Nikon D3500 Banner
Industry News
·1 min read

Nikon’s Most Boring Camera Announcement Yet: The D3500 SLR

·

Nikon has a rich history of boring camera announcements in the D3000 line, but they’ve outdone themselves this time. This evening, Nikon announced the D3500, a 24.2 megapixel APS-C DSLR that is compact and quite capable; indeed, probably perfect for the average person who wants to get better image quality in their snapshots, exactly as its predecessor the D3400 was.

And I mean exactly.  The two cameras are built around the same sensor, and neither has an optical low-pass filter. They share the same ISO range (100-25600), the same number of autofocus points (11), the same frame rate and video features, and the same shutter speeds. They both write files to a single SD card, and have Bluetooth and WiFi.

So what’s new?  The body is slightly smaller (.2 inch thinner) and lighter, and the battery life is somewhat improved (CIPA rated for 1550 shots rather than 1200, per charge of the same battery).

AND, although Nikon doesn’t mention it in their press release, it appears that the D3500 has optical Advanced Wireless Lighting (ie, it can control other remote flashes with its pop-up flash). This is a features that hardly any D3000 series users will ever use, but for the budget minded pro, it may work as a back up body. Unless you need high-speed sync, of course, in which case you’ll need to buy a camera in the D7000 series.

Price & Availability

If you are a member of that rare breed that doesn’t have much money to spend but absolutely must have the latest model, the D3500 will be available in a kit with an 18-55mm lens in September for about $499, or in a kit with the 18-55 and a AF-P DX NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED for $849. Those of you who are of sound mind will simply buy the D3400, which costs even less.

However, if you’re interested in pre-ordering the D3500 (or just buying the D3400), please feel free to do it through our links, which help support the site. You can order from B&H or Adorama, or of course, Amazon.

Tags
Matthew Gore
Editor-in-Chief
Matthew Gore is the Editor-in-Chief and Administrator of Light & Matter Media.
Related

7 Comments

  1. Hi Matt,

    I’ve been reading your articles all afternoon (slow day at the office) and they’re fantastic! Though I’m sure you get tired of these types of questions, I wanted to burden you with my dilemma on the off-chance you’d answer. :-)

    As a gift – I’m deciding on a digital camera (lightly used) for outdoor clothing shoots (my wife runs a small knitwear design company which relies heavily on good-quality photos). We’re using an older digital camera I bought years before the business took off, and it now seems time for something more professional. Wireless connectivity via the Nikon app is useful for streamlining social media uploads, though I think she can live without touch screen. The background of the photos is also important for setting the “vibe”, so a good landscape camera would be excellent.

    I live in New Zealand and have a much smaller second hand camera market to pull from, but the following three are presently available in my price-range:

    Nikon D3400
    Nikon D5600
    Nikon D7100 (with aftermarket Wi-Fi, so I think it can connect?)

    Or something totally different?? I have no brand loyalty.

    Which would you think is the best choice for the uses I’ve described? Your opinion would be fantastic, I need someone who’s not dazzled by features (and who’s obviously knowledgeable) to get me out of the research-quagmire. Maybe you should have a $1/opinion section? I would certainly pay for that.

    Thanks mate.

    Carl

    Reply

    1. Hi Carl,

      I’m always happy to answer questions like this… no worries. In this case, the answer I give you isn’t going to be very satisfactory, but it is honest. For any sort of online publishing (but especially social media like Instagram), the camera that you choose will make almost no difference at all (as long as it has the features that you want). Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji… even their inexpensive models are all wonderful these days, and better than most people will be able to get out of them. Of the cameras that you mention, I’d probably go with the D5600, but the Canon 77D or 80D are also good, and the Sony a6000 series are also excellent… and pretty much all of the Fuji X-trans sensor cameras.

      On the other hand, getting an excellent lens or two can make a huge difference. My general advice is always this: buy the least expensive camera that will meet your needs and the best lenses that you can afford.

      Unfortunately, choosing an excellent lens is not easy. It takes a pretty good understanding of what you’re looking for in your finished images. Many people have good luck with an 85mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 lens to get professional quality portrait shots (with nicely blurred backgrounds). I personally prefer the 70-200 f/2.8 lenses for just about everything… but a lot of it just comes down to personal style and personal taste, which come with a lot of practice and experience as a photographer. It can be very helpful to look around a website like flickr or 500px and find some images that you like and want to create images in the same style, and check and see what lenses were used, if the info is posted.

      Good luck! And let me know if I can help you narrow things down a bit.

      – Matthew

      Reply

      1. Thanks Matthew, that response (true to form) was excellent and much appreciated.

        I’m glad you said that about online posts, that helps. Instagram and Ravelry (a knitting site) will make up roughly 85% of the camera’s usage (even the iPhone does a fair job), however, another part of knitwear design is magazine/book publishing and larger images for pattern releases, and that’s sort of what I’m looking at. Essentially: buying a camera for the 3% of the time I’ll actually need it (like a 4×4).

        As for the lens question, I’ve been avoiding that rabbit hole a bit (hoping to cut my teeth on kit-lenses), but I’m definitely getting the message that a better lens is the way to go and will face that dragon once I land on a camera.

