LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

The D7500 is a better DSLR in some ways, the non availability of a vertical grip was a deal breaker for me.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Mel, if the zoom doesn't matter the Sony is the better choice. It has the larger 1" sensor which will give better images, better low light capability, and larger pixel size as well as greater true resolution. The Sony is also lighter and smaller.

buldog216 Loc: Boynton Beach, Florida

I've been using my 3300 for quite a few years. I have a 18-70 mm and a 70-300mm. both work fine.

hookedupin2005 Loc: Northwestern New Mexico

I would lookat the Tamron 18-400mm($650.00)Heard and read good things about that lens, plus you can take it with you when you upgrade to a different Nikon DSLR.

Gilkar

I am sure you got a lot of replies both positive and negative and I'll add my two cents here. The old adage about it not being the "driver of the car but the nut behind the wheel", applies. I have seen beautiful pictures made with a pinhole camera and we all know the cost of a camera like that. However, if you do feel like upgrading to a "better" camera with more features consider buying a low mileage used used one. Most are compatible with any lenses you may already have saving you from having to buy new ones. Then when you are ready, consider buying used lenses as well from a reputable dealer. I have done this many times (with both cameras and lenses) and have never been disappointed.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

The D3400 is an excellent camera. The D7200 has the same sensor- side by side the pictures are identical. The D7200 has a lot of ups and extras, dual slots, and a more detailed menu system.
Nothing wrong with good, clean zooms. The guy said "refurb AF-P 70-300 VR", get that. Practice..

nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY

A lot of folks will have you spend all the money you have and more, because you "need" better than what you now own.
Don't listen to that stuff.
"Upgrade" your camera only if there is some definite reason to do so. No one can tell you what is "better" for your needs.

Wordchipper Loc: Fargo, North Dakota USa

I agree with Lamont - the 3400 is still very useful. I currently have the 5300, moving up from 3100. Still have that camera too. My wife uses it to take photos of her quilter's group participants. This is a C-size sensor camera, like the 3400. My 5300 has 24 million megapixels and takes beautiful photos. If one goes to a "full frame" sensor, weight is added, bulkiness. I like the size of 5300 and/or 3400 bodies. If one goes to full frame - yes - there is some resolution difference but not enough, in my opinion, to merit the change-up. With my 14 megapixel 3100, I took photos from which I made 16 x 20 prints, and framed 'em for the wall. Excellent quality. It's not so much how new a camera is or how many megapixels, it's how and what you shoot with what you have.

DBQ49er Loc: Dubuque, IA

You make it sound like me. I still have my 3100, been using D5300 for two years, purchased refurb with 50 SC on it. I am waiting for the truck to deliver a E+ used D7200, hoping for a low SC. I have all kinds of DX lens that will fit the D7200. I am trying to get better and looking for more camera menus.

John Maher Loc: Northern Virginia

I upgraded from a D3000, a more significant upgrade.

I looked at the D3500 when it came out and I re-examined my choice of the D5600. The decisive factor for me was the desire to photograph mushrooms and I wanted that articulated screen for getting down to ground level. If I had a D3400, I would still would have gone for the D5600 just for the articulated screen.

if I could afford a D7200, of course I would buy it. But I do not believe there is anything wrong with the D3100, D3200, D3300, D3400, or D3500.

Look at what you have, the D5600, and the D7200. Then look at future wants to decide on what body you can afford.

I read UHH daily. I will spend the dollar difference between a D5600 and D7200 on glass.

