doesn't really matter. But go to a basketball game and try to take photos of your favorite player performing a slam dunk.  A camera with more focus points will give you a better chance of capturing the moment.  Same thing with wildlife photography, when I try to photography wild birds flying in the sky I am glad my camera has 51 focus points.

 

It would take me a long time to go over every point in that comparison, but perhaps you might not have seen the detailed list.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3300-vs-Nikon-D5300/detailed

 

I'm looking at the detailed list myself and I think the differences in the measured values are very marginal for most of them.

Wow that is awesome. Thanks. And yes, I missed over the detailed list button. I must have thought it was a link to an ad or something and not looked at it.

[Captain_Slow]

The biggest question I have is, do the extra focus points make enough of a difference to where using the same lens on the 3300 would produce a better image than on the 5300?

Not really unless you want the camera to select an point for you, you'll use the center at point 99% of the time

[d3sl91]

Wow that is awesome. Thanks. And yes, I missed over the detailed list button. I must have thought it was a link to an ad or something and not looked at it.

 

As usual, @ALwin has had good points. 

 

 

 

 

My question - What is she upgrading from? Did she already use and prefer a DSLR? Does she need a large DSLR?

 

If taking pictures of the kids and getting snapshots of random stuff on trips is the need - Maybe a smaller camera would do her better than a DSLR. These days, cheaper Mirrorless/Micro 4/3s take just as good of pictures in most casual environments and are smaller, lighter, and more "fun cool features" rich than a DSLR. All while still being a very serious camera that can easily replace a DSLR in many situations.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1029860-REG/sony_ilce6000l_b_alpha_a6000_mirrorless_digital.html - a very popular (for good reason) offering.

 

Olympus, Panasonic and Sony seem to be the Go-To brands right now for Mirrorles and 4/3s cameras. 

[Renegade7369]

As usual, @ALwin has had good points. 

 

 

 

 

My question - What is she upgrading from? Did she already use and prefer a DSLR? Does she need a large DSLR?

 

If taking pictures of the kids and getting snapshots of random stuff on trips is the need - Maybe a smaller camera would do her better than a DSLR. These days, cheaper Mirrorless/Micro 4/3s take just as good of pictures in most casual environments and are smaller, lighter, and more "fun cool features" rich than a DSLR. All while still being a very serious camera that can easily replace a DSLR in many situations.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1029860-REG/sony_ilce6000l_b_alpha_a6000_mirrorless_digital.html - a very popular (for good reason) offering.

 

Olympus, Panasonic and Sony seem to be the Go-To brands right now for Mirrorles and 4/3s cameras. 

She currently has a Nikon P500. At the time i bought it, almost 4-5 years ago i think, it seemed like a good choice, but now that I am more into tech stuff than I was back then, and am more perceptive to different resolutions and image quality than I used to be, i feel like its about time to get here a newer one.

[.spider.]

The D3300 and invest the saved money in lenses.

The D3300 has more than enough focus points for almost everything.

A good photographer with experience and skill can compensate or even go beyond the limitations of the camera (what I call, just a tool). 

 

Going beyond of physical properties isn't possible.

[Renegade7369]

The D3300 and invest the saved money in lenses.

The D3300 has more than enough focus points for almost everything.

Going beyond of physical properties isn't possible.

So the more i think about this, the more I think i should get the d3300 bundle with the 2 basic lenses and get a good 50mm lens for like portraits and stuff. Does that sound like a better option than the 5300?

[ALwin]

So the more i think about this, the more I think i should get the d3300 bundle with the 2 basic lenses and get a good 50mm lens for like portraits and stuff. Does that sound like a better option than the 5300?

Up to you.

As I said before, the specification differences are marginal. The physical differences are in certain features like a swivel back LCD which could be useful for taking photos from different angles. I had to invest in one of these when I started out (see image), now I have an external field monitor as none of my cameras have flip out screens.