        I have a D5600 on the docket, but for argument’s sake: there is also a D7100 (with wifi kit) for about the same price. Would I be wanting the D7100 when it comes time for outdoor magazine cover-shots? Or is the D5600 still the way to go? I guess I don’t really understand if the extra focus points will have any added benefit for my purposes…

        Thanks again mate, you’re a legend.

        ~Carl

        Reply

        1. Ah ha. For magazine publishing, the camera can be a little more important. In terms of image quality, they’re still all going to be about identical (the Nikons that you mention all use a 24 megapixel sensor without a low-pass filter on it, so image quality will always be the same if you shoot RAW… shooting JPG throws away something like 98% of the captured data per channel, and there may be some differences between what each camera decides to keep. You should always shoot RAW, or shoot RAW + JPG if you really need the JPGs quickly).

          The autofocus systems of both cameras (the D5600 and D7100) are excellent. There are two situations where more AF points can be helpful: if you’re tracking a moving subject (someone running towards you) and you want to keep an AF point right on the face, you may have better luck with the D7100. The other is if you’re shooting from a tripod and you want to focus on a particular point in the frame without moving the camera. Otherwise, having tons of AF points doesn’t make the camera more reliable for focusing (though having more cross-type AF points does). I made it through college for photojournalism back in the 1990s with a Canon EOS A2, which had 5 AF points, shooting college sports and events. The important thing is to get familiar with your camera and how it will respond in different situations, and you’ll be able to use it for anything.

          The D7100 will be able to shoot a little faster, and it might manage one more shot during a burst, but otherwise, they’re going to be very similar. If you’re shooting in very low light, the D7100 will also be a little more reliable. Perhaps the most important thing with the D7100, especially for fashion/lifestyle photography, is that you’ll be able to use high-speed sync with flash.

          I’d be curious to hear what wi-fi kit comes with it. The Nikon version? Something like an Eye-Fi card? Camranger or CaseAir? They’re all going to give you different levels of functionality and reliability, and more importantly, ease of use. The D5600 will probably have an ease-of-use advantage, but the D7100 will certainly be able to get the job done.

          Anyway, the D7100 vs D5600 is a tricky choice, and either way you go you’ll get some advantages. The D7100 is probably the better camera, ultimately, in terms of speed, autofocus, professional features and build-quality (but it’s larger and heavier), but I’m just not sure about the social media bit. The good thing is, either way you go you’ll be able to get professional quality images with good lenses (assuming that you know what you’re doing), so you can’t really go wrong. I don’t know if any of that helps (I just woke up), but it may at least give you a little more to think about :-)

          Reply

          1. Thanks Matthew,

            I’ve read what you said several times and that was a fairly legendary wakeup response. The D5600 I had on the hook slipped my grasp, so I’m back to waiting for something to pop up within reach of our little islands.

            In following your Flikr search advice I did notice some staggeringly beautiful shots taken on an Olympus E-M10 II. I haven’t yet come across many sample images taken on the D5600 or Canon M6 that have had that “wow factor”, but after seeing some Canon EOS R photos (really setting the bar for me, but wayyy too expensive sadly) and then coming across the Olympus, I’m starting to think I can be a bit more open-minded about my choices.

            Have you seen anything under $1k that can match the Canon EOS R for photo quality? I’m not sure what technical quality gives it that sharpness but DANG. I also haven’t forgotten what you said about lenses, though even with good lenses the camera seems to set the tone…

            All the best,
            Carl

            P.S. This shows her website and some of what we’d be using the camera for btw:
            http://www.blackcatknittingcompany.com/

            Reply

            1. Hi Carl,

              I’m leaving for India in the morning (for several weeks), so I’m looking forward to taking some photos of things I’ve never seen before, but it also means that my responses here on the site will be a little limited, so don’t take it personally if you don’t hear from me any time soon.

              In any case. The Canon EOS R is essentially a Canon 5D Mark IV in a mirrorless body… the sensors are just about identical. And the Olympus that you mention (a micro-4/3rds camera) is a great example of why it’s the lenses that are so important… it has a small, relatively low pixel-count sensor that doesn’t have the greatest dynamic range, but when you put some good glass in front of it (MFT cameras often use Leica lenses), it makes all the difference… especially in the hands of a good photographer.

              Part of what you’ll be seeing on flickr, unfortunately, is that there are thousands and thousands of people with Nikon D5600s and kit lenses who are just not very good photographers (they’re not marketed towards professionals), so you’ll see a lot of their images and get the impression that the cameras don’t produce amazing images. But again, very little of what you’re seeing has to do with the camera… it’s the lenses and the photographer. The EOS R is brand new, and ONLY has 3 really expensive lenses available…. and only photographers with some very serious interest in photography are going to be buying them.

              Incidentally, one of the things that often makes particular images look so sharp is that large parts of the image are not sharp. With telephoto lenses or large aperture prime lenses, the background will be pretty blurry, and it’s the contrast with that blurry background that makes the in-focus subject look especially sharp. And contrasty light helps a lot too.

              Anyway… good luck! I’ll check out your link when I get a little time :-)

              – Matthew

              Reply

              1. Thanks Matthew,

                I’ll keep searching for a D5600 matched with a good lens and more importantly a good photographer, and we’ll see if that kicks me back off the Olympus.

                At the end of the day, I image the gimmicks (Bluetooth, wifi, flip screen, remote control etc) rather than image quality will be the biggest upgrade over our existing Sony.

                Enjoy your trip mate!

                ~Carl

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *