Is it using the same sensor as the D7100? When i used the d7100, highlights are quite recoverable though not as much as the D800.
Nikon D3300 User Thread
- Thread starter JacePhoto
- Start date
Is it using the same sensor as the D7100? When i used the d7100, highlights are quite recoverable though not as much as the D800.
I have no idea about the sensor. But dynamic range is not that great. Don't get me wrong. It's a great camera at a great price point.
I M just covering from someone who has downgrade from a D800. Someone who is looking for a good-enough camera to use for personal usage. Haha.
I M just covering from someone who has downgrade from a D800. Someone who is looking for a good-enough camera to use for personal usage. Haha.
I finally purchased wireless WU-1A. First and foremost was the confusion between A and B. Seems like B is for d600 series. One thing that is different is their USB mounting is different. From the looks of it, 1B cannot mount to D3300.
The wireless app connects quite fast. Touch focus was ok even in din light. My only complain is the timer is only 2 seconds! Not enough time to even put your hands down when u are holding the iPhone.
I haven't tested on the distance it works at the moment. I hope I am not disappointed. Haha
The wireless app connects quite fast. Touch focus was ok even in din light. My only complain is the timer is only 2 seconds! Not enough time to even put your hands down when u are holding the iPhone.
I haven't tested on the distance it works at the moment. I hope I am not disappointed. Haha
#6 - New 18-55 Kit lens test at 50mm length
Comparing the new 18-55 Kit lens with 50 mm F1.8G Prime Lens.
Nikon has raved about its new 18-55 Version 2 Kit Lens. I put it to the test with a prime lens at 50 mm focal length. Of course, its not that i am unhappy with the 18-55. I am just curious how it stands up.
For the 18 mm length, i can accept its performance so i didn't do any comparison.
<original size at 100%>
[/url]
18-55 Version 2Kit lens compared by We are only as good as our next picture, on Flickr[/img]
Comparing the new 18-55 Kit lens with 50 mm F1.8G Prime Lens.
Nikon has raved about its new 18-55 Version 2 Kit Lens. I put it to the test with a prime lens at 50 mm focal length. Of course, its not that i am unhappy with the 18-55. I am just curious how it stands up.
For the 18 mm length, i can accept its performance so i didn't do any comparison.
<original size at 100%>
18-55 Version 2Kit lens compared by We are only as good as our next picture, on Flickr[/img]
#6 - New 18-55 Kit lens test at 50mm length
Comparing the new 18-55 Kit lens with 50 mm F1.8G Prime Lens.
Nikon has raved about its new 18-55 Version 2 Kit Lens. I put it to the test with a prime lens at 50 mm focal length. Of course, its not that i am unhappy with the 18-55. I am just curious how it stands up.
For the 18 mm length, i can accept its performance so i didn't do any comparison.
<original size at 100%>
[/url]
18-55 Version 2Kit lens compared by We are only as good as our next picture, on Flickr[/img]
Did you do a comparison of the 18-55 to the old 18-55?
I see. But I really don't see how a zoom lens can be sharper than a prime lens stopped down, especially the zoom lens is a kit lens. I think a fairer comparison is to compare it with the previous 18-55VR or the cult status 18-55ED non VR.
ya. agree la. But Nikon hype it so much. I have to decide whether to carry the 18-55 or the 50 mm... haha :bsmilie:
Light Machinery
Senior Member
Hi Jace. Thanks for the quick review. I thought the new 18-55mm is much better than what I have now. Nikon's MTF shows that the new 18-55mm is better than the old.
Guess I'll be keeping the old lens.
Guess I'll be keeping the old lens.
s1221ljc
Senior Member
Pardon me but I am a bit confused. The image on the right looks more contrasty/sharper (seen more clearly by bluish walls & the rooftops antennas) & this is the 50mm f1.8g? And why the 48mm setting (left image kit zoom) has a narrower angle of view than the 50mm (right image prime)? Anyway, the lighting is different as shown by the bleached out roof on right image which can account for the perceived contrast/sharpness.
Your posts show the D3300 is a very good camera indeed. I understand that it has a built in panorama feature. Have you tried it & is it good?
Thanks for sharing...
Your posts show the D3300 is a very good camera indeed. I understand that it has a built in panorama feature. Have you tried it & is it good?
Thanks for sharing...
Last edited:
Hi S1221ljc,
I didn't want to draw the 'conclusions' but let readers decide on their own.
You are right! The kit lens is less sharp.
> Why the images on the right looks contrasty/ sharper? >> Different lens coating and elements give you different results.
> Why is the left image at 48 mm? >> Because on the kit lens, there is no '50 mm focal length' marking. Manually i have tried to 'set it' at 50 mm. However the exif file says '48 mm'. Thats why it has a narrow angle. I wanted to state it correctly that it was at 48 mm focal length.
> Light is different as shown by the bleached out roof >> Yes. Anyway, imho, it was more contrasty. But yes, the highlights of the 50mm F1.8G was blown.
I haven't tried the panorama feature yet. Will bear in mind.
Yes, its a good cam. A good alternative rather than changing to M4/3 or other rangefinder styled APSC.
I am happy with the video quality of the D3300. Seems to work fine even for professional use. It has an audio in. Nice for a camera for this class. It doesn't have an audio out for monitoring. But the usual visual audio meter on the LCD worked quite well. As long as i keep the input within acceptable quality, the recording is good.
So, after a few months of using, my summary is this:
As a Still Camera:
1) Reasonable quality for its price. Lacking sufficient bit depth for adjustments but nice size compared to bringing a D800 around.
2) Lacking fast (large aperture) wide angle lenses except for 35 F1.8 DX (becomes 50 mm focal length) and 50 F1.8 FX (Becoming 75 mm focal length). The only thing i try to beat the system is a 24 mm F1.4G but this is a costly beast.
3) Kit lens is usable in Video and wide angle. Acceptable in 55 mm telephoto but try not to shoot anything further than 3 meters.
4) Kit lens has a silver ring. But it was already peeling the first 2 weeks i used it. Poor quality.
5) Wireless module WU-1a is a nice toy to have but features are limited. I.e it does not do time lapse and the timer is limited only to 2 seconds! This isn't enough for you to put your iPhone (operated via iPhone) back to the pocket.
As a video Camera:
1) Nice video quality with input jack
2) No complains.
Overall, nice size and weight but unfortunate for the lack of wide angle, fast aperture lens.
Sample video made with D3300 (some small parts are with Sony PJ660-EV)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImW_yWsp3k4
So, after a few months of using, my summary is this:
As a Still Camera:
1) Reasonable quality for its price. Lacking sufficient bit depth for adjustments but nice size compared to bringing a D800 around.
2) Lacking fast (large aperture) wide angle lenses except for 35 F1.8 DX (becomes 50 mm focal length) and 50 F1.8 FX (Becoming 75 mm focal length). The only thing i try to beat the system is a 24 mm F1.4G but this is a costly beast.
3) Kit lens is usable in Video and wide angle. Acceptable in 55 mm telephoto but try not to shoot anything further than 3 meters.
4) Kit lens has a silver ring. But it was already peeling the first 2 weeks i used it. Poor quality.
5) Wireless module WU-1a is a nice toy to have but features are limited. I.e it does not do time lapse and the timer is limited only to 2 seconds! This isn't enough for you to put your iPhone (operated via iPhone) back to the pocket.
As a video Camera:
1) Nice video quality with input jack
2) No complains.
Overall, nice size and weight but unfortunate for the lack of wide angle, fast aperture lens.
Sample video made with D3300 (some small parts are with Sony PJ660-EV)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImW_yWsp3k4
Last edited:
Does the new processor measures Auto WB better than D3200?
My D7100 does better Auto WB than my D3200. I'm thinking of getting D5300/D3300 as replacement for D3200. Sometimes, there are just fleeting moments that you want to shoot and there's not enough time to take out the ExpoDisc and measure Custom WB. I'm OC when it comes to WB, regardless shooting RAW or not.
My D7100 does better Auto WB than my D3200. I'm thinking of getting D5300/D3300 as replacement for D3200. Sometimes, there are just fleeting moments that you want to shoot and there's not enough time to take out the ExpoDisc and measure Custom WB. I'm OC when it comes to WB, regardless shooting RAW or not.
The WB are presets and one of them allows u to do custom white balance.
So far I find it ok. Even better than my D800 (which I was kind of disappointed for a $4488 camera).
My only qualms w D3300 is the jpegs are wafer thin. Once you try to adjust the colors and recover highlights/ shadows, the files breaks easily. I guess that's the diff betw 12 bit and 14 bit cameras. Haha
So far I find it ok. Even better than my D800 (which I was kind of disappointed for a $4488 camera).
My only qualms w D3300 is the jpegs are wafer thin. Once you try to adjust the colors and recover highlights/ shadows, the files breaks easily. I guess that's the diff betw 12 bit and 14 bit cameras. Haha
Similar threads