A Nikon D3300 and my $3000 (when I purchased it) D800E, in the right hands both can capture high quality images. Sure there are differences in terms of MP count, durability of the physical body, higher ISO rating, inclusion of an AF motor in the body making it better compatible with older lenses, etc. But I didn't buy my D800E or my $6000 D4 for the sensor or image quality. I bought it because the consumer level cameras like the D3300 are not designed to be as durable as the more expensive "pro" models. My cameras have been through rain, mud, dirt, dust, sand, sun, without a protective weather cover and they still work like brand new.

This is how my camera can look like during some field work. (Image is not of my camera, I don't have a photo of mine with mud)

I can even make my camera take gigapixel photos*, with the right technique and accessories. This goes beyond the camera's native specifications. I've modified some of my older camera bodies to take IR and UV photos. I have underwater housings for some of my cameras so I can take photos and videos while I am diving.

HDR techniques allow you to capture a higher dynamic range than what the camera's sensor is designed to do. ND gradient filters can also help capture wide dynamic range scenes. I've also used other techniques such as focus stacking, exposure stacking, exposure blending/fusion, reverse mounting lenses, etc. to go beyond the written specifications on paper. Slightly higher than base ISO can help extend the range of the flash unit in flash photography.**   Additionally, a bit of over exposure can also help improve the captured image and improve the performance of your camera's dynamic range.

*I'm not breaking any laws of physics or hocus pocus voodoo. My 16MP D4 and 36MP D800E are still 16/36MP respectively. I'm just using various techniques to capture 50-100MP or more photos.

**Today I was covering a press conference for some celebrities visiting the UN, and even though I was using a flash unit to provide lighting my camera was set to using ISO1000 because it provided a better exposure than using ISO100.

The type of people who only limit themselves to the specifications written on paper are the amateurs.

Here's what I say, take your wife to a store that carries both cameras, let her try out both cameras, explain to her the differences, including the price and investment costs (the cost of a D3300 allows you to buy a few more accessories than if you buy the D5300), and see what she prefers.

Nikon has a TON of lenses on the second hand market, many of them are good and cheap. Too bad you don't seem to have a budget to get a Nikon D7100 or 7200 body, which has an AF motor built in the body making it better compatible with many older Nikon lenses that do not have AF motors inside the lens.

Bodies like the D3300 or D5300 do not have an AF motor inside the body, so in order to get Auto Focus the camera body has to rely on the motor being inside the lens. But higher level Nikon cameras have a motor inside the body too, letting them AF with older Nikon lenses that do not have the motor inside.

[ALwin]

One of my favorite events to cover, I will see if I can go again next year.  I came out of this event with my coat singed and head to toe covered in a thin layer of ash and smelling of smoke, but camera still in perfect condition.  While some "tourists" who were there, in the front rows like I was, left with damaged cameras and phones.

[Renegade7369]

One of my favorite events to cover, I will see if I can go again next year.  I came out of this event with my coat singed and head to toe covered in a thin layer of ash and smelling of smoke, but camera still in perfect condition.  While some "tourists" who were there, in the front rows like I was, left with damaged cameras and phones.

Jeez. Yea my wife pretty much only does some landscape stuff if were driving down the highway or if I fly her down to visit her family. Other than that, she does a lot of like family pictures for friends and family.

 

The only thing that seems to be my deciding factor is that the 5300 has built in wifi which she can hook up to her Samsung Tab S to preview pictures before loading them to the computer and see if she has to retake. (I know she can preview on the camera's screen, but her tablet is a 10.5 inch screen with a 1440p resolution, so she can get a lot better feel for how the picture will ultimately turn out and whether she needs to do a retake or not.)

 

Other than that, I am mildly worried that with more AF points on the 5300, she will be able to line up shots of kids running around and playing easier than with the 3300's less AF points. Kids don't like to stand still very long or do the same thing twice if you missed it with the camera, so that is what I am partially worried about. From my reading, it seems that more AF points makes it easier to focus in shots in motion.

[.spider.]

  I boost the ISO even in enough light, because using a higher ISO than the camera's lowest native setting can improve the dynamic ranged captured by the sensor.

 

That's funny

Actually it decreases the dynamic range but it increases the distance between the noise floor and the shadows by a loss of details in highlights.

As I said the limits are fixed.