Nikon D40?

[kenny]

Thinking of making the switch from PNS to SLR and was looking at the Nikon D40.

My thoughts were it seems to get fairly decent reviews, was cheap compared to other DSLR's and being a Nikon, I would have lots of choices among lens.

What are peoples thoughts? Is this a good beginner DSLR or is there something better in the same price range. I would have liked a little more than 6.1 mp (can you get a good quality 8x10 pic from 6 mp?) and image stabilization but I guess for the price beggers can't be chosers.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

 

[YEKCIM]

I have a D50, which is also 6MP. 6MP is plenty, IMO. The D40 seems to be well thought of as an entry-level DSLR, although its lack of an in-body focus motor *may* be a limiting factor. What that mainly means is that you would not be able to AF with the el-cheapo (but very good IQ) Nikon 50mm f/1.8 prime. Sigma makes a couple of very good fast primes with in-lens AF motors, but they are significantly more expensive than the Nikon 50mm. If that is not an issue for you, I would think the D40 would be an excellent selection.

~Y

 

[pointandshoot]

Limited lens choice is a consideration. The D40 lacks some of the on body camera controls/adjustments that higher end Nikons have thus making you use the menu to adjust settings. This can slow you down if you change aperture and shutter in manual mode. It also shoots both RAW and low, medium, and high quality JPEGs. Its combo RAW and JPEG mode only supports medium quality JPEGs.

Compared with my Nikon D200 and Canon 40D, the images are very good. My daughter shoots the D40 with kit lens and it takes a sharp picture. It is very light and small for a DSLR. I sometimes prefer to shoot with it over my other camera bodies when I want to take pictures without all the weight. Never a concern about image quality.

I am sure Canon has a similar offering but the D40 is a good choice.

Chuck

 

[handicap18]

I've used the D40 a few times (my Uncle's DW has one). It is a nice camera. I love the LCD on it especially compared to the 2" one on my D50. Its a little on the small side for me (again compared to my D50), but it is still comfortbale to use. Takes great images and is easy to use too.

The lens issue is not as much of an issue as it was when the D40 first came out. There are now close to 100 lenses between Nikkor and Sigma that will work fine with the D40. Most people point to that fact that the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 will not auto focus with the D40 (or D40x or D60). For the most part this is really the only lens that a person looking to buy an entry level dSLR would even consider. The VAST majority of people who would buy this body would never want anything more than the kit lens. Maybe the 70-300mm VR, but not much more than that. So it also makes the AF issue even less. If someone is seriously considering getting into photography more than just for basic family candids and vacations then they woud consider the D80 or the new D90. Just my $0.02.

You may also consider the D60. It is the newest entry level offering from Nikon. 10MP and a better sensor and the new EXPEED processor (that is also found in the D300, D3 and D700).

 

[kenny]

I've used the D40 a few times (my Uncle's DW has one). It is a nice camera. I love the LCD on it especially compared to the 2" one on my D50. Its a little on the small side for me (again compared to my D50), but it is still comfortbale to use. Takes great images and is easy to use too.

The lens issue is not as much of an issue as it was when the D40 first came out. There are now close to 100 lenses between Nikkor and Sigma that will work fine with the D40. Most people point to that fact that the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 will not auto focus with the D40 (or D40x or D60). For the most part this is really the only lens that a person looking to buy an entry level dSLR would even consider. The VAST majority of people who would buy this body would never want anything more than the kit lens. Maybe the 70-300mm VR, but not much more than that. So it also makes the AF issue even less. If someone is seriously considering getting into photography more than just for basic family candids and vacations then they woud consider the D80 or the new D90. Just my $0.02.

You may also consider the D60. It is the newest entry level offering from Nikon. 10MP and a better sensor and the new EXPEED processor (that is also found in the D300, D3 and D700).

Being a newbie you kind of lost me. If the D40 can accommodate about 100 lens why would you not invest in more than just the basic len? My thinking was to start I would need a decent zoom lens and one for low-light/night shots (love some of the firework shots I see on these boards).

To start, really just looking for something for vacations, holidays, some scenic day trips, pictures of the kids, etc. If it turned into more of a serious hobby then I would consider upgrading in years to come. That is sort of why I was thinking Nikon because from my understanding there were many lens choices and then some other brands.

 

[handicap18]

Limited in the sense of lens that would work with a higher model, ie D80 won't work with D40 or if I upgrade down the line to a higher model are my D40 lens not compatible with higher models?

Nikkor has 2 different types of auto focus lenses. AF and AF-S. AF lenses do not have a focus motor in the lens and much rely on the camera body to focus the lens. AF-S lenses have a focus motor and will auto focus on body's that do and do not have AF drives in them. The D40, D40x and D60 do not have auto focus drives in the camera body so any AF designated lens can only be focused manually.

