Nikon D3400 vs Canon EOS Rebel T6

[oc_in_fw]

I am planning a trip to Denver this October, and am considering a DSLR bundle. Sam's Club has a Canon EOS Rebel T6 kit, bundled with two lenses, bag and accessories. Amazon has a similar kit, based off the Nikon D3400. The Nikon is a little more, but not much. Does anyone have any opinions on these two cameras? Maybe some pros and cons between the two? I understand the basics of SLR- I took photography in high school (back in the good old days of film). I have a lot of rust, but I think I can get back to where I used to be. Thanks in advance.

 

[burry1]

Both are capable of stunning photos. I always think the best thing to do is to try and handle them , if possible and see which seems more comfortable in the hand. Which has controls that fall under your fingers the best. This is the camera that you will have with you more often and be able to adjust quicker, and so get the best results with.

 

[oc_in_fw]

Both are capable of stunning photos. I always think the best thing to do is to try and handle them , if possible and see which seems more comfortable in the hand. Which has controls that fall under your fingers the best. This is the camera that you will have with you more often and be able to adjust quicker, and so get the best results with.

Thanks. I was wrong about one thing- prices aren't quite similar. The Canon comes with a 75-300mm zoom lens as well as a standard 55mm lens. The Nikon kit with that lens included is about $120 more. That may weigh my decision.

 

[oc_in_fw]

If you scroll don't to the comparison section of the page, it says two of the cameras are automatic only but the other two have bodies that are auto and manual. If they are the same camera, how can that be? Is it an error, or is it something about the lenses?

https://www.amazon.com/Canon-18-55m...1534626646&sr=8-6&keywords=canon+eos+rebel+t6

 

[sarimento1]

either choice is ok, IMO.
i'd lean toward a kit with extra batteries.
doubt you will use tripod.
perhaps think about a mirrorless camera with all-in-one zoom lens, but keep to a larger APSC sized sensor.
if very early october, consider travel to aspen for the fall colors at maroon bells.

 

[oc_in_fw]

either choice is ok, IMO.
i'd lean toward a kit with extra batteries.
doubt you will use tripod.
perhaps think about a mirrorless camera with all-in-one zoom lens, but keep to a larger APSC sized sensor.
if very early october, consider travel to aspen for the fall colors at maroon bells.

Thanks for the maroon bells recommendation (and any other sights people think I should see in the area). To the mirrorless camera- any recommendations in the same range? How steep is the learning curve?

 

[ackvil]

You may want to check out a few camera stores, too. B&H photo, Adorama, and Beach Camera offer some good deals.

 

[oc_in_fw]

You may want to check out a few camera stores, too. B&H photo, Adorama, and Beach Camera offer some good deals.

Thanks.

 

[oc_in_fw]

I was looking at this. I assume the switch labeled "MF" and "AF" on the lenses allow you to switch from auto focus to manual focus. Is this correct?

BeachCamera.com - Canon EOS Rebel T6 DSLR Camera w/ 18-55mm IS II + 75-300mm III Double Zoom Deluxe Kit

 

[troy]

I have no experience with either, or any DSLR for that matter, but agree with others that either would be capable of great images. Also agree mirrorless is another great option. The most important thing is to decided what you want, and get it with enough time to get to know it before your trip.

For what it's worth I'm in love with my Panasonic GX85. It has a micro 4/3 sensor, which is a bit controversial. The sensor is smaller than an APSC, but closer to APSC than APSC is to full. It's basically 1/2 the width or 1/4 the size of a full frame. This means it isn't as good in low light (But it's really not that bad and you can always use the built in flash if needed.) and is harder to get that really blurry background that some people really seem to love. What it also means is lenses can be built much smaller. I can fit my camera, a 14- 140 (28-280 full frame equivalent), the kit lens 12-32, 2 extension tubes, 4 batteries, charger, cleaning cloth and a couple SD cards all in a bag that measures just under 8"x 8" x 5". It also has a tilting touch screen, image stabilization, and shoots 4K video. The images that it captures are good enough for me, and much better than anything I had before it.

Good luck with your search, hope you find something you love!

 

[Go West Young Man]

Wirecutter says the Nikon has a better sensor than the Canon, but honestly at your stage of photography you're not going to notice the difference. If you get serious enough to worry about that level of detail, you're going to be looking at multiple lens upgrades in the $500-600 range, the extra $100 you paid up front is going to be a rounding error

The Best DSLR for Beginner

 

[oc_in_fw]

Wirecutter says the Nikon has a better sensor than the Canon, but honestly at your stage of photography you're not going to notice the difference. If you get serious enough to worry about that level of detail, you're going to be looking at multiple lens upgrades in the $500-600 range, the extra $100 you paid up front is going to be a rounding error

The Best DSLR for Beginner

Thanks for the link. I am leaning toward just buying a camera with lens and not a kit. Yeah, the kit has a lot of stuff, but to start out I just need a bag, strap, quality filter for lens protection, and a lens hood. When it comes time to wanting a zoom lens (and that may be a while) I will want to leave my options open. I am not sure of the lens quality in the kits. As an aside, people on LetGo and 5 mile are out of their minds in regards to prices. I see Canon T3s selling for the price of new T5s, and Nikon 3200s for the price of 3400s.

 

[Chapinahat]

Why just those two? Sony A6000 out performs pretty much everything at that price point and is compact.

The kit lens is pretty decent and with Sigma offering 19/35/60mm f2.8 primes at less than £$150 each, will give you a fantastic lightweight travel kit.

 

[luv2shave]

More than a single camera model - Nikon, Canon or Sony - its about an investment in an eco-system where Canon shines above competition. I have an aps-c and also a full frame 5DMark3 camera. The number of options I have for lenses both from Canon as well as third party is incredible. Canon has been stepping up the game in the after market lenses specially for the APS-C crop sensor cameras such as the T6 rebel.

I would advise take a higher view of long term investment in an ecosystem and essential lenses which you would eventually want/need as you will quickly outgrow the kit lenses in some time due to their inherent and severe constraints in exploring and using the full capabilities of a DSLR in Low light photography, wide angle landscape photography, portrait photography, wild life photography and so on. You would eventually start putting money in to the ecosystem. Canon at this time is well placed.

 

[oc_in_fw]

Why just those two? Sony A6000 out performs pretty much everything at that price point and is compact.

The kit lens is pretty decent and with Sigma offering 19/35/60mm f2.8 primes at less than £$150 each, will give you a fantastic lightweight travel kit.

Two reasons. Main one being that I don’t want to order one. With certain things I like to be able to put my hands on it before I buy it. The seconds is that I know zero about mirrorless cameras. For instance, can I have as much manual control with a mirrorless as I can with an SLR? I am researching that now.

 

[oc_in_fw]

Two reasons. Main one being that I don’t want to order one. With certain things I like to be able to put my hands on it before I buy it. The seconds is that I know zero about mirrorless cameras. For instance, can I have as much manual control with a mirrorless as I can with an SLR? I am researching that now.

Any input on the Sony will be welcome.

 

[shm]

Can't help on the 6000, but I have the Sony A77 mk1 and the A99 mk2 both are mirrorless cameras with every control equivalent to my old SLR's.
One thing I really like is the in-camera stabilisation, which mean that no matter what lens I put on them I have the ability of stabilisation, I don't need to buy an expensive lens with that feature.

The only thing that really needs attention, is the battery consumption. No mirror mean you have a screen that needs electricity and especially in a dark environment it consumes a lot of power, so at least one more battery is needed.
I have four batteries and I have used about 2½-3 the times I used most.

 

[oc_in_fw]

Can't help on the 6000, but I have the Sony A77 mk1 and the A99 mk2 both are mirrorless cameras with every control equivalent to my old SLR's.
One thing I really like is the in-camera stabilisation, which mean that no matter what lens I put on them I have the ability of stabilisation, I don't need to buy an expensive lens with that feature.

The only thing that really needs attention, is the battery consumption. No mirror mean you have a screen that needs electricity and especially in a dark environment it consumes a lot of power, so at least one more battery is needed.
I have four batteries and I have used about 2½-3 the times I used most.

I was reading that battery was the one area of concern with mirrorless, due to the screen and the smaller body size (meaning smaller amount of room for a battery). Can you tell me about night shooting (both sky and general)? I probably won't do a lot of long exposure stuff (at least right away), but it is something that I will get around to. Some say that DSLR may be a little better for that, but you know how internet opinions can be. Yes, I recognize the irony of asking that question on an internet forum, but I generally put more weight into the opinions of the guys here.

 

[shm]

It is a bit more tricky, because the screen cranks up the ISO (seems like that) so it get more grainy and in a very dark environment, it can sometimes be difficult to actually see the motive because of the grain (noise), and in such situations I miss the old fashioned viewfinder where you see the motive mirrored.
But I don't have any difficulty focusing, as I let the camera focus and rely 100% on its accuracy. If you want to focus manually in these situations it will be more tricky - but it is only if it is very dark. If the motive has just a little light on it, there is no problem - at least I haven't experienced any.

I don't know the size of the battery for the 6000, but both my SLT's use the same battery, and it is pretty much the same (physical) size as those for my old SLR's and they were not rechargeable.
I have two original Sony and two Duracell batteries; all are 1600 mAh. The Sonys seems to keep the electricity a little better/longer, but not much and for the price I am quite happy and satisfied with the performance.
Here in Denmark the Duracell is about 33% cheaper than the Sony.

 

[oc_in_fw]

It is a bit more tricky, because the screen cranks up the ISO (seems like that) so it get more grainy and in a very dark environment, it can sometimes be difficult to actually see the motive because of the grain (noise), and in such situations I miss the old fashioned viewfinder where you see the motive mirrored.
But I don't have any difficulty focusing, as I let the camera focus and rely 100% on its accuracy. If you want to focus manually in these situations it will be more tricky - but it is only if it is very dark. If the motive has just a little light on it, there is no problem - at least I haven't experienced any.

I don't know the size of the battery for the 6000, but both my SLT's use the same battery, and it is pretty much the same (physical) size as those for my old SLR's and they were not rechargeable.
I have two original Sony and two Duracell batteries; all are 1600 mAh. The Sonys seems to keep the electricity a little better/longer, but not much and for the price I am quite happy and satisfied with the performance.
Here in Denmark the Duracell is about 33% cheaper than the Sony.

Thanks for the input. I hope to visit your country one day. I’ve seen the northern lights in pictures, but i want to see them in real life. Also, Denmark is the home of MacBaren pipe tobacco- they make most of my favorites.