Nikon Introduces D3400 and Two 70-300mm DX Lenses

<p>The D3400 is the latest installment in the D3000 series, entry-level DSLRs. It is still 24MP.</p>

<p>The two 70-300mm are DX lenses with an AF-P stepping AF motor. They are f4.5-6.3. One has VR and one doesn't.</p>

<p>More info from Nikon Japan's web site:</p>

<ul>

<li>D3400: http://www.nikon.com/news/2016/0817_dslr_01.htm</li>

<li>70-300mm DX lenses: http://www.nikon.com/news/2016/0817_lens_02.htm</li>

</ul>

<p>Nikon with a 4.5-6.3 zoom lens? I guess 6.3 is the new 5.6. With the high iso capabilities on new cameras, it was inevitable.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>One has VR and one doesn't.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Begs the question as to why? $50 price differential can't possibly justify having two versions. One can always turn VR off on the one that has it - so what's the reason for the one without?<br>

D3400 = D3300 + snapbridge, enlarged ISO range, better battery performance and improved guide system? Anything else?</p>

In a discussion with Nikon, they pointed out that they have a non VR version to keep the cost down. We also need to

keep in mind that DSLR is now a mature product. The rapid technological improvements from a decade ago is long gone.

It is now like cars; there is a new model every year, but the changes are very gradual.

 

Unless you are very rich, you don't upgrade your car every year or even every two years. A new model makes the

newcomers feel that they are getting something updated, but few would upgrade from a D3300 to a D3400.

<p>Is the old 70-300VR going to continue? These new versions look down market, in terms of build and f/6.3 at the long end.</p>

<p>EDIT: Oops - just realized these 70-300 lenses are DX. That explains it!</p>

<p>Probably will discontinue the 55-300 now though?</p>

<p>The AF-S 70-300 VR is an FX lens so probably it won't be discontinued at this point, unless there is a replacement coming. Nikon has sold a huge number of these lenses.</p>

<p>Right, the two new 70-300mm AF-P are DX lenses. They are slower at f6.3 on the long end, probably to keep both cost and size down, but that also implies that they are mostly outdoor lenses. Not sure Nikon is phasing out the old 55-300mm DX AF-S VR, but that is f5.6 on the 300mm end.</p>

<p>Clearly the new 70-300 DX lenses cannot replace the FX 70-300mm/f4.5-5.6 AF-S VR, which has been around for quite a few years and maybe due for an update.</p>

<p>What surprises me is that Nikon scheduled the announcement on August 17, in the middle of the Olympics. It also makes me wonder whether there will be additional announcements before Photokina, which starts in a month. The D3400 plus a few consumer DX lenses and the 105mm/f1.4 E AF-S seem to be kind of thin for Photokina.</p>

<p>Tech improvements in other areas may be slowing, but in ISO sensitivity it is still going pretty fast. even low end D3400 now has twice the high ISO speed of D810. D5 has 10 times the ISO speed of D810. For those interested in astrophotography, this is a important improvement.</p>

<p>Those extreme ISO settings are just full of hot air and not indicative of corresponding real improvements. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>D3400 now has twice the high ISO speed of D810.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm going to wait to read actual users' experience here. I bought a D3300 with kit lens for $250 a few weeks ago, to use as a back up camera and for when I want something small. Image quality is quite good, but I'm disappointed it has no histogram. Looks like the D3400 doesn't either. Will likely end up selling it and buying a used D5300 (assuming it has histogram--will have to check.) The Blue Tooth on the D3400 is of no value to me.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p>Still no MFA, and they removed the sensor cleaning? And the same old AF module?</p>

<p>Why bother?</p>

<p><em>Why bother?</em></p>

<p>Most people nowadays do not print photographs on a regular basis, but use photographs to communicate with their friends, family and coworkers with comments and pictures posted on social media and e-mail. This camera is intended to make that process as smooth as possible. It remains to be seen how Nikon succeeds in developing SnapBridge, its features, ease of use and reliability. The use of a DSLR with automatic download to the mobile phone in the background (even when the camera is off!) makes a lot of sense to me. Compared to the smartphone camera, a DSLR adds options such as the use of a zoom lens, or a long lens, or a wide angle. It also is likely more responsive so it should be easier to capture the right moment. The files captured on the memory card are suitable for printing while the mobile phone holds smaller versions for electronic display. To me this camera doesn't sound like such a bad plan for a product. Some of the D3x00 users catch the bug and end up buying more lenses and a D7200 or equivalent, and that does support (virtually) all the lenses in the system and is more fully featured. (I would expect the whole consumer lineup to get SnapBridge in the next iteration.)</p>