If there was only one best-value solution for all needs, there would only be one camera.

rfar34687

The D3400 has very similar image quality output as the D7200, I have owned both, I still use my D7200 for product photography, and my beloved D850 for everything else. The difference between the 3400 & 7200 are the controls and more semiprofesional adjustments with easier controls (more buttons and two wheels). But if you know how to set up and work your 3400, then you can get very much the same results out of it compared to the D7200. Having said that, I used to believe that original Nikkor lenses were always flawless, until my D850 proved me wrong. If I want to use my lenses with the D850, I need to fine-tune the autofocus on 10 of my 12 lenses. To save some money, I started using the new Tamrom lenses the G2 versions, and boy are they good, sharp and much less expensive than NIKKOR lenses. My favorite walk around long zoon lens today when I'm out there with my D850 is the Tamron 100-400mm f/ 4.5-6.3 this is a lens that you can get today for less than $600 bucks (international versions are fine). The only thing is that they need to be calibrated to the body, at least I had to calibrate it to my D850 so that I could get the sharpest results possible, and trust me, it's is sharp! So yes, don't focus on upgrading the camera body so much, instead, get good lenses and Lear how to take the best out of them, then, when you already know what you're doing and what you want, get a professional body. In real life, collecting lenses is exciting, but you don't need more than 3 maybe 4 great lenses that cover all focal lengths from 24mm all the way to 500mm. My lenses of choice today for my D850 are the Tamron 24-70 g2, then the Tamron 100-400. For longer zoom and great sharpness, I have the Nikon 200-500, and for travelling light, the Nikon 24-120 does a great job. My favorite lens from Nikon is a DX micro 40mm f2.8. that's the sharpest lens I own for product photography. Forget about the 50mm nifty fifties, that DX 40mm micro lens is the sharpest lens you'll ever attach to your D3400 or D7200, and the best of all, is less than $250 dollars. If you can't take good pictures with a d3400 and a $250 dollars lens, then better equipment will not solve your problem, time and learning will.

CO

I've had the Nikon 40mm f/2.8 DX micro lens. I was using it on my D7000. It really is a gem of a lens and sharp. The only reason I sold it is because I wasn't doing a lot of macro photography although it's great for general photography as well. I wish I had kept it now.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

LOVE those guys! Wifee poo likes to quote some of the "7 types of photographer" at me/

Davd S

I offered this same advice to Bertk a couple of days ago. They asking about moving up to a better body. If you are looking for a great deal on a quality DSLR and don’t want to spend mega bucks consider the Nikon D750. I’ve been involve in photography for over 50 years. I’ve shot large and medium format and a lot of 35mm. I’ve work in labs, commercial and portrait studios. I’ve shot weddings and special events. My first Nikon was an FTN back in the 1969. I work my way through the F4 in the 80’s later the F100. When I moved into digital I started with the D100 and then D300, a real work horse. When I retired 2 years ago I decided to buy my last good camera. I choose the D750 pro-level DSLR and paid over $2,000 for it. Today most of my shooting in for myself and consist of travel and grand kids. The D750 is a fantastic camera and they are available new at a number of retailers or direct from Nikon for around $1,200. It is a rugged full frame, 24 MP with ASA 100 to 12800+. It holds 2 cards. It offer Lv, HDR, which I love, has built in Wi-Fi, a variety of metering and focus modes and numerous other options, some I have no need for but it’s good to know they are there. I know there is a newer D850 and I have no doubt it too is a great camera. But for the money I doubt anyone could find a better all-around DSLR of this quality for $1,200. An honest good deal doesn’t come around that often. Don’t miss the opportunity to take advantage of this one. If someone want to move up this is your chance to it at a reasonable price. As far as a lens goes a quality lens in the other half of the equation. The better ones are expensive. My one piece of advice is to stay away from plastic mounts. They are common on inexpensive lenses and are often found on those lenses that come with packages both from Nikon and other manufactures. They enable the manufacture to offer a lower price on a package or kit and some call it. Plastic mounts do brake and the cost to get them repaired exceeds what was save by not buying a better lens in the beginning.

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

I totally agree! I only shoot the Nikon D3000 series because of the cost. I have never "reached my limitations" with these cameras. I print at (usually) 11x14 and will compare my prints with anyone else's. I have two 11x14s hanging in the Connecticut Legislative Office Building and both of those prints were shot with my D3100 camera. I have printed larger without any degradation of the print. Keep you D3400, but if you decide to "upgrade", give the 3400 to me -- I'll put it to great use!