I've heard that the canon is v good at video recording but since I have 3 lenses which are nikon and new to video shooting Im not sure what Im looking at for quality? heres a test vid of the 5100 AF anyway - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCbAnLbJv24 I don't get to play with mine till the weekend when im back home :(
Main reasons would be: Build quality Built in AF motor for older AF lenses Bigger brighter viewfinder Image quality especially in low light will be better on the new D3200, plus a 24mp image allows for excellent cropping potential. For anyone else commenting in photo threads: Lens does not have an 'e' on the end.
Just wanted to check that I didn't miss out on any good deals. I've just bought a 600D. Not as good as Nikon when it comes to pictures (not far off), but far superior video. When Nikon sort out AF for video shooting, I'll sell my Canon.
Body only - was on HUKD including that £50 cashback making it £385 :) I concur the D90 feels better and is semi-pro, but on the d5100 I couldn't resist the tilt screen, 1080p video and simply because its lighter and better low light condition pictures. If it was like for like in price I would get D90, but since I got it at difference of £70-80 I could use that for another lense (af-s 50mm). If I knew I was going into professional photography 100% i might of bought the D90, but then again if I was very sure I may have just stepped it up and got a D7000. At the end of the day both D90 and D5100 are great, if you want that final icing on cake you'll need to look at specific user requirements to decide between the two. Portability and versatility are quite high on my list, 5100 topped that. shlunk - I had a go on the 3100 not the 3200 but imo thats a very beginners camera, very limited settings and things to play (I even felt the 5100 was a little limiting compared to the d90, but acceptable imo)
D90 just looks and feels more pro, have a look first don't take my word for it...