Canon EOS 50D vs Nikon D3100

Winner
Canon EOS 50D

68

Nikon D3100

59

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 50D

Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Rapid fire
Continuous shooting
6.3 fps
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
300 ms startup delay
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Pentaprism
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D3100

Supports 24p
24p movies
For that film look
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Badge
Autofocuses shooting video
Contrast detection
Sensor cleaning
Self cleaning sensor
Avoids dust in your photos

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 50D.
Explore our gallery of 48 sample photos taken by the Nikon D3100.

competitors

Canon EOS 50D Competitors

Canon EOS 60D

Canon EOS 60D

Pro DSLR

$800 body only

$1,244 with 50mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Movie format Shoots movies
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag
Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

$400 body only

$600 with 18-135mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Movie format Shoots movies
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag
Canon Rebel T5i

Canon Rebel T5i

Entry-level DSLR

$390 - $649 body only

$449 - $599 with 18-55mm lens

HDR Has in-camera HDR
Autofocus Video autofocus
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag

Nikon D3100 Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Entry-level DSLR

$325 body only

$379 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
True resolution Higher true resolution
Color depth Worse color depth
Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$419 body only

$400 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Thickness Thicker
Nikon D3200

Nikon D3200

Entry-level DSLR

$348 body only

$426 with 18-55mm lens

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Thickness Thicker

discussion

Canon EOS 50D
EOS 50D
Canon

Report a correction
Nikon D3100
D3100
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments