More Confused Than EVER!

[Mickey Fliers]

Seriously, I was up from 4:00 till 5:00 am thinking of this stuff. Any before that, I was actually dreaming it!

So, I thought I had made my mind up about the D80. I went to a Ritz yesterday and they didn't have one in stock, so I played with the D40x. Now, I know I don't want the 40x, but now I am thinking about the 40.

I am so confused. Ken Rockwell's site says the D40 is the way to go. But, on Nikon Cafe, everyone suggests the 80 over the 40.

This is my first trip into dSLR and I don't want to get too overwhelmed. I liked the size of the 40 (I am small and have smallish hands), but I don't want to feel like "I should have gotten more camera". KWIM? I like the idea that the 80 is easier to manipulate b/c it has two dials.

Also trying to decide btwn the 18-135 and the 18-200 vr. Of course, I want the later, but don't know if I will need it quite yet.

Please help. I can't go another sleepless night.

 

[rtphokie]

Seriously, I was up from 4:00 till 5:00 am thinking of this stuff. Any before that, I was actually dreaming it!

So, I thought I had made my mind up about the D80. I went to a Ritz yesterday and they didn't have one in stock, so I played with the D40x. Now, I know I don't want the 40x, but now I am thinking about the 40.

I am so confused. Ken Rockwell's site says the D40 is the way to go. But, on Nikon Cafe, everyone suggests the 80 over the 40.

This is my first trip into dSLR and I don't want to get too overwhelmed. I liked the size of the 40 (I am small and have smallish hands), but I don't want to feel like "I should have gotten more camera". KWIM? I like the idea that the 80 is easier to manipulate b/c it has two dials.

Also trying to decide btwn the 18-135 and the 18-200 vr. Of course, I want the later, but don't know if I will need it quite yet.

Please help. I can't go another sleepless night.

Is it Ken Rockwell's money? Have you held both cameras? Which one felt better to you? In the end, that matters more than the numbers and certainly matters more than the recommendations of others.

If you are salivating over the 18-200 over the 18-135 and it's not much more cash, go for the 200. You'll use it soon enough. You'll find yourself shooting at the far end of the 135 before you know it and wish you'd gotten the 200 instead.

 

[AndrewWG]

Is it Ken Rockwell's money? Have you held both cameras? Which one felt better to you? In the end, that matters more than the numbers and certainly matters more than the recommendations of others.

If you are salivating over the 18-200 over the 18-135 and it's not much more cash, go for the 200. You'll use it soon enough. You'll find yourself shooting at the far end of the 135 before you know it and wish you'd gotten the 200 instead.

I agree with this. Go with the 200mm. You'll not regret it.

As far as the camera, I would wait until you can get a D80 in your hands. If it feels awkward, go with the D40, but I wouldn't purchase one until you can find out for sure which one feels right to you. Otherwise, you may regret the purchase.

 

[YEKCIM]

Just a few random thoughts...

First, from all I've seen, the D40 is a fine camera (if you doubt it, look at what *O*-Joe has produced with his!). The primary drawback of the D40 (IMO) is the lack of an in-body focus motor. This may or may not be an issue for you. If you do not plan to purchase one of the non-AFS Nikkor lenses (AFS lenses have AF motors in the lens and are thus not dependent on a body-based AF motor) then the D40's lack of AF motor would not be an issue for you. Keep in mind, too, that there *are* third party (i.e. Sigma) primes and zooms that have the AF motor in the lens, so that might be an option.

The D80 does have some features that the D40 does not, such as top panel lighted LCD panel, grid lines, ability to accept a battery grip, and so on. IMO, from what I've seen, the D40 has better high-ISO noise characteristics. In addition, since it is getting a little long in the tooth, the pricing is very attractive at present ($980 w/18-135mm kit lens).

Comparing two options, the D80 w/18-135mm kit lens + Nikon 50mm f/1.8 vs. the D40 w/18-135mm kit lens + Sigma 30mm f/1.4, the totals are almost exactly the same. The 18-135 is a fine lens and would be a good starting point with either body and would give you a baseline to evaluate future lens purchases. One or the other of the two fast primes might fit your anticipated needs more than the other.

