[ADVICE PLEASE] Nikon D5100 vs Nikon D5200

johnd123

johnd123

Messages
7
Name
Jay
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys

Ok im looking to get a new DSLR which has a rotating LCD Screen.
I have chosen Nikon for personal choice plus I already have a IR Modified Nikon D50 with lenses which i can use with my new Nikon.

One thing that stood out to me when I studied photography at college was the information regarding Mega Pixels and Sensor Sizes.
From my course it was clearly stated that the size of the sensor is very important in relation to megapixels.

Example: a DSLR has a larger sensor then that of a compact camera, lets say both are 12 Mega Pixels - It is believed that the larger sensor would produce much better
quality images then that of the compact camera. This is due to the larger workspace of the larger sensor. Smaller sensors are often pushed to squeeze all these pixels in such a small area which can cause color issues as well as noise, bleeding etc.

This in mind, here lies my dilemma..

For me the first thing thats top of my list when choosing a camera has to be the quality of the images - not the size - but the quality and crispness etc.
Now i know lenses play a very important part in this but i don't want to end up polishing a turd, so to speak lol
I do not plan to produce an image the size of time square or the great wall of chine!
Quality over size for me is the issue :0)

The consumer is clearly obsessed with higher Mega Pixels, as if more means better quality without image size being more the issue.

The Nikon D5100 has 16.2 Mega Pixels - The sensor size is 23.6 x 15.6
The Nikon D5200 has 24.1 Mega Pixels - The sensor size is 23.5 x 15.6

Now as you can see the D5100 has a slightly larger sensor to handle the 16.2 Mega Pixels
Yet the D5200 with 24.1 Mega Pixels, has only a 23.5 x 15.6

To me this sounds crazy, why did they not fit a larger sensor to make up for the extra 8MP??
So in theory that's an extra 8MP that will be squeezed onto a sensor smaller then that of the D5100!

I know its a little bit of a rant, for that im sorry. However, I would really like to hear other fellow photographers views on this misconception.

Can anyone advise me on this?

Would I not be better saving about £200 and going for the D5100 and putting the £200 saved towards a better lens?

Many Thanks :)
 
You're obsessing about one tenth of a millimetre? The difference in area is .004% - do you really think that is significant?
Sensor technology moves on so a later, higher density sensor may well be better than its predecessor. The 16MP D5100 sensor is very definitely better than the 12MP sensor in the D5000.

Ignore the mega-pixels and look at the cameras' facilities - does the D5200 have anything extra that you need over the D5100 to justify the £200 difference in price?
 
Last edited:
Snapsh0t said:
You're obsessing about one tenth of a millimetre? The difference in area is .004% - do you really think that is significant?
Sensor technology moves on so a later, higher density sensor may well be better than its predecessor. The 16MP D5100 sensor is very definitely better than the 12MP sensor in the D5000.

Ignore the mega-pixels and look at the cameras' facilities - does the D5200 have anything extra that you need over the D5100 to justify the £200 difference in price?
Click to expand...

Im not obsessed, thats harsh..
Im just pointing out that the 5100 which has less MP has the slightly bigger censor then that of the 5200 which has 8mp more on a smaller sensor

how is that being obsessed lol - its a valid question!
 
Last edited:
ForceGhost said:
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D5100-vs-Nikon-D5200/specs
Click to expand...

Thanks mr ForceGhost for that link - that very interesting

Quote taken from the site:
Images in digital cameras are captured by the sensor. Pixel size refers to how big, in microns, each pixel on the sensor is. Typically bigger pixels result in higher quality images, especially at higher ISO settings
Click to expand...

Nikon 5100 pixel size - 22.9 µm²
Nikon 5200 pixel size - 15.2 µm²

as i said in my original post, for me the most important thing is quality, most of the features are just gimmicks which i would not use anyways
as long as I can adjust the ISO, Aperture and Shutter Speed and the LCD screen im happy :).

thanks for that link :)
 
I'm assuming you are serious and this isn't a wind-up .... Without wanting to sound harsh it isn't really a valid question. To all intents and purposes and for all practical applications the sensors are the same size. Try and get away from mega pixels - they really are almost irrelevant. To address the size issue the D5100 sensor is 368.16 square mm, the D5200 is 366.6 that is 1.56 square mm difference or approx 0.42% smaller. Yes there's a difference - will it make any measurable difference that we can see? No.

To address the pixel size issue, usually bigger is better (all else equal - which it's not) but you have to factor in how the data from them is processed - this is where the D5200 beats the the D5100 - it has to do with the version of EXPEED they use (2 in the 5100 and 3 in the 5200) and the "wiring" on the chip etc. - the image quality is better from the d5200 - not massively so, but better nonetheless. I'd be happy with either.

The key differences (other than MP) are the improved AF system, improved metering system and improved video (if that is at all important - it isn't for me) in the D5200. No camera maker would produce a replacement model that had worse performance in IQ terms than it's predecessor (at least I am not aware of any from Nikon or Canon).

To quote some other figures back at you from the link posted the DxO scores are better for the D5200 quoting a higher IQ score for the D5200 - i.e. better. It is easy to dismiss DxO but their results are repeatable and measurable - not perfect as nothing is, but useful in evaluating the whole picture no pun intended).

I'd stop worrying over the size of things and start thinking about what I'm going to photograph, either camera is capable of excellent images.
 
cheers Paul for the info, this was the kind of information i was after.. i still feel its a valid question though in this battle of Mega Pixels
 
Just get the 5200. It has better image quality, better dynamic range, better noise handling, better focus system, better processor. Yeah it's more money, but I think it's worth it as it is hardly expensive from somewhere like hdew or panamoz.

I can't believe we're discussing 1.5 mm :D
 
minnnt said:
Just get the 5200. It has better image quality, better dynamic range, better noise handling, better focus system, better processor. Yeah it's more money, but I think it's worth it as it is hardly expensive from somewhere like hdew or panamoz.

I can't believe we're discussing 1.5 mm :D
Click to expand...

lol i know it sounds crazy ... i just thought it was strange that the 5100 had a slightly larger sensor then that of the 5200 which has to fit more megapix
im sure its like splitting hairs but asking the question is the only way of getting the information i needed ;)
 
Well... they obviously did it for a reason. The focus system is from the d7000 which is an awesome camera and if you didn't need the flipy flappy screen then I would say go for that, but it's not an option. The 52 is highly discounted atm with the launch of the 53 which is still silly money.
 
I bet if I posted up two photos, one from my D5100, and one from my Full frame D700, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference based solely on the size of the sensor... The difference between the D5100 and D5200 is so small, you'd never in a million years spot any differences. Of course, the sensor size isn't the only differences, so it wouldn't be a valid test, but you get the point.
 
TCR4x4 said:
I bet if I posted up two photos, one from my D5100, and one from my Full frame D700, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference based solely on the size of the sensor... The difference between the D5100 and D5200 is so small, you'd never in a million years spot any differences. Of course, the sensor size isn't the only differences, so it wouldn't be a valid test, but you get the point.
Click to expand...

i did try watching a few review vids on you tube that compared the 2 but being videos the quality didnt really help lol
one of the reviews made the 5200 colour look washed out in comparison to the 5100..

If you have some pics taken with either id love to see them :)

thanks for the advice!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top