Entry-level DSLRs compared: Canon EOS Rebel SL2 vs. Nikon D3400
 |
The entry-level DSLR segment is traditionally highly competitive, and dominated by two big names: Canon and Nikon. With Canon’s new Rebel EOS SL2 just hitting dealers’ shelves, we’ve compared it against one of its main competitors – the Nikon D3400.
Keep an eye out for our full review of the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 coming soon, and read our previously-published review of the Nikon D3400 here.
Sensor
 |
Twenty four megapixels is becoming a pretty standard resolution for entry-level and midrange DSLRs, but despite the identical pixel count, the sensors in the Nikon D3400 and Canon EOS Rebel SL2 are quite different. Most significantly, the Canon’s sensor is slightly smaller. This means that it introduces a slightly more aggressive crop factor of 1.6X, compared to 1.5X from the D3400.
Crop Factor
 |
Should you care about this? That depends. We expect image quality from both cameras to be broadly similar for most shooting, but the increased crop factor may be relevant to you, especially if you enjoy shooting with long lenses.
You should be aware that (for example) the new Tamron 18-400mm will offer slightly greater telephoto reach on the SL2 (29-640mm equiv.) than it will on the D3400 (where it will cover an equivalent zoom range of 18-600mm). Likewise, a typical 50-200mm telezoom will reach slightly further on an EOS Rebel SL2 (~320mm) than it will on the D3400 (where it caps out at an equivalent focal length of 300mm). Honestly though, the difference between a 1.5X crop and a 1.6X crop is so minimal at normal focal lengths that shouldn’t be a reason to choose one system over another.
Autofocus (viewfinder)
 |
Entry-level DSLRs are not typically characterized by advanced autofocus systems, and the Nikon D3400 and Canon EOS Rebel SL2 are pretty typical of cameras in this class. Remarkable, the D3400’s 11-point AF system has been around for more than ten years, and the SL2’s 9-point AF system (illustrated above) isn’t much newer. Neither AF system is particularly remarkable, but both are perfectly reliable in normal everyday use.
Where the Nikon scores over the Canon is in AF-C mode, with 3D AF Tracking turned on. Although nowhere near as versatile as the 153-point system in Nikon’s high-end D5 and D500, 3D AF Tracking does work in the D3400, and offers a good solution for casual sports and wildlife photography.
Autofocus (live view / video)
 |
In live view and movie mode, the AF tables are turned. Here, the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 offers a far superior autofocus system, thanks to Canon’s unique Dual Pixel AF, which provides on-sensor phase-detection, covering 80% of the image area (indicated above). As such, the SL2 actually boasts better AF performance in live view mode than it does when used as a conventional DSLR.
General performance
 |
The Nikon D3400 and Canon EOS Rebel SL2 give similar performance overall, when measured by standard features like maximum continuous shooting rate (which is the same, at 5fps for both cameras) and ISO sensitivity span (again, the same, at ISO 100-25,600). Both are capable of capturing great-looking images in most shooting situations, and doing so quickly and without fuss. Both cameras offer an option for quiet/silent shooting, too – which is nice.
The Nikon D3400 does have a couple of tricks up its sleeve though – for one thing, it offers a more generous Raw buffer in continuous shooting, and is capable of capturing 10 Raw files at 5 fps as opposed to 6, from the Canon SL2, before slowing to allow the buffer to clear. The D3400’s 11-point AF system is superior to the 9-point system in the SL2 too, especially when it comes to tracking moving subjects.
Rear screen
 |
The Canon Rebel EOS SL2 has a far better rear screen than the Nikon D3400, in multiple respects. For one thing it’s articulated, rather than being fixed. This is especially helpful for movie shooting and live view work. It’s higher resolution than the D3400’s LCD too, offering 1.04 million-dots compared to 920k.
Touch-sensitivity
 |
The difference between 920,000 and 1.04 million dots is modest, but more significant is the addition of touch-sensitivity in the Canon SL2, which can be extremely useful when it comes to setting AF point position in live view and movie modes. And thanks to Canon’s Dual Pixel autofocus system, when you set AF by touch on the SL2, you can expect fast, accurate and smooth focus.
Movie mode
 |
As far as video is concerned, these cameras offer a near-identical specification, but very different user experiences. Both the D3400 and Rebel SL2 feature a now-standard (for entry-level DSLRs at any rate) 1080/60p maximum resolution setting, and both can shoot perfectly good looking video. At this level we wouldn’t expect any video-centric extras like zebra highlight warnings or focus peaking, but it’s nice to see that Canon provides a mic socket on the SL2 (pictured above) for users that want to upgrade from the camera’s built-in microphone.
The big differences between the D3400 and SL2’s video modes become obvious when you start shooting. The D3400’s fixed, non touch-sensitive rear LCD and contrast-detection autofocus system provide a pretty clunky experience. You can shoot video on the D3400, and footage looks fine, but it’s not much fun.
The SL2 on the other hand offers a fully articulating, touch-sensitive rear display and Canon’s excellent Dual Pixel autofocus system. This is a no-brainer: if you’re interested in shooting video as well as stills, get the SL2.
Connectivity
 |
Both of these cameras offer built-in connectivity options, but they work in very different ways. Nikon has tried to make things easy with its low-energy Bluetooth ‘Snapbridge’ connectivity suite (see screen-grabs above) but in practice, we have had issues getting it to work reliably, especially when paired with iOS smart devices. And even when it does work, sending files to a smartphone over Bluetooth is a very slow, frustrating experience. If you want Wi-Fi, you’ll have to upgrade to a model higher up in Nikon’s DSLR lineup.
The Canon EOS Rebel SL2, on the other hand, includes built-in WiFi with NFC, plus Bluetooth, and the option to add a GPS receiver. The overall implementation of these features is much more sensible and versatile. It’s also pretty hassle-free.
User interface / handling
 |
As entry-level DSLRs, the D3400 and Rebel SL2 are designed to be as small and light as possible, while remaining easy to use for beginner photographers. Both Canon and Nikon have long experience of designing cameras for this audience, and it shows. The D3400 and SL2 are mature, well-designed products that serve their intended buyers well, offering a range of fully automatic shooting modes, along with manual exposure control for more advanced or aspiring photographers.
In addition, both cameras offer a simplified, more illustrative UI compared to their higher-end stablemates, including the option of a specifically beginner-focused interface, geared towards educating novice DSLR photographers about the best choice of settings for certain subjects, and the effects of different exposure parameters on the final image.
For our money, the D3400’s ‘GUIDE’ mode, which takes the form of a simplified on-screen tutorial, makes it a better DSLR for the absolute beginner.
User interface / handling
 |
Both cameras are very small and light, but impressively, the SL2 offers a fully-articulating, touch-sensitive LCD screen while still feeling very slim. The D3400 is a few grams lighter, but not enough that you’d notice when the two cameras are held side by side.
Battery life
 |
The D3400 offers substantially greater battery life than the Canon EOS Rebel SL2, at a quoted 1,200 shots compared to 650 under CIPA conditions, which includes 50% flash use. Canon quotes a battery life of ~800 when flash is not used at all. We generally expect CIPA estimates to be on the low side, so the SL2’s battery life will probably be better than these figures might suggest in normal use, but it’s clear that the D3400 offers a lot more endurance on a single charge.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)