<p>Removing sensor cleaning doesn't sound like a hot idea, but most users of this type of a camera will likely only use one or two zoom lenses and rarely change lenses, so perhaps the dust accumulation is not such a big problem. These zooms have relatively small maximum apertures and unlikely to benefit much from autofocus fine tuning (also the camera is meant to be easy to use which can be hardly said of AF fine tune). For fast primes, the situation is different, and I would recommend getting a D7200 or higher for such lenses, not only because of the fine tune feature, but also better viewfinder and autofocus system, so it is easier to get shallow DOF shots in focus. Also it has the sensor cleaning feature so the sensor doesn't need to be cleaned manually as often.</p>

 

Wow. Short thread for a new body in this forum. Nobody

here cares about a D3x00 body and consumer zooms

(including more 18-xx, sigh) or nothing to see here? Not

that I'm exactly the target audience myself.

 

Dpreview are suggesting that the "improved battery"

numbers may be because of a lower power flash. I don't

know how the measurements work and whether this

should actually affect things (shouldn't the amount of

flash be fixed for the test exposure, within limits?) but

it's an interesting choice if Nikon decided to go for a

paper advantage.

 

Unless there's lossless raw, I'm not sure I buy the D3x00

for astronomy argument, btw. Besides, mirrorless is

easier to mount and focus.

Well, some other Nikons (e.g. D810) can get more shots per charge than their predecessors so it would hardly be

surprising if the D3400 also is improved in this respect.

<p>Belatedly... yes, I'm sure the efficiency has improved with going to a new Expeed. But the D3400 is quoted as 1200 CIPA shots, vs 700 in the D3300. That's a lot, given that the test process involves some chimping and flash usage, and that actual image processing doesn't take much these days (or videos would be very short). I assume that's where the "weaker flash" theory came from - although actually dpreview are quoting the same guide number (or at least flash distance), and I still would have thought a given test shot would use the same amount of flash power.</p>

<p>My D3200 has been great. I've used it on professional jobs and it's come thru. I'm done with incremental upgrades :-) and am going to stop fooling around and upgrade to a D500.</p>

<p>Alas, an upgrade to the D810 may get me (although probably not until a few months after release for the price to drop and to see what Nikon have got wrong this time...) - I don't quite trust the D810's AF (although it's more reliable than the D800's) and I'd not turn down the high ISO abilities and 4K video of the A7R2 sensor (possibly with some on-sensor phase detect for video) if the D810's ISO 64 was retained. But that's heavy speculation. I try to avoid minor incremental updates, and sat on my Eos 300D for a very long time, but then I went D700/D800e/D810, so I guess I'm in the loop now. Not that I'm going to claim the D810 isn't a very good camera any time soon.</p>

<p>Is the AF-P stepping motor really a step up from the standard motor in the 55-300 DX lens? I have understood things correclty when I say AF-P motors still need to be set to M Before I can refocus manually, right?</p>

<p>Faster and quiter always sound nice, but is it noticeable? Could the F6.3 @300 mm eliminate any speed advantages when compared to the 55-300 DX?</p>

<p>I'm not aware of needing to switch to M before you refocus on AF-P - KR suggests that it's got the same instant override as a conventional AF-S lens (not that I've tried one or found many reviews yet). My understanding is that it's a combination of being quieter and possibly behaving better with contrast-detect autofocus (for video) - because it might be better at toggling direction. That's a bit of a guess, though - but I've heard reports that conventional AF-S motors might not play well with video, and allegedly this was the reason that Canon are moving to a similar system. I'm not sure how much faster I'd expect it to be than an AF-S lens, at least as inherent technology - but the size of the focus group (and therefore optical design) probably has as much to do with it. Just try a mk1 80-200...</p>