I hope that hasn't further muddied the water for you. Feel free to post back with any additional questions.

~Ed

 

[Mickey Fliers]

Well, I am going to hit the store today and see if I can get my hands on the 40 and the 80. I definitely need to feel them both in my hands.

Two questions:

1. I have PhotoShop Elements. Will I be able to use that to convert RAW images?

2. We also have an old Canon 35mm with two lenses. Will they work with the 40 or the 80? They are probably from 1996. How can I tell if they are AF-S?

Thanks for all your help.

 

[jann1033]

photoshp elements isn't great for raw images in that it can't batch process them but you can download either the camera raw from ( free)or there may be a raw software program with your camera( canon has digital pro with theirs not sure about nikon) then it will open in phe if you want to do anything els...the camera raw can do saturation, clarity, exposure, pretty much everything but crop and "artistic features" ie filters etc ( i use phe5 and camera raw)
you can get a converter to use but not sure how good the lenses are...i'm guessing they are ef lenses, if so they can be used on canons now but nikon you need an adapter and i'm not sure if the electronics work or not. you can go to www.canonusa.com and they might be listed and tell you the specifications

 

[fitzperry]

Well, I am going to hit the store today and see if I can get my hands on the 40 and the 80. I definitely need to feel them both in my hands.

Two questions:

1. I have PhotoShop Elements. Will I be able to use that to convert RAW images?

2. We also have an old Canon 35mm with two lenses. Will they work with the 40 or the 80? They are probably from 1996. How can I tell if they are AF-S?

Thanks for all your help.

1. I agree with Jan that PSE is not great for converting NEF files, but it can be done. If you or anyone in your house is a student, you can get Lightroom at places like www.campustech.com for under $100. I've been playing around a bit with Nikon's Capture NX for raw conversion. So far I think I like it (mostly because it preserves the camera settings), but is SLOW, SLOW, SLOW--PSE is like lightning by comparison.

2. If you really mean that they are Nikon lenses, try referring to this chart which explains all the abbreviations you'll find on the lenses, etc. http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html

 

[Gdad]

The D80 & the 18-200vr are a great combo. If it was within the budget I do not think you would be disapointed- you could add a $100 50/1.8 and be right there. The D40 may have a little better noise performance due to the fact that it is 6MP- but I think all the other advantages of the D80 far outweigh this IMHO.

 

[ukcatfan]

Listening to Ken Rockwell is your first mistake! In all honesty, he does review stuff pretty well, but I would never take his opinion on anything. He is a little off his rocker and waaaaaayyyyyy too arrogant for my taste.

If you did not like the D40x, then you will probably not like the D40 either. I believe they are almost exactly the same form factor. Mainly it is just the MP difference.

Not to confuse you more, but if you are having this many indecisions, why are you not considering any other brands? The Nikons are nice, but so are every other DSLR brand. Each brand has its own quirks, but all are capable of incredible results. You might want to put more thinking into what lenses you want and then find a camera that matches that brand of lenses and see if it feels good in your hands.

Kevin

 

[TinksDH]

Another lens option to consider would be looking at the Sigma 18-200 OS HSM if you like that focal length. Like the Nikon 18-200, it uses its own internal focusing motor (the "HSM" versus Nikon's "AFS") so you could use it on the D40/40x/60 if you chose to go that route. It also has Sigma's version of vibration reduction (the "OS" versus Nikon's "VR"). I have had the Sigma for 2 months and am highly pleased. It replaced a Nikon 24-120 AFS VR on my D50, so I do know something about how it compares to Nikon in terms of IQ, build quality, vibration reduction, focusing, etc. It's about $200 less than the Nikon, and for all intents and purposes, pretty equivilent. Like all 11X zooms, it has its quirks and compromises.

