I want an entry-level DSLR that's not too expensive, but that produces sharp images and good quality images. I was looking at the Nikon d3300, mostly because it has 24.2 megapixels. However, the Canon cameras for the price range that I'm looking at are 18 megapixels. I have a Canon SX40 HS (12 MP), and I decided I should get something better, because I wasn't too fond of my SX40 HS. I heard that people praise the d3300 for its sharpness, but then I realized that most of what you want in your camera/your images depends on the lens. So do the megapixels in the cameras matter? Which one has better Image quality? Is the d3300 better than the Canons? If I want a Canon lens, would it be worth getting the Canon, despite a smaller amount of pixels? Or should I get the d3300 with a Nikon lens? OR, should I get a lens from neither of those companies (Tokina or sigma)? What lenses would you recommend? The lenses that I need are one for wildlife photography (so a long lens with a large focal distance like 200-300mm) and an all-around lens so something like a 18-200 or something like that. And i want good image quality. Please give feedback, any feed back would be greatly appreciated!
Read more: Do Megapixels Matter?