Nikon D3000 versus Nikon D3100
The Nikon D3000 and the Nikon D3100 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in July 2009 and August 2010. Both are DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) cameras that are equipped with an APS-C sensor. The D3000 has a resolution of 10 megapixel, whereas the D3100 provides 14.2 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their size, their sensors, their features, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison: Nikon D3000 vs Nikon D3100
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Nikon D3000 and the Nikon D3100 is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also toggle the display to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the D3000 – represents the basis or 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Nikon D3100 is somewhat smaller (3 percent) than the Nikon D3000. Moreover, the D3100 is markedly lighter (6 percent) than the D3000. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the D3000 nor the D3100 are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. In this particular case, both cameras feature the same lens mount, so that they can use the same lenses. You can find an overview of suitable optics in the Nikon Lens Catalog.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Nikon D3000 (⇒ rgt)||126 mm||97 mm||64 mm||536 g||500||no||2009||599||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3100 (⇒ lft)||124 mm||96 mm||75 mm||505 g||550||no||2010||599||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||124 mm||98 mm||76 mm||445 g||1200||no||2016||499||latest||check|
|Nikon D3200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||125 mm||96 mm||77 mm||505 g||540||no||2012||599||discont.||check|
|Nikon D5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||128 mm||97 mm||79 mm||560 g||660||no||2011||749||discont.||check|
|Nikon D5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||127 mm||104 mm||80 mm||590 g||510||no||2009||749||discont.||check|
|Nikon D90 (⇒ lft | rgt)||132 mm||103 mm||77 mm||703 g||850||no||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Nikon D60 (⇒ lft | rgt)||126 mm||94 mm||64 mm||522 g||500||no||2008||629||discont.||check|
|Nikon D40X (⇒ lft | rgt)||124 mm||94 mm||64 mm||522 g||520||no||2007||729||discont.||check|
|Nikon D40 (⇒ lft | rgt)||124 mm||94 mm||64 mm||522 g||470||no||2006||499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||130 mm||94 mm||60 mm||521 g||500||no||2009||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||130 mm||91 mm||53 mm||440 g||500||no||2009||499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||130 mm||91 mm||53 mm||440 g||500||no||2008||599||discont.||check|
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The two cameras under review were launched at the same price and fall into the same market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison: Nikon D3000 vs Nikon D3100
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature an APS-C sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the D3100 is 5 percent smaller. They nevertheless have the same format factor of 1.5. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
Despite having a smaller sensor, the D3100 offers a higher resolution of 14.2 megapixel, compared with 10 MP of the D3000. This megapixel advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 5.01μm versus 6.11μm for the D3000). However, it should be noted that the D3100 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year) than the D3000, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that partly offset its pixel-size disadvantage.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for most cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under consideration, the D3100 has a markedly higher DXO score than the D3000 (overall score 5 points higher), which will translate into better image quality. The advantage is based on 0.2 bits higher color depth, 0.2 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.7 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Nikon D3000 (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||10.0||3872||2592||no||22.3||11.1||563||62|
|Nikon D3100 (⇒ lft)||APS-C||14.2||4608||3072||1080/24p||22.5||11.3||919||67|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.8||13.9||1192||86|
|Nikon D3200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.1||6016||4000||1080/30p||24.1||13.2||1131||81|
|Nikon D5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.1||4928||3264||1080/30p||23.5||13.6||1183||80|
|Nikon D5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||12.2||4288||2848||720/24p||22.7||12.5||868||72|
|Nikon D90 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||12.2||4288||2848||720/24p||22.7||12.5||977||73|
|Nikon D60 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||10.0||3872||2592||no||22.5||11.4||562||65|
|Nikon D40X (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||10.0||3872||2592||no||22.4||11.4||516||63|
|Nikon D40 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||6.0||3008||2000||no||21||11.0||561||56|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||no||21.3||10.3||536||55|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.5||10.5||512||56|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.5||10.4||527||56|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. The D3100 indeed provides for movie recording, while the D3000 does not. The highest resolution format that the D3100 can use is 1080/24p.
