Nikon D3200 coming in April with a 24MP sensor and many new features

Nikon will soon announce the D3200 DSLR camera which will replace the current D3100 ($549). The expected specs are:

  • 24 MP sensor
  • 11 AF points
  • 4 fps
  • ISO range: 100-6400, with hi-ISO of 12800
  • Improved video functionality
  • The Nikon D3200 will have some kind of a Wi-Fi connection that is supposed to offer few very interesting new features
  • Announcement in April, 2012

Those specs basically confirmed my initial D3200 report from last month.

In addition to the D4 and D800, Nikon is expected to announce 3 more DSLR cameras in 2012. I understand that most of you are interested in the D300s replacement - at that point I do not have any reliable information worth sharing. I think it's safe to assume that the D400 (or whatever the name might be) will have a 24MP DX-format sensor. There is also a possibility for two different models - one with an anti-aliasing (AA) filter and one without (just like the D800/D800E).

I am still not sure if some of the expected Nikkor lenses (18-300mm f/3.5-5.6, 16-85mm f/4 and the full frame 28mm f/1.8) will be announced together with the D3200 next month.

Stay tuned for more details.

This entry was posted in Nikon D3200, Nikon D400. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Old Badger

    I’m not at all surprised that Nikon are going 24Mp at the entry level – if we assume the rumour to be true. They have to reply to the competition which includes mirrorless for the lower end of the DSLR range.

    Nikon 1 is relevant here. I’d expect further Nikon 1 models announced this year, and Nikon will wish to put some clear headline differentiation in their own product range between Nikon 1 and their DSLRs – pixel count is always a good marketing one.

    There is a tendency to understate the differences between the DX models. Better continuous shooting speed, AF and viewfinder are often mentioned; so are durability and weatherproofing. It’s easy to overlook external controls, buffer depth (ever been caught out by your D7000?), processing speed, two card slots, additional user customisation, drive for non AF-S lenses and so on. In reality, there isn’t a huge real world difference between the still photo IQ produced by the bodies in the current DX range (I own D300s, D7000 and D5100 – but don’t know the D3100). It would be quite possible for Nikon to produce a revised DX range using only one sensor (but more likely two). As an example, the D90 and D300/s co-existed for a long time (although I always understood they actually used different 12 Mp sensors). There is plenty of product differentiation possible, and I don’t see the D300s being the end of the road for the top DX model.

    • PAG

      Agreed. Topping the DX line at the D7x00 would cut free a solid existing market and turn it over to Canon.

      As to those who say shooting a D800 in DX mode is a replacement for a DX D400, that’s just flat out ridiculous. Rather I see the D800 as something for those who want an “entry level” FX. It’s only about $500 more than a D700 when it was new, isn’t it?

      • CameraMaker

        You may find it ridiculous but that’s what it is.
        There will not be any DX D400, just wait and see!
        You could thank me later. 😉

  • rhlpetrus

    Pixels sell, period. And this sensor is pretty good, check Nex7.

    • Jerrie

      Great. So this new nikon d3200 is going to be better and cheaper than the d800!?! I went to b&h yesterday to look at the new D800 and they didnt have one, they had a d700 and a d3s. That’s it. I went to canon’s booth and they had the 5d mk3 and a bunch of other cameras, yet the 5d mk3 was released and announced later than the d800. I hate nikon for crap like this!

      • mikils

        Of course they have a bunch of 5Dmark III: care to see how many they have sold so far?

        • The One

          Ok, let’s see!

      • Larry C

        That the D800 continues to be the #1 selling DSLR on Amazon while the 5DM3 is only #10, and falling, might be part of the reason Nikon can’t meet demand and Canon can. It’s perhaps even more remarkable that the D4, a $6,000 camera is the #19 most popular DSLR, and rising!. The Canon 1Dx is barely in the top 40, and falling.

        oops, somebody misjudged the market and competition 😉

      • Mike

        Yeah, hate them for making a good camera that sell like hotcakes and being unable to keep up with demand even when they were able to survive an earthquake, nuclear disaster, a flood and a tsunami to top it off washing their production capabilities! Boo on them.

