Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs Nikon D3200

Winner
Canon EOS 5D Mark III

100

Nikon D3200

65

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Low noise at high ISO
Low light performance
2,293 ISO
Large screen
Screen size
3.2"
Large viewfinder
Viewfinder size
0.71x
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D3200

Dynamic range
Wide dynamic range
13.2 EV
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Badge
Autofocuses shooting video
Contrast detection
Lens availability
Slightly more lenses available
230 lenses

galleries

Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 5D Mark III.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D3200.

competitors

Canon EOS 5D Mark III Competitors

Nikon D750

Nikon D750

Pro DSLR

$1,499 - $1,897 body only

$2,397 with 24-120mm lens

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Cross type focus points Many fewer cross-type focus points
Canon EOS 6D

Canon EOS 6D

Pro DSLR

$1,164 - $1,499 body only

$1,899 with 24-105mm lens

Dynamic range More dynamic range
GPS Has a GPS
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV

Pro DSLR

$2,999 - $3,499 body only

$4,349 - $4,599 with 24-105mm lens

Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Storage slots Has fewer storage slots

Nikon D3200 Competitors

Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$419 body only

$419 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Panorama Can create panoramas in-camera
Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Canon EOS Rebel T6

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Entry-level DSLR

$325 - $749 body only

$449 with 18-55mm lens

External mic jack Lacks an external mic jack
Canon EOS Rebel T5

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Entry-level DSLR

$319 body only

$360 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Color depth Worse color depth

discussion

Canon EOS 5D Mark III
EOS 5D Mark III
Canon

Report a correction
Nikon D3200
D3200
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments