Nikon?

[rwrocksme]

Has anyone here used a Nikon D40? What did you think? I may get one, but I don't like to make a big purchase without some DIS input.

Thanks!

 

[YEKCIM]

Can't help you with a D40, but I have D50 and like it a lot. Have you read any reviews on some of the review sites, or checked out some of the discussion forums, like: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1034 ?

What lens(es) are you considering?

~YEKCIM

 

[fan1080]

I just bought one, can't wait to get it.

The reviews are good. Only down side is that the auto-focus motor is not located in the camera body which means you have to buy specific lenses with an auto focus motor in the lens.

The D50 is still available at some on-line sites if you don't mind buying a refurb. It has the auto-focus motor in the camera body and doesn't limit you as I noted.

 

[ukcatfan]

Like fan1080 said, the biggest drawback is the lack of a focus motor. While there are a few popular lenses out there that this affects, to me the biggest impact is the 50mm f/1.8 that will not AF. It is a very popular and cheap lens that is great for low light situations. That alone would be the deal breaker for me. If you really want Nikon, I would consider a leftover/refurb D50 or go on up to the D80.

Kevin

 

[Master Mason]

nikon sucks get a canon

Actually nikon makes a fine camera, but personally I wouldn't buy a d40 because of the lens issue.

When the majority of the availible nikon lenses have the motors in the lenses, then it will be fine, but right now it is a handicap I wouldn't be willing to submit to.

 

[Groucho]

Nothing really wrong with the D40 except the glaring lack of a focus motor. If you have any interest in using some of the lenses that lack such a motor (like Nikon's 50mm F1.8 - and a Nikon user might know better about third-party lenses? I'd guess that they were slower to put motors in their lenses than Nikon was) you may want to consider digging around for a leftover D50 or a used or refurbished one.

In case you haven't, you may also want to consider the Pentax K100D, which has the same sensor inside as the D40/D50, a better kit lens, image stabilization with every lens, and costs less to boot. The ergonomics and feel are very similar to the D50, and probably also to the D40. The biggest achilles heel is that it has a small buffer so it can't do as much continuous shooting at the Nikons, though it is slightly faster (2.8 fps vs 2.5). Nikon also is going to have more in the way of currently-available fast zoom lenses but the D40 is going to probably have many older lenses that lose AF due to the lack of a focus motor, so that will limit the use of older lenses, which is not an issue with the Pentax, which has full functionality with any Pentax-mount lens ever made.

They're all excellent choices. My preferences would be the Pentax (image stabilization and low price, plus some really fantastic lenses), then the D50 (primarily for the focus motor), then the D40. I like to be able to use older lenses as well, so the focus motor thing is a very important issue to me. If you won't be interested in any lenses that require a focus motor to AF, then the D40 may be a more attractive choice than the D50.

 

[YEKCIM]

Nothing really wrong with the D40 except the glaring lack of a focus motor. If you have any interest in using some of the lenses that lack such a motor (like Nikon's 50mm F1.8 - and a Nikon user might know better about third-party lenses? I'd guess that they were slower to put motors in their lenses than Nikon was) you may want to consider digging around for a leftover D50 or a used or refurbished one.

In case you haven't, you may also want to consider the Pentax K100D, which has the same sensor inside as the D40/D50, a better kit lens, image stabilization with every lens, and costs less to boot. The ergonomics and feel are very similar to the D50, and probably also to the D40. The biggest achilles heel is that it has a small buffer so it can't do as much continuous shooting at the Nikons, though it is slightly faster (2.8 fps vs 2.5). Nikon also is going to have more in the way of currently-available fast zoom lenses but the D40 is going to probably have many older lenses that lose AF due to the lack of a focus motor, so that will limit the use of older lenses, which is not an issue with the Pentax, which has full functionality with any Pentax-mount lens ever made.

They're all excellent choices. My preferences would be the Pentax (image stabilization and low price, plus some really fantastic lenses), then the D50 (primarily for the focus motor), then the D40. I like to be able to use older lenses as well, so the focus motor thing is a very important issue to me. If you won't be interested in any lenses that require a focus motor to AF, then the D40 may be a more attractive choice than the D50.

Some good points, Groucho, and may I also add that the 18-135mm lens is an excellent walkaround lens, whether it is considered a "kit" lens or not. Over 2X the reach, and very sharp. The D40 + 18-135 + "free" 1GB card is available from Beach, at present, for $720, shipped. You can also get a refurbed D50 body from Adorama or B&H for $399 (last I checked) and an 18-135 for about $300 online, for a total of about $700, give or take. As ukcatfan and Groucho point out, the D40 does not have a focus motor in body, although this is becoming less of a factor, as Nikon releases more AF-S lenses with the motor in the *lens*. The very popular 50/1.8 is one of those which will not AF on a D40, though, if that is an issue for you.

~YEKCIM

 

[Gdad]

I would honestly avoid the D40 for some of the reasons listed above- I just bought a factory refurbished D50 from B&H for $399 that had 122 shutter actuations on it. I am extremely pleased with it.

 

[KrazyPete]

I'm actually considering the D40 for my wife. I don't know why she decided she wanted her own camera. She likes mine (D80) but she wants the D40 because it's smaller/lighter and in general less complicated.

OK, it doesn't have an AF motor in the body. That means she can't use my 50mm or my 70-300mm. So why would consider the D40 when I can still find a D50 refurb? She just wants to take good pictures when I'm not around. She wants a DSLR that's dead simple. She'll rarely change lenses (if ever). So for her, smaller size, larger LCD, and improved image processing trumps most everything else.

I get the benefit of keeping it in the Nikon family so we can share accessories and I can use it as a backup if I need to. I also hold out some hope that she'll catch the full-on photo bug with it.

The D50 and the D40 are both great cameras. If you're going to be buying a few more lenses right away (especially if you are going to get them used) then you probably want the D50. They both have their advantages that suit them to particular users. Don't be a hater!

D40 vs D50 comparisons:
DPReview.com
DPNotes.com

 

[Gdad]

No hating here- If that is your scenario it is a fine camera.

I'm actually considering the D40 for my wife. I don't know why she decided she wanted her own camera. She likes mine (D80) but she wants the D40 because it's smaller/lighter and in general less complicated.

OK, it doesn't have an AF motor in the body. That means she can't use my 50mm or my 70-300mm. So why would consider the D40 when I can still find a D50 refurb? She just wants to take good pictures when I'm not around. She wants a DSLR that's dead simple. She'll rarely change lenses (if ever). So for her, smaller size, larger LCD, and improved image processing trumps most everything else.

I get the benefit of keeping it in the Nikon family so we can share accessories and I can use it as a backup if I need to. I also hold out some hope that she'll catch the full-on photo bug with it.

The D50 and the D40 are both great cameras. If you're going to be buying a few more lenses right away (especially if you are going to get them used) then you probably want the D50. They both have their advantages that suit them to particular users. Don't be a hater!

D40 vs D50 comparisons:
DPReview.com
DPNotes.com

 

[Groucho]

Some good points, Groucho, and may I also add that the 18-135mm lens is an excellent walkaround lens, whether it is considered a "kit" lens or not.

You're right, I should have been more specific, I meant the Nikon 18-55mm kit lens in particular. The 18-135mm is a whole different beast - but the D40 kit with that lens is nearly $200 more expensive than with the 18-55mm one. ($527 vs $719 at the moment.)

 

[YEKCIM]

...the D40 kit with that lens is nearly $200 more expensive than with the 18-55mm one. ($527 vs $719 at the moment.)

And worth every nickel, IMO.

~YEKCIM