With the recently fast performance and very good photo quality.
The Nikon 3200 delivers what you expect from India --
While the cameras lackluster feature set some underwhelming design changes.
And photos that don't necessarily surpass its predecessor might disappoint some people.
It's still delivers enough that it should please most folks we're looking for an upgrade from their point sheets.
It's a lot of the same or similar components of the 3100.
Including the same viewfinder not a focuses. The latter's bolstered by an icons -- -- recognition technology.
Also has a newer higher resolution sensor coupled with icons updated XP -- three imaging engine.
Got a higher resolution LCD and 108830. HDMI connector.
The 3200 essentially has the same body as the 3100.
It's still relatively small and light now it also still feels a little plasticky.
While it remains a pretty streamlined camera issue. Like it's changed a few of the control types and locations and -- -- don't particularly like.
It keeps the same view finder it's small and -- which is pretty typical for this class.
I also hate that -- focus points which only illuminate and only briefly when you -- press the shutter.
Impossible to see in moderate to dim light so if you shoot on anything other than full -- you first have to press the shutter to find the appropriate focus point.
For you can even begin different --
Act is also -- the record button. Twin I think is an awkward location.
On the 3100 there's a combination live -- record switch that falls on your right thumb and that's really nice.
Now we're back to the separate live view button on the back which you have to invoke first before you can record.
An a record button on top you've got stretch to reach. 200 does keep and I Scotland that provides various levels of step by step help for a limited number of common shootings.
Not come audibly puts the 3200 SD card slot and the more accessible direct side location.
Unfortunately it retains the bare bones feature -- of the 3100. Right down to -- lack -- something as basic as bracket it.
Compared to its competitors. The 3200 matches their photo quality but doesn't -- -- them.
In fact I think the 3100 has better photos of world and by the numbers it has a better noise profile.
In general the JPEG for clean up to ISO 400.
You don't gain any -- ambiguous advantage issue -- -- about iso 16100.
It still gives you some headroom for image manipulation. But you can't easily produce cleaner image without some tradeoffs.
In other specs color exposure sharpness -- ranged camera -- very well.
I wasn't terribly impressed with the video quality.
It's okay for personal vacation I use but even in good light it's fairly soft and there are a variety of -- -- -- based artifacts.
In dim light it gets very.
Performance is definitely better than its predecessor -- still a rocket ship compared with models like -- -- -- -- except.
This is typical for its class live view auto focus is slow and cumbersome.
And full time auto focus video performs about the same as other allies it can focus but it doesn't stick in pulses on moving -- --
There's nothing about this camera that screens behind me -- don't --
It's faster has better LCD and better video in the 3100.
-- -- sensor doesn't deliver better photo quality.
It's bare bones feature set can't match that of the cheaper 837.
You can probably find the older -- more feature rich 5100. For less than the cost of the new 3200.
Still. I think most entry level shooters will be perfectly satisfied that my content.