There are currently 36 Nikkor AF-S lenses, 31 Sigma lenses with a motor and 6 Tamron lenses with a focus motor.

http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcb...&forum=152&topic_id=13319&mesg_id=13319&page=

This list is always getting bigger. All new Nikkor lenses have had focus motors including the soon to be released 18-105mm VR. Sigma is also supposed to be releasing a 50mm f/1.4 with a focus motor.

As of right now, these are the only 3 Nikon dSLR bodies without the focus motor. The D80 (and soon to be announced D90), D200, D300, D700, D3 and 6 or 7 other older dSLR's all have the focus motor to be able to use both AF and AF-S lenses.

 

[MICKEY88]

any entry level DSLR from the main manufacturers will do a good job,

the sony A300 can be had for 599

or the sony a200 for 499
both with a 18-70 zoom lens and both are 10.2 megapixel cameras

I respectfully disagree with handicap18,

a lot of people buy entry level dslrs and buy numerous lenses,

if you are limited budget wise, it's better to buy an entry level DSLR and put more money into quality glass, than to buy a higher end camera, and then buy lower quality lenses.

an entry level camera will serve the average person quite well, it's only when you get more serious, and have certain needs such as burst shooting, that you need a higher end camera

if you become serious about photography you will eventually upgrade the body, but by buying quality lenses they will last a lifetime..

 

[MICKEY88]

My thinking was to start I would need a decent zoom lens and one for low-light/night shots (love some of the firework shots I see on these boards).

.

a fast lens is good for night, or low light shots, but not neccessary for fireworks, you want to shoot fireworks at f8 or 11 anyways, so the fast lens has no benefit..

 

[kenny]

any entry level DSLR from the main manufacturers will do a good job,

the sony A300 can be had for 599

or the sony a200 for 499
both with a 18-70 zoom lens and both are 10.2 megapixel cameras

I respectfully disagree with handicap18,

a lot of people buy entry level dslrs and buy numerous lenses,

if you are limited budget wise, it's better to buy an entry level DSLR and put more money into quality glass, than to buy a higher end camera, and then buy lower quality lenses.

an entry level camera will serve the average person quite well, it's only when you get more serious, and have certain needs such as burst shooting, that you need a higher end camera

if you become serious about photography you will eventually upgrade the body, but by buying quality lenses they will last a lifetime..

Thanks. Was actually looking at the a200 also and camera/feature wise it seemed to offer more for the money but I kept hearing that Nikon offered more lens choices for less money. Not sure if that is true or not.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Thanks. Was actually looking at the a200 also and camera/feature wise it seemed to offer more for the money but I kept hearing that Nikon offered more lens choices for less money. Not sure if that is true or not.

Hi Kenny. I'm a recent Sony buyer and have had some of the same thoughts about the lenses. I can't really comment on the Nikon other than that from what I hear they do have a very large selection and some very nice lenses. But, you do have to pay attention to getting the VR if you want stabilization and from what I hear those lenses are a bit more expensive. And, as was pointed out with the D40 it doesn't have an in body focus motor so you have to watch for that as well.

Right now B&H shows 76 lenses for the Sony mount and Sony is rumored to be announcing a few more this year so this seems to compare to what was listed below as lenses that would be fully compatible with the D40. I don't know how many of the Nikon lenses have VR but all will with the Sony. On top of that you also can use all the Minolta AF lenses from the past 20 yrs and b/c of the in body stabilization all those will be stabilized as well. I've picked up a few of these from reputable online dealers and can say that they are terrific.

Overall, for me, Sony easily provided the quality lenses that I wanted, I didn't need to worry about VR and auto focus and there were more than enough choices that I still had to do quite a bit of debating about what I really wanted.

 

[ukcatfan]

Here is my take on the Nikon focus motor issue. There are more than enough choices to do anything you want to do. The kicker is that they might not be affordable to the average buyer of the D40, D40x, and D60. Unless something has changed, the cheapest low light prime lens (i.e. lens with f/1.4 to f/2 at the widest) is around $400. Compared to the excellent 50mm f/1.8 that costs $100 but will not AF on the D40, why not invest the $300 difference and go for the D80 that can AF the 50mm.

I suggest that the OP go out to a camera store and handle the models from Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Sony, and Olympus. Without handling them, you could end up buying something that is not even comfortable in your hands and then not use it. IMO, the feel is the #1 most important feature to consider b/c all of the brands will do the job and have all of the lenses and other accessories that the average beginner and intermediate user could want. Once you have a couple that you like the feel of, then research that brands lenses and accessories to make sure what you want will be within your budget. For example, if you want an inexpensive prime (not used) then you pretty much have Canon, Nikon, and Pentax to choose from. Unless something has changed, the Sony and Olympus versions are on the expensive side.

 

[adabob]

i love by D 40

That is all i am going to say

 

[kenny]

Thanks everyone for the advice. Went to a few camera stores today and everyone seems to be pushing the Nikon. I have to admit it deal feel more comfortable in my hands and was lighter and smaller.

Going to think about it another day or two but right now leaning towards the D40 over the Sony a200.