Wed 20-Feb-13 08:57 AM | edited Wed 20-Feb-13 09:08 AM by Tony1337
>I'd take a long look at the D5100, I think you may like it >better if you were thinking about a D3200, given your other >bodies the D5100 is likely easier, and it's right in your >budget, as well.
I would second this. Pretty much the only advantage of D3200 is more pixels. However, we're getting to the point where sensors are outresolving lenses, so 24 MP might not be such a huge advantage over 16 MP. With the D5100, you get more advanced features like bracketing, articulated screen, finer ISO settings, and slightly longer battery life. They're both pretty close, though. If I were you, I would get the refurbished D5100 with lens from Adorama, which at $439 is truly a steal.
As a general rule, a higher-end model that's one generation old is likely to be the same price as the model just below it that's current, but will almost always be better for the serious shooter, barring tremendous improvements in sensor technology, processing, etc. (For example, I would argue that the D7000 is better than the D300.)