        • HaHaHaHaHa !! Wonderful !! Typical British humour–love it !!!

  • Jon D

    Entry level Consumers look at MP and think more is always better. That sells to this market.

    • Andrew

      In the case of the D800, more is better! More megapixel, higher ISO performance, enhanced video, and so on. But I do not see many entry level consumers spending $3,000 on a professional grade camera. The previous arguments against high ISO is now mute when taking into account the D800. We all thought that the D700 with 12 MP will outperform the D800 with 36 MP. We were all wrong! So I think it is about time that you start changing your thinking on high megapixel cameras if you are subscribing to that old way of thinking. But as far as the entry level consumer is concerned, they may not realize that based upon the small print size of the pictures they generate and the maximum 300 dpi resolution of practically most printers, extremely high resolution is counter productive. So on this count, you are correct. But the D800 delivers!

  • Will this one have the Automatic Bracketing feature for taking three shots at different exposures?
    This is one feature that was sadly lacking in the D3100…

  • El Aura

    I am a bit wary if this is the NEX-7 sensor. While for the central part of an image, this is a great sensor, it is very clear that the NEX-7 sensor has an off-axis problem. All lenses tested on different resolution sensors (eg, on the Nikon D200 and D7000) produce a higher resolution for all apertures and positions in the image. The NEX-7 is the exception in that it does so only in center and does the worst wide-open in the corners where the light rays come in the most off-axis.

    • an nonymous

      Is that as big a problem also with the A mount lenses?

      It may be an E mount lens related problem due to the nature of it, correct me if I’m wrong.

  • vitamin_s

    4 of my friends and including me were waiting for D400, since its not going to be launched before October, we all are shifting to Canon 7D

    • burgerman


      whats the point of it?

    • Sayonara


    • The 7D is a great camera, I think you will enjoy it. I shoot Nikon now ( because my wife prefers Nikon body ergonomics ) but I remember my 7D fondly.

      • amy

        uh, what?

        • Kill’em with kindess…

    • Andrew

      “D400, since its not going to be launched before October…”

      You missed the opportunity to say… “BREAKING NEWS! The D400 will not be launched before October”.

    • Douglas Adams

      You have four imaginary friends!? Isn’t that little too many?

      • I loved your HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY. What an imagination!!

    • Valiant Thor

      They’re not really your friends. Friends don’t let friends buy Canon.

      • Well said, Thor. With Nikon since the heyday of the fabulous Nikkormat FT2, I just can’t stomach turncoats. Let ’em go to Canon…the prodigals will soon be back duly humbled by Nikonpower.

    • MashingTheGas

      You must not have a very large investment in glass. Good luck to you in Canon world.
      (personally, I think you sound a little like a paid Canon shill, but maybe not.)

  • an nonymous

    I guess the reason why DX pro level DSLR’s are going to stay is simply also because all the good FX lenses gives an 1.5 X magnification which is great for certain type of photography and saves a lot of money on lenses.

    Just think of what an FX equivalent lens for an FX camera of the 70-200/f2.8 on a DX combo would cost, 105-300/f2.8 sure wouldn’t be cheap if it ever surface.

    • burgerman

      You dont get it do you.

      A FX camera IS a DX camera too. If its got enough pixels like a D800 or maybe even more in the future, you already have a DX camera that can do FX as well when you want…

      DX is dead. And 36mp is already borderline / best lens/ tripod territory for the best image in can do. So taking the middle half of this image area (DX!) is the DX camera you want. So the only way a DX camera will be better and give your “1.5 times” magnification is if you just crop the D800 image to 15+ mp.

      DX is now pointless other than for cost reasons. Going to a 24mp sendsor (DX) meands the same super fine pixel pitch as a 50mp full frame. And I have a D800 and can already see issues with nikons BEST lenses… So going to 24mp isnt really going to give much real world resolution to a DX camera! Other than in a lab at 5.6 with the best lense you can get and the camera in a vice.

