Nikon d3200 sample image
![nikon d3200 sample image nikon d3200 sample image](https://live.staticflickr.com/7099/7273316990_57f302574b_b.jpg)
bicubic downsampling in PS) because of the thinner antialiasing filter and the fact that it's a Bayer sensor where the actual RGB image that you see is a result of interpolation. High-resolution sensors also produce better detail contrast at lower resolutions (after e.g. However, given the D3200's high pixel density the requirement of high per pixel level sharpness is unrealistic in many situations in practical photography. These lenses have overall very good performance, practical range, and the autofocus functions exemplarily (especially on the telezoom). I haven't used the D3200 but I would think the lenses Matt mentions would work well on it the 17-55 DX and the VR 70-200/2.8 (either version). These have the AF motor built-in, similar to Canon's USM. What you are looking for, instead, are AF-S lenses for the D3200. The indication "G" only means the lens has no dedicated aperture ring. Nikon does not explicitely has a line-up like Canon L with a red pinstripe to indicate they believe the lens to be better. Does it really need to remain pin-sharp at those magnifications? How large do you print, is the resolution of the image really that important? In other words: in real world application, how important is it really that at 100% your 24 megapixel image looks perfect? Of course, you also need to consider what you are really looking at, when you zoom to 100%: that's equivalent to a huge enormous print. It's not a fool-proof system (like any AF system is prone to errors), but it might help you out. This continues to work with AF-D lenses on a D3200, even if you focus them manually. But typical prints and web viewing, of course, forgive all sorts of technique sins.įocus confirmation light is the little dot in the viewfinder that lights up when the system achieved focus. The D3200 is utterly ruthless if you're actually going to use all of that data or crop substantially. I've also been very happy with sharpness from three Sigma lenses (the 10-20 ultrawide, and the 30 and 50 1.4 HSM primes) and Nikon's 70-200/2.8. Pixel peeping a 24MP image file isn't generally very productive, but of course I can't help myself and sometimes do. I've not felt wanting for sharpness even a bit. With good technique and light, that combo produces enormous, razor-sharp image files.Īs I've been test-driving that body, I've most often kept my 17-55/2.8 mounted. Speaking of studio macro stuff, I've used a Nikon 60/2.8 Micro (which must be manually focused on a body like this) to wonderful results on the D3200. I find it's quite accurate once you understand the "size" of the area the D3200's AF system is actually looking at.Īnd don't forget you can use Live View (zoomed in) for very, very accurate focusing when shooting something like landscapes or studio macro type stuff.
Nikon d3200 sample image manual#
So if you're rolling your manual focus from near to far, the LED will pop up to tell you when you've nailed your subject. In the viewfinder is a green rangefinder LED that will light up as you hit focus.
Nikon d3200 sample image series#
Even so, I am loathe to buy an expensive G series lens for a camera if it isn't going to produce-and I am not financially prepared just yet to spring for the D800. Those bird shots look pretty crisp, and so user error is a definite possibility on the landscape shots used with a tripod and timed shutter release. So far my best shots with the D3200 have been hand-held shots of a bird, of all things. Has anyone used some of the best Nikon glass on the D3200? What have you gotten? I am hoping that someone has gotten better than I have. (It won't take D series lenses, and so I cannot try my old AF 80-200mm f/2.8D workhorse on it.) There is obviously no point in packing 24 megapixels on a 1.5x crop sensor if one cannot resolve those pixels. I would like to hear from someone who has shot the D3200 with high quality G lenses. I still suspect that the camera is capable of better. I never expected a camera with such high pixel density to be the best performer, but I expected better than this-especially with the lens stopped down to f/8: The results look pretty soft to me, and I hate excessive applications of unsharp mask. I have been shooting it with the 18-105mm and have gotten good results-until one looks at the 100 percent crops. I have now bought the Nikon D3200, but I have no high quality G lens to use on it. I shot the Canon T2i (one of the Digital Rebels with 18 megapixels) with a high quality lens (the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L) and got incredibly sharp results.