www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

I am about to buy a new camera and thought I would ask if anyone has any reviews on the Nikon D3400. Although it is an entry level model, I am by no means an expert with a camera. I am looking to return to DSLR after many years with a bridge camera.
I have tried the Nikon D3400 in store and like it's light weight, picture quality and focus at very short distance (i.e. 3-6 inches).
It is my intention to also purchase a macro lens to go with it, perhaps 105mm.

I would welcome any feedback on this model as well as views on whether 105mm is the right sort of macro to try.

Kind Regards
Kev Ling

Hi Kev,

My two penn'orth, for what it's worth, being a confirmed non-expert. Against all advice from this forum (150 minimum, 180 for preference), I bought a Sigma 105 macro several years ago. I like the comparatively light weight and enjoy the fieldcraft necessary to get near to one's quarry. I like the close minimum focus distance and it's plenty sharp enough for me. After a Bridge camera, a DSLR with a 180mm lens will seem very weighty.
I await the flak...

Tony M.

I used Nikon DSLRs for many years and can confirm that they are very nice 'photographers' cameras. There is no significant difference in image quality between the 'entry-level' models and the more advanced models. Entry-level models tend to rely more on menus for making adjustments, while more 'advanced' models have more knobs and buttons, which make changing settings quicker, if you know what to do with them all! The entry level models usually have good-quality plastic bodies (which are lighter), while metal bodies, with weather-sealing gaskets, are used in more professional models that are expected to receive hard use.

Having said that, it is the lens which actually makes the image, so do not skimp on quality here. It is also the lens that will contribute most of the weight, especially if you are a wildlife photographer, with a need for 'long' lenses. The D3400 uses an APS-size sensor, which is smaller than the 'full frame' sensor(i.e. same size as 35mm film), used in larger models. The advantage for the wildlife photography is that the smaller frame provides more 'telephoto' effect from any given focal length. In this respect, a 105mm lens on an APS sensor has a similar effect to a 160mm on a full frame camera. (I've written a comparison of different sensor sizes on my website, which may be of interest)

With my own Nikon cameras, I used a Tamron 90mm macro (which was a highly regarded lens at that time) and often added a 1.4X teleconverter, to give a little more 'reach'. This worked well for me, over many years but, as I got older, it seemed to get harder to approach an active subject like a butterfly, without disturbing it, and my knees objected to the low viewpoints that were often needed.

A few years ago, I changed to an Olympus 'mirrorless' camera and like it very much. Not only is the camera body very light but the lenses are smaller and lighter as well, while the overall system still provides image quality equivalent to the best APS-size sensors. Mirrorless bodies are becoming increasingly popular with Fuji, Sony, Olympus, and Panasonic, all providing good examples. Canon are rumoured to have a new mirrorless body in preparation and Nikon are sure to follow suit. I was won over after I tried an Olympus in my local John Lewis store. If you haven't experienced one, it might be worth at least having a look, to see how you like the style.

I'm sure that, whatever you choose, you will like the quicker and more direct operation, when compared with the 'Bridge' style.

Mike

I'm with Tony on the use of a 105mm macro. I also use a Sigma 105mm coupled with a 1.4x teleconverter, a combination which can yield excellent results.

Kevin.

A few comments on lens for butterflies etc
I own and use the Nikon105 ,a very sharp lens but I find it lacks reach for butterflies but excellent for smaller moving bugs and static subjects.
Example.Hornet.
Sigma 150 again very sharp used as my standard workhorse with various cameras Nikon D800 or D500
Example Apollo.
Sigma 180 a produces super pictures a tripod is essential, good for video.
Example Comma.
Nikon 300 f4 is well worth considering, light ,sharp and gives the range for the more difficult subjects,good for Dragonflies ,a walk about lens for small birds and with the addition of telly-convertors it gives serious reach
Example Woodland brown.

http://jamesgibbs6929.zenfolio.com

Thank you to everyone who has replied with their advice. I will be shop testing the D3400 with a 105mm lens at the weekend based on your feedback.

Regards
Kev

Just to add a little confusion....I have used a Sigma 150mm for both butterflies & moths for several years and there is no way I would work with a shorter focal length; indeed for flighty species I use a 1.4 extender (teleconverter) with a 25mm extension tube between the converter & the lens (see http://www.davidtomlinsonphotos.co.uk/m ... _lens.html). I note that WEX regularly have used Sigma 150mm lenses on their website recently and, if I were starting again, that's what I would go for. WEX used gear is reliable. As to Nikon vs Canon, I am certain that there are no significant differences.

As a Nikonian, I agree with the comments about Nikon bodies - an entry-level Nikon is a bit trickier to get-to-grips-with than the equivalent Canon (I used to flog Canon DSLRs even tho' I was a Nikon user, which caused some ribbing from other reps...!) but I prefer the images from Nikon.
It is the lens that makes the biggest difference and I have used Tamron 90mm, Nikon 105mm (with and without VR), Nikon 200mm, as well as Canon 100mm L series which is a stonking beast, and should be for the price!
My favourite has to be the Nikon 200mm, even though it is old and heavy, but I mostly use the Nikon 105mm as sometimes the 200mm is more difficult to get at the right distance as things "get in the way". Sigma EX 105mm is also a good contender as is the 150mm for less-close approaches. Tamron also do a 180mm which would also do a similar job. Be aware that trial and error (mostly error when you start!) is necessary to learn the best distances, speeds and apertures to use with your set-up. The biggest difference outside of the lens for me (and many others) was the purchase of a monopod; sharpness increased and blur diminished once I started using one...
Happy shooting