Feature comparison: Nikon D3000 vs Nikon D3100
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The D3000 and the D3100 are similar in the sense that both have an optical viewfinder. The latter is useful for getting a clear image for framing even in brightly lit environments. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Nikon D3000, the Nikon D3100, and comparable cameras. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Nikon D3000 (⇒ rgt)||optical||no||3.0||230||fixed||no||4000||3.0||12||no|
|Nikon D3100 (⇒ lft)||optical||no||3.0||230||fixed||no||4000||3.0||12||no|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||921||fixed||no||4000||5.0||7||no|
|Nikon D3200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||921||fixed||no||4000||4.0||12||no|
|Nikon D5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||921||swivel||no||4000||4.0||12||no|
|Nikon D5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||230||full-flex||no||4000||4.0||17||no|
|Nikon D90 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||4000||4.5||17||no|
|Nikon D60 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||230||fixed||no||4000||3.0||12||no|
|Nikon D40X (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||230||fixed||no||4000||3.0||17||no|
|Nikon D40 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||230||fixed||no||4000||2.5||17||no|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||230||swivel||no||4000||4.0||12||YES|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||215||fixed||no||4000||3.5||12||no|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||215||fixed||no||4000||3.5||12||no|
Both the D3000 and the D3100 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on eBay. The D3000 was replaced by the Nikon D3100, while the D3100 was followed by the Nikon D3200.
Review summary: Nikon D3000 vs Nikon D3100
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Nikon D3000 and the Nikon D3100? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Reasons to prefer the Nikon D3000:
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in July 2009).
Arguments in favor of the Nikon D3100:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (14.2 vs 10MP), which boosts linear resolution by 19%.
- Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (5 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (0.7 stops ISO advantage).
- Broader imaging potential: Can capture not only stills but also 1080/24p video.
- More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year) more recently.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the D3100 is the clear winner of the contest (5 : 1 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the D3000 or the D3100 handle or perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable. This is where reviews by experts come in. The adjacent table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites. You can find the full text of the reviews, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Nikon D3000 (⇒ rgt)||80/100 Rec||72/100 HiRec||4/5||3.5/5||4.5/5||2009||599||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3100 (⇒ lft)||84/100 HiRec||72/100 Silver||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2010||599||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||76/100||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||499||latest||check|
|Nikon D3200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||73/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2012||599||discont.||check|
|Nikon D5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||86/100 HiRec||76/100 Silver||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2011||749||discont.||check|
|Nikon D5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||88/100 HiRec||75/100 HiRec||4/5||5/5||4.5/5||2009||749||discont.||check|
|Nikon D90 (⇒ lft | rgt)||89/100 HiRec||HiRec||4/5||5/5||4.5/5||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Nikon D60 (⇒ lft | rgt)||80/100||HiRec||4/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2008||629||discont.||check|
|Nikon D40X (⇒ lft | rgt)||79/100||HiRec||4/5||reviewed||4/5||2007||729||discont.||check|
|Nikon D40 (⇒ lft | rgt)||81/100||HiRec||reviewed||5/5||4.5/5||2006||499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||88/100||72/100 HiRec||4.5/5||reviewed||5/5||2009||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||4/5||2009||499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||85/100||HiRec||4/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2008||599||discont.||check|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when refering to cameras in the same category and of the same age. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool. If you cannot find the camera you are interested in, please send me an email, and I will try to update the database with the necessary infos.
- Canon 77D vs Sony A77 II
- Canon G5 X vs Panasonic FZ300
- Fujifilm X-Pro2 vs Sony A7 III
- Fujifilm X-T2 vs Canon T7i
- Nikon D3400 vs Nikon D7000
- Nikon D7000 vs Nikon P900
- Olympus E-PL6 vs Olympus E-M10 II
- Panasonic G5 vs Panasonic GX8
- Panasonic G9 vs Canon 750D
- Panasonic GH5 vs Leica X2
- Panasonic TZ200 vs Nikon D7000
- Sony RX100 V vs Nikon D7100