      • enesunkie

        “DX is now pointless other than for cost reasons.”

        Cost is a pretty big hurdle for a lot of people. How many people are willing to spend $3000 on a body only! DX is not dead by a long shot.

        • Joe


          Most people aren’t going to spend $2000 + on a camera body, and full frame sensors cost too much to manufacture for the prices to drop much below $2000 anytime in the near future. And besides, who wants to lug around the weight of an FX body and lenses all the time? Even many pros don’t want to. I can think of several off the top of my head that frequently shoot DX. Crop sensors are here to stay.

          • burgerman

            D800 body no bigger really than the d300 on my bench. And about same weight. And with all those pixels you dont need to use heavy FX lenses, DX works as well or better than the DX only cameras…

            In real terms the D800 is both a Pro D7000 and a pro high res FX camera in one.

            • an nonymous

              “You dont get it do you.” lol

              I understand your points, the D800 is a bit of a game changer in many aspects, but again, there’s a a higher cost in a D800 and many won’t need by far the 36 Mp so there’s not much advantage here.

              Further on the D800(in DX mode) and D7000 do 6 fps, the D300 did up to 8 fps and let’s see where the D300 successor will take us shall we?

        • Jake

          Professionals will…….

      • Pellevin

        DX is anything but dead. FX is great at times but until they make a FX camera at DX price and size DX will never be dead. Not everyone enjoys lugging around on a brick that costs a fortune.

        • burgerman

          The D800 with a DX lens on it is exactly the same to “lug about” as a D300 with the same lens.

          And the D800 has more DX pixels, better focus system, less noise, etc. So that argument makes no sense.

      • If you’d been a poor Third World writer like me, you’d be better able to appreciate the boon that is DX, simple because of the economy factor. Not even in the affluent West can just about anyone breeze into B+H and walk out with an armload of FX gear. Nikon glass and hardware COST, Mr Burgerman !

        • Miguel

          Well said Subroto Mukerji!
          I, for instance, have to multiply by 10 the price of any camera/lens/flash – (even memory card) available in the US in order to get it in my country. Even a “mid-range” camera such as the D7000 costs a fortune. So yeah, the sir who is claiming that “DX is dead because FX is also DX” is clearly not getting the whole picture here (no pun intended). It would be like buying a hybrid car only to run it on gasoline. It makes no sense.
          The purpose of DX is to offer a more affordable camera. Period.

  • D90, D700 and D300 all shared the same megapixel count. Where as D3000, D5000 had lower MP count. SO if you go by that logic, I think we can expect 36MP DX sensor for D400

    • D90 and D5000 shared the same resolution, if not even the same sensor, both 12 Mp.

    • burgerman

      If you want pro build/focus etc quality and DX capability buy a d800. Or whatever FX high res cam follows.

      If you want cheap, buy a plastic DX camera.

      Why would they bother to make an expensive pro DX only camera now that pixel density has got to 36FX/15+DX on one sensor? It may be a tiny bit cheaper but not by much. And I doubt that more than 36/15mp will be very workable with the current lenses.

      Already you can see the issues with lens quality on the D800. Only the very best glass allows the full resolution, under good conditions. So 24mp DX will be hard work if you want to take advantage of that resolution on a small sensor.

      • Fatty McGee

        The reason they would make it— people are wanting to buy one. Not me tho.

      • Sleeper

        Awesome, another genius who is smarter than everyone else and thinks for you.

        Except he doesn’t get the fact that:
        – DX pro build/focus D400 will have 8fps instead of 4.
        – DX pro build/focus D400 will have a deep buffer.
        – DX pro build/focus D400 will have a higher magnification VF.
        – DX pro build/focus D400 will have a price tag at around 2k instead of 6k.

        All of those are extremely important to wild life photographers who do not have the budget to buy a 600mm/4 + D4. Is that reason enough for you to STFU?

        • burgerman

          >> – DX pro build/focus D400 will have 8fps instead of 4.

          You mean 6 in DX mode? A small difference, and if you really need 8 then obviously 10 would be better so buy a D4… Oh yes its dearer!

          Viewfinder on the D300 and D800 in DX mode is so simiar its hard to see the difference.

          Buffer IS bigger (at least more shots fit in it in DX mode anyway)…

          Cost? Well they already make cheap DX cameras. If you want to use a pro camera it looks like it will be full frame from now on. DX and Pro no longer go together since we have DX mode on pro cameras with 15+ mp. Doesent make sense to go to all the trouble and expense of building a pro camera and fitting a sensor with the edges masked off or chopped off…

          • KnightPhoto

            I realize many people want a cheaper faster fps FX camera, no objections wish-listing like that although understand you are ACCEPTING the risk that one may not be built. But why on earth do people feel they need it is the D300S replacement?

            Sports and wildlife togs are going to continue to buy a DX camera in the D100/200/300 line.

            If you need cheaper, faster, smaller FX – find your own market space elsewhere in the lineup 😉

          • Mike M

            You appear not to understand the economies of digital camera sensor production. FX sensors are substantially larger in area than DX sensors, and that area has to be made out of high purity silicon wafers similar to those used to make microprocessors. The cost to produce an FX sensor is exponentially higher due to the fact that not only does it require a huge amount more of the expensive silicon wafer, it is much more likely to be rejected due to defect due to it’s large surface area. If the sensor can be shared with a high volume production inexpensive model the economies of scale will make it even more attractive to produce.

  • I have been reading all the comments with great interest
    I am making the first jump to a SLR, I would like to purchase a D7000 I’m tempted to wait for the upgrade (D7100?) !!
    Your comments have made me think twice re more mp!
    would you expect the buffer to be increased, better focus on video, exposure issues fixed?

  • zanypoet

    Nikon lulls Canon into thinking high megapixel don’t matter.
    Jabber on about how lower mp, high ISO performance is king.

    Then bam, Canon is suckerpunched not once but twice … first D800, now D3200,
    a lowly rig with more mp than 5d mkIII and maybe as good ISO performance too.

    Canon staggers back to their cornor … wondering whoa.
    What next?

    • MeTOO

      What next? Maybe a 36MP D400 DX. 😉

  • Sorry but for me, that’s way too many megapixels-12-16 is enough. I am sure this camera will be a beauty but it will probably cost an arm and leg in price, plus its raw files will only be able to be edited in CS6 whose full version will probably cost £700 -you would need to get out a loan for all the software you would need let alone the Camera itself. You wouldn’t be able to do IR photography with it either, I plan to save for a D5000 which is still available in the UK at selected Camera places ( bignorman and slrhut). Nice idea, and I am sure you can crop like mad with that many mps, however I think features are more important than megapixels.

    • Peter

      I all this fuzz about megapixels, it should be remembered that the theoretical maximum optical resolution for spherical lenses uses on an APS-C sensor is in the area of 12 megapixels. Unless you are prepared to use the more expensive aspherical lenses, there is no point in having a camerahouse with higher resoulution.

  • Alwyn

    Dontcha just love these peeps who threaten to throw all their toys out their cots and go to Canon. Go if you think the grass is greener. What made me buy a Nikon is Canon themselves. That smug arrogance of theirs. If you think you’re going to get better service with Canon, then leave. My experience of Canon told me otherwise. I called their head office twice and on both occasions they were not interested in my issues that I was experiencing with my 60d. I’m no Canon hater, the 60d actually felt more at ease in my hands than my current D90, but I’ll gladly exchange comfort for reliability, quality and actual service

  • Dave

    Am looking forward to the D3200. I had the D3100 for awhile and it was great to hook a 35 or 50 f/1.4 to and have a camera that will fit in most jacket pockets. I always try to take my D3 with me when I go out, but the compactness of the D3200 will be very handy when you need to be more discreet. I considered the J1/V1, but iso was just too poor and for a compact it is actually quite large. Bring on the D3200…

  • Back to top