Just bought one of these used. Nice little camera with all the things that matter to me inside. I think a great camera overlooked by all the mirrorless stuff out there and just what is new. I saw a couple shopping for their daughter a new camera and the salesman said the D3400/3300 would be great. I nodded my head in total agreement when they looked at me. D3300 are very good bargains now.

I love this little camera. Use as back up for my D7200. Can't beat this one for the money.

I find no problem using the D3300, trips to menu nothing to it! I've been using my D700 and D2Hs and D2x, bodies and i feel I adapted to the light and quick D3300 with no interruptions.

The single command dial poses no problems at all I see no difference using this camera and spending time with my D2X, its just bulkier and heavier.

I've decided I prefer the smaller and lighter camera body over the bulkier FX, I'll sell my D700 and the FX lenses and stay DX. This little D3300 along with my 35 1.8 Dx, and 18 140 pretty much covers all I need to enjoy photography.

Besides its all about ego? isn't it? I need??? I am thinking a D5500 could work just as well and it does offer the "floppy doodle" LCD.

Besides, i can save much dollars over the bulky cameras.

If anyone's got problems with screen not turning off when using lenses longer than 55mm, the 1.01 update fixes the issue.

You might consider a Pentax K-50 because it has 100% pentaprism viewfinder. Or maybe because it has features in the next class up, is fully weather sealed and is cheaper!

Can I use a zoom lens (AF 18-135 3.5 5.6) from my D40X on my D3300 camera and the 18-55mm lens from my
d3300 on my D40x without damaging either? The zoom lens has a nicer picture than the 18-55. Maybe my imagination.

Just ordered my D3300 with 35mm f/1.8 DX as everyday travel camera. Had the D3100 before: while my D800 and D600 are the perfect tools for specific projects and events, the D3xxx is the one I just throw into my office rucksack every day, sometimes just by itself, sometimes in combination with the little BeeFree-tripod and pano-head. The D3xxx never let me down: with its light weight and robust construction it takes more abuse than most so called semipro bodies. Best value for money you can buy!

The only thing I am not being able to learn is how to use the zoom to get far away shots of my birds like the old cannon I am used to with the pull lever.. any ideas on this one appreciated. ( I mean get far away things up close and personal) Am I needing a special lens for this one?

I’m most interested in the video capabilities of this camera. This site provided the first downloadable raw sample i have seen so far.
I see no bad focus on the video, at 100% zoom (cars passing in london, passing under a bridge).
The quality of the video is also fine, given it’s 50p.
I would rather see a 24fps sample, since it would have much less compression, and that’s what 90% of the people use 90% of the time. 50p is just a low quality feature in case slow-motion is needed.

this CIPA rating for the battery is funny, I get at least 1500 images and battery is still good (about 2/3 charge left)...

For the price I would argue that this is the best budget DSLR camera on the market. Excellent photo quality, and the high mega pixel means that you can crop out any unwanted crap without a huge loss in photo quality

Another class of photographer for whom this camera might be a very good value, is the older person looking for an easy carry, and minimalist quality imaging. I've yet to take an image that can't give everything I want through a few steps in raw processing. And I'm using the scene and Auto modes almost exclusively for family and travel. The older generation digital cameras I sold off to pay for the D3300 kit and second lens, were much more fiddly.

If you can buy a $600 camera that delivers images only a pro can tell the difference from a $3,000 camera why not Then in two years when the next Nikon problem surfaces instead of being out thousands of dollars you throw away the $600 one We paid $1350 for a D70 Three years later card reader error rendering camera useless. Years later find out this was common to every D7O and Nikon would not stand behind. D600 people pay thousands for and find oil spots on lens causing picture anomalies. Buy a D800e might as well place 3k on the back porch and burn it, get it over with instead of waiting for the camera to fail just when you need it most and Nikon do nothing. So the idea of a low priced Camera delivering Nikon quality shots at a price you can just throw them in the garbage every couple years aligns better with Nikon's inability to deliver reliable performance and stand behind their known issues. Nikon should sell just the body and maybe even in a three pack in a dixie cup dispenser?

You talk about Fuji X-A1...but tell me! How much cost the (excellent) Fuji lenses??? If you are reviewing Interchangeable lenses cameras you must take into account the price of the lenses. Fuji lenses are all +400€ lenses. So much for the cheap body...

My comments apply to both the D3300 and D3200. Nikon USA is, I think, underrating these cameras by marketing them as "entry level" only and refusing to sell them without kit lenses. I started in serious photography in 1955 and have been satisfied with the feature set of the D3100, but wanted the higher resolution and ISO levels now available. I shoot RAW with a specified ISO and don't care about jpeg in camera processing. I have 2 "CPU" lenses which replace the kit lens, as well as 4 excellent older prime lenses which can take advantage of a higher resolution sensor. Why on earth would I want to pay for another lens I don't use.

