Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I have been a fan of Nikon's Entry level DSLR cameras including specifically the D3xxx and D5xxx series. All of these cameras have great image quality, are reasonably small and light with intuitive controls. Most of these Nikons improved with each new generation. The Nikon D3300 is smaller and lighter than its predecessors, the D3200 and D3100. It is also considerably smaller and lighter than the D5200, the somewhat more advanced entry level Nikon DSLR. The biggest physical change in this kit is the new "VRii" 18-55mm lens. This new kit lens is smaller and lighter than its predecessor and 'collapses' into about 2/3 its size when not being used. Perhaps more significantly, this lens is sharper capturing more detail than the older kit lens. The reduced size and weight of the D3300 appears to be Nikon's response to Canon's 100D/SL1. Although the SL1 and D3300 are about the same size and weight, the D3300 has a better/larger grip and is more comfortable (to me anyway) than the SL1. Although the D3300 is the eventual replacement for the D3200, I purchased the D3300 in anticipation of replacing my D5200 assuming that this newer camera would have improved image quality over last year's models. I was actually somewhat disappointed as I preferred the image quality of the older D5200. That is not to say that the D3300 is not an excellent camera because actually it is. My testing was limited to still indoor shooting (it is already dark outside when I come home from work). I compared the D3300 to the D5200 shooting identical scenes using 3 different lenses under various lighting conditions. Both cameras delivered excellent high ISO results with similar ISO performance through ISO 3200 (I really do not like shooting past ISO 3200). High ISO performance on the D3300 was better than its predecessor, the D3200. On the D3300 and D5200, ISO 800 is really indistinguishable from ISO 100. ISO 1600 is also very good on both cameras with some graininess/noise creeping in. ISO 3200 is usable but there is a definite degradation in image quality. The reason I prefer the D5200 to the D3300 is white balance & color rendition. Both cameras have difficulties under incandescent lighting when using AWB (tip: use 'sunny' instead of AWB) especially when trying to render shades of yellow, but the D5200 did a better job. I felt the general color rendition of the D5200 was more natural especially in Caucasian skin tones. It seemed like the D3300 colors needed to be manually re-adjusted for many different lighting situations. Each of these cameras benefited from shooting raw with the JPGs of each camera being a bit too warm and under-sharpened. However, the JPGs rendered by the D5200 resulted in more pleasing colors than the D3300 (to me anyway). The D3300 (like the D3100 & D3200) does not have some features which one would expect for a camera at this price including specifically a DOF preview; a movable LCD screen; any type of bracketing (wb bracketing could really be helpful with this camera); incremental ISO settings between stops (ie ISO 2000 which could be helpful in not using a higher than needed ISO setting). Each of the D5xxx models have all of these features. The Menu system is familiar to anyone who has owned a Nikon DSLR in recent years. The LCD setting display/selector is similar to the one used on recent Nikons including the D5200. There is no dedicated WB or ISO button (although the FN button can be programmed for one of those or some other functions). There is no touch screen which I do not really care for anyway. Although the D5200 has a more sophisticated autofocus system (several more AF points), I found the AF system to be similar on the D3300, that is to say very quick and accurate under all conditions. The 5 Frame per second continuous shooting capability is really fast. The built in flash on this (and almost all cameras) is not very good. Light is unevenly distributed and can be quite harsh. An external flash with bounce capabilities (ie SB-400) greatly enhances exposure and color. I really like the kit lens. I do not know it it is available for purchase separately. It is light and compact (especially when collapsed) and optically better than prior kit lenses. I read about a "low pass filter" being removed in order to provide greater image detail. However, I honestly did not see any difference in the detail being captured by the D3300 over the D5200 even when using my best prime lens. In fact, it appeared that the D5200 captured slightly more detail than the D3300. In summary, the D3300 is an excellent DSLR. Shooting raw and using an external bounce flash will enhance the quality of the photographs greatly. This camera is especially attractive for those who are seeking a small and light DSLR. Those who prefer something a bit more substantial or who place image quality above all else, may wish to consider the older (and slightly cheaper) D5200. Like all cameras, the most important component is the skill and imagination of the photographer. UPDATE: I have since had the opportunity to test this camera outdoors. Like most cameras, the D3300 did very well in good lighting and actually very similar to the D5300. I found however that the auto white balance on the newer Nikons (including the D3300) to be a little too warm. I prefer the awb on the older D90/D80/D40 etc.