 

[Zoesmama03]

I liked the D40 and D50 for just that reason it felt better in my hands. They aren't really "small" hands but it was more comfy. The D80 may be a bit bigger but it fits my hands good still. And I'm so glad I just got the D80 because I know after a while with D40 I'd have wished I'd just got the D80.

And of course I love my 50mm f/1.8 too. Its always on it. I have only used the "kit" lens a couple times so far.

Ritz can order anything pretty easy you could get it in a week or check out bhphoto.com they have it a little cheaper even if you are willing to wait 3-5 days for UPS.

Oh and I hear ya on the sleepless night. I knew I'd have trouble sleeping when I got my tax refund late Friday night. I had already checked the ads for the next Sunday(perk my mom gets with her job early ads) that night then found it cheaper online Saturday and rushed out to get it.

 

[Steve's Girl]

The D80 & the 18-200vr are a great combo. If it was within the budget I do not think you would be disapointed- you could add a $100 50/1.8 and be right there. The D40 may have a little better noise performance due to the fact that it is 6MP- but I think all the other advantages of the D80 far outweigh this IMHO.

This was the exact set-up I started with - D80, 18-200 and 50 1.8. I have only recently added a 2.8 lens. But that basic set-up gave me everything I wanted for quite some time. I personally would miss a lot of the D80 features on a D40. You may not use all of them right away, but over time you will come to appreciate them.

 

[jann1033]

This was the exact set-up I started with - D80, 18-200 and 50 1.8. I have only recently added a 2.8 lens. But that basic set-up gave me everything I wanted for quite some time. I personally would miss a lot of the D80 features on a D40reci. You may not use all of them right away, but over time you will come to appate them.

not being brand specific here but i agree, get the most camera you can for your money...or you'll be like me and want the next version 6 months down the road. they all have auto settings so you can learn as you go on any of them...

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I don't know anything about either camera. But my advice to you, having gone through this myself recently, is to slow down, maybe even take a break from it for a while. What's the rush? Let it go and just ponder it lightly. Wait until you're sure about what it is you want. This is what worked for me - I think it took about four months in all once I'd made the decision to actually make a purchase. About a month before my purchase I changed my mind completely, but it just didn't feel right. That's what finally made me realize I knew what I wanted. Good luck with whatever you decide.

Oh, and one other thing. Don't go by what everyone else says. Go by what feels right to you. Like others have said, you don't want to have doubts or regrets later on.

There seem to be a lot of new models coming out this spring, btw.

 

[handicap18]

If any of the mentioned bodies/lenses are in your budget, then personally I would go with the D80 and the 18-200 VR lens. After that I would go with the D80 and the 18-135mm lens. After that I would go with the D80 and the 18-70mm lens. After that I would go with the D80 and the 18-55mm lens. After that I would wait for the D80's replacement.

Now, that being said, the D40 and the D40x are fine camera's, but if the D80 is in your budget then don't bother with the D40 or D40x. In the long run you'll get more out of the D80. Much more lens options (though that is becoming less of an issue) and more features (ie: top LCD screen, which i use a lot with my D50, and it also has 2 command dials {which I wish my D50 had}).

You mentioned old lenses, but you mentioned they are Canon lenses. No Canon lens will attach to a Nikon camera body. Not that it doesn't like it, but that it is a different mount and they don't match up. If they are Nikon lenses, then it doesn't matter if they are AF or AF-S if you get the D80. Based on the year you mentioned you got them, they are NOT AF-S as the AF-S is a fairly new feature for Nikon over the last few years. That being said, based on the year you mentioned, the lenses (again if they are Nikon lenses) will not Auto Focus with the D40 or D40x. They will mount and the meter system will work as will the aperture system, but you will have to manually focus them.

The D80 is a bigger camera than the D40 and D40x, so in reality you should get your hands on each (the D40 and D40x are the same size) to make sure it feels good in your hands. After that, get the D80.

 

[tiggerwannabe]

I've used both...

the D80 for two years and the 40 for six months, the 40 is much more comfortable in my hand (I've carried both around Disney parks all day) and honestly I think the 40 produces crisper, clearer images~

JMHO...Good Luck!