Nikon sells these cameras abroad with a body only option. Why not here?

I just bought a refurbished D3200 body to bypass this problem. Had a new D3300 body with a USA warranty been available I might have gone for it.

I was considering buying a Nikon D3300. My background is very much an enthusiast photographer, coming from the film days.

Nikon D3300: looks good, the 24mp is of course attractive, but the menu driven system mostly is a put-off for me (I would have liked some more physical controls). The 95% viewfinder coverage is also not good and the so many auto settings not good for me either. You need to question whether you really need the 24mp (I personally do not print large photos and do not either crop a lot).

I went the extra mile of adding £200 to my budget and ordered the Nikon D7000 with 18-105 lens. With 16mp (enough for my needs), 100% viewfinder coverage, good AF, LCD screen on the top, tilting 3in screen, weather-proof body, and good build quality (still quite far of my Nikon FM3a though) I am happy.

Any comments welcome.

Does it really cost hundred$ of dollar$ to add a tilting screen and to unblock bracketing in it's internal software?
Meet the D5300.
This is why I no longer buy Nikon.
You KNOW the D5300 could sell for the price of a D3300, because they have identical production costs, but you can't have it for that price. Pay a couple hundred extra if you want the $1 in extra hardware and the unlocking of the software.

The D3300 is a solid camera. As the review states, though, times they are a-changin'. Is it better than, or does it even have a reason to exist next to, mirrorless cameras carrying a similar price and feature set? That is the question...

With each generation, the entry level dSLR becomes harder and harder to recommend to people just looking for a casual camera with good image quality.

Once it was a no-brainer: "Yeah, get a D40. Sure, the D60. The D3000, definitely." Today... no. I wouldn't. I can't even in all honesty imagine what kind of person I would recommend the D3300, or even its discounted predecessor, the D3200, to.

TRULY A MASTERPIECE!

And to You talkin' about incremental upates, the 3300 is a leap: New high resoulotion sensor (same as the 5300/7100), new processor, and new kit lens (good one). That's 3 outta 3 in my book.

A lot of talks from people reading a review. I have the D3300, and with 2900 shots with three different lenses, I KNOW what the camera is like: Shooting only RAW, I get the pictures I want, and even underexosure of 2 EV I can get almost fully recovered pictures(!). Easy handling, fast operations, amazing battery life, all the buttons I want/need, lightweight, no wi-fi/gps (thanks! I hate it, drains battery & adds weight). I am actually stunned by the quality of the images. At ISO 6400, using a 50mm 1.8 in very low light, the output is fantastic. Compared to 5D Mark II, the IQ up to ISO 800 is on pair. And don't argue, if You don't have the experience with theese cameras - I do. 'Nuf said!

This camera plus the Sigma 35mm 1.4 would be an unbelievable combination for street shooting or events. Why would you need anything else

High IQ doesn't satisfy me. I would never buy such a camera because I am a status obsessed snob and spec loving geek.

I really hope that you can turn the screen off on this model. I look at my images when I get home. Dont want that screen glowing like a torch in the night when trying to be discreet.

USB2? No WiFi? No GPS?

They still don't understand their competition and market.

I like the comment..."Though a little long in the tooth, the Panasonic Lumix GF6"
This camera only came out last year ( about September? ) and its already being classed as long in the tooth.
You can see why manufacturers keep updating their line ups for no apparent reason when you get reviews like this.
The " I must have the latest gear" brigade must be throwing out their G6s in droves because its a bit long in the tooth after reading this.
Dear life....whats the world coming to??

I don't even read most of these reviews anymore. Blimey, talk about dry reading.Even the conclusion page is (yawn) boring. Weren't DPR going to shake things up in their reviews, what, last year?

So few comments. Guess the thrill is lost with the entry level dSLR.

Is it also crippled like the rest of the D3xxx series when it comes to remote useage? Is it missing auto bracket options like the D3200?

77% and Silver, seems a bit low. I would've expected 80% and Gold...

And how about mention of the new collapsible kit lens...

What an interesting camera , Nikon has raised the bar for entry level SLR`s. Its amazing how much cameras have come in a few years !

Excellent review, Allison. Undoubtedly a fine camera. But where Nikon loses me is in the way products are crippled. As you pay more, sure, better viewfinder coverage, brighter viewfinder, faster AF, more AF points, better weathersealing, etc. but there is no reason this model shouldn't have the full Adaptive Lighting implementation. Back to Pentax for me should I buy a new DSLR.