Updated (March 2012): Compare the Nikon D3200 vs Nikon D5000

Nikon D3200 vs Nikon D5000

Winner
Nikon D3200

100

Nikon D5000

71

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D3200

Low noise at high ISO
Low light performance
1,131 ISO
Great image quality
Overall image quality
81.0
Full HD
Movie format
1080p @ 30fps
Great color depth
Color depth
24.1 bits
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D5000

Screen flips out
Flip-out screen
Great for movies
Supports RAW
Shoots RAW
Better editing
Interchangeable lenses
Interchangeable lenses
Many lenses to choose from
Sensor type
CMOS Sensor
Better in low light

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D3200.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D5000.

competitors

Nikon D3200 Competitors

Nikon D3400

Nikon D3400

Entry-level DSLR

$390 body only

$349 - $497 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Lower frame rate movies
Battery life Much longer battery life
External mic jack Lacks an external mic jack
Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$405 body only

$399 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Lower frame rate movies
Viewfinder size Larger viewfinder
Lowest price More expensive
Nikon Coolpix L340

Nikon Coolpix L340

Super zoom

$162 - $171

Battery life Significantly longer battery life
Size Significantly smaller
Movie format Lower resolution movies

Nikon D5000 Competitors

Nikon D3100

Nikon D3100

Entry-level DSLR

$533 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Screen size Much larger screen
Screen flips out Screen does not flip out
Nikon D90

Nikon D90

Entry-level DSLR

$600 body only

Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Screen size Much larger screen
Screen flips out Screen does not flip out
Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$405 body only

$399 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Screen flips out Screen does not flip out

discussion

Nikon D3200
D3200
Nikon

Report a correction
Nikon D5000
D5000
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments