Nikon D5200 vs Olympus E-3

Winner
Nikon D5200

79

Olympus E-3

41

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D5200

Low noise at high ISO
Low light performance
1,284 ISO
Great image quality
Overall image quality
84.0
Full HD
Movie format
1080p @ 60fps
Great color depth
Color depth
24.2 bits
 

Reasons to buy the Olympus E-3

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Viewfinder
Great viewfinder
Pentaprism
Shutter lag
Barely any delay taking photos
135 ms shutter lag

galleries

Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Nikon D5200.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Olympus E-3.

competitors

Nikon D5200 Competitors

Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$460 body only

$369 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Panorama Can create panoramas in-camera
Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
HDR Lacks in-camera HDR
Nikon D5300

Nikon D5300

Entry-level DSLR

$597 body only

$478 - $697 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Overall image quality Slightly worse image quality
Canon EOS Rebel T6

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Entry-level DSLR

$285 - $749 body only

$449 with 18-55mm lens

Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Lowest price Cheaper
Movie format Lower frame rate movies

Olympus E-3 Competitors

Olympus E-30

Olympus E-30

Entry-level DSLR

$1,299 body only

$1,599 with 14-42mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
True resolution Higher true resolution
Color depth Worse color depth
Olympus E-5

Olympus E-5

Entry-level DSLR

$1,800 body only

Movie format Shoots movies
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Lowest price Much more expensive
Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$600 - $2,000 body only

$610 - $1,299 with 12-40mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder Has a digital viewfinder

discussion

Nikon D5200
D5200
Nikon

Report a correction
Olympus E-3
E-3
Olympus

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments