Canon 60D or Nikon D3200

[bigjimmyauk]

Given the choice of either of these two kits for free which would be the better option and have the better potential, I've use them both briefly and both feel great, both have less than 1000 shutter actuation's. Not a option to keep them both it's my choice of inheritance so can only have one.

Both kits have a grip and 6 extra batteries all the boxes and a universal kit case, remote control and flash

 

[Iron-man]

I cant comment on the canon but I have the Nikon and it is a very good camera, you have tried them out so I guess which do you prefer after giving them a test run

 

[marcg868]

60d for me. It has a weather sealed body, and is a solid Camera.
The Nikon probably edges it slightly in image quality and better low light performance. But a weather sealed body is a bigger advantage.
I have a Canon 80d.

 

[i know nothing]

I have no idea. I have never owned/used either.

But from what I can determine from your photos, the Canon kit gives you lenses that go all the way from 18-250mm. In addition you have what appears to be a "nifty-fifty" of some description with a Canon 50mm there. I would imagine the 50mm is probably a f1.8 at a guess which would give you something to use for low light situations. Whereas the Nikon kit covers the focal lengths of 18-200mm with no low light capability. For the Nikon kit you'd need to spend a few quid extra to get either the AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G or a AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G to get some low light capability (if you need/wanted it). I'd do some research into the lenses being offerred (both Nikon and Canon), as it's the glass that I would spend money on, not the body.

 

[bigjimmyauk]

60d for me. It has a weather sealed body, and is a solid Camera.
The Nikon probably edges it slightly in image quality and better low light performance. But a weather sealed body is a bigger advantage.
I have a Canon 80d.

I did read this in an review. Even reviews put them pretty close to each other and one of the main negatives for the Nikon was its non weather sealed body.

I have no idea. I have never owned/used either.

But from what I can determine from your photos, the Canon kit gives you lenses that go all the way from 18-250mm. In addition you have what appears to be a "nifty-fifty" of some description with a Canon 50mm there. I would imagine the 50mm is probably a f1.8 at a guess which would give you something to use for low light situations. Whereas the Nikon kit covers the focal lengths of 18-200mm with no low light capability. For the Nikon kit you'd need to spend a few quid extra to get either the AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G or a AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G to get some low light capability (if you need/wanted it). I'd do some research into the lenses being offerred (both Nikon and Canon), as it's the glass that I would spend money on, not the body.

I did look into this lens and it does seem like a very good lens for low light situations. I'd seen some comparisons of indoor shots against other lenses and it does seem a solid option. I think the canon is edging it at the moment especially as the batteries have a bigger capacity. I took some test shots yesterday and the canon can feel a bit soft on the focus compared to the Nikon but that could just be me as the variable. I think the fact the canon has the extra lens and bigger battery plus weather sealed body might just edge it for me. I'm also enjoying the tilt and twist LCD panel could see that being very handy when I can't get my eye to the viewfinder in certain situations.

 

[sHo0sH]

I'd go with the canon .

I believe that is Nikon's entry level DSLR, and the canon is a step or two up the range which is numbered. Essentially the more zeros in the camera name the lower down the table it is, with their single digit cameras being their flagships. (Both brands)