3 choices in slr's, which one should I pick?

[moniikat]

I am new into this type of camera but very interested, i have these options but i'm unsure which would be good for me. I like vivid crisp photos, shoot a lot of outdoors and macro. Also open to new suggestions on cameras! preferrably Nikons.

here are some of my options:

for $500
Nikon D-70,UV Filter, Circular Polarizing Filter, 4 SanDisk Ultra Memory Cards capacity 2.5 GB, 1 SanDisk 2GB Extreme memory Card, 3 Nikon Battery Packs, 1Nikon Battery Adapator for CR-2 Batteries, 9 CR-2 Batteries, Nikon Manual, Intro to D-70 DVD, Nikon Battery Charger, Tamron 28-300mm Tele-Zoom lens, Nikon Wide Neck Strap and Lowepro camera bag
(the only thing i dislike is how small the lcd screen is)

for $400
Nikon D-40 maybe used it for about a year, with a 18-55 and a 55-200 lens. A case that carries it all and an lens cleaner accessory.

or for $450
Nikon D60 with an 18-55 VR lens

 

[Restomage]

D40 is the best deal there.

 

[amargarets21]

I have a D40 myself and its my first 'real' camera, and I LOVE it. (best choice out of the 3.

 

[flea77]

I believe the D70 has a focus motor in the body, and if so, I would take it over two of the D40s, or two of the D60s. Why? You can use far cheaper lenses that have no motor in them and save yourself a ton of cash in the long run.

Example:

The Sigma 24-70 2.8 with a motor? about $800, without a motor? about $500
The Nikon 105 Micro with a motor? about $800, without a motor? about $500

Not to mention the D70 has a 1/500 flash sync which is way cool (of course not owning a D40 or D60 I don't know what they sync at).

Allan

 

[KmH]

You can use far cheaper lenses that have no motor in them and save yourself a ton of cash in the long run.


Not to mention the D70 has a 1/500 flash sync which is way cool (of course not owning a D40 or D60 I don't know what they sync at).

Allan

The comment about far cheaper lenses is not very accurate. An auto focus motor in the lens doesn't add all that much cost.
Many auto focus lenses also have an image stabilization system that does add significant cost.

The D40 can sync at up to 1/4000. The D60 can sync at up to 1/200.

The D70 has a less aggressive low-pass filter that allows for sharper photos straight out of the camera.

I too would recommend the D70 over the D40, mainly because of the low-pass filter.

 

[flea77]

The comment about far cheaper lenses is not very accurate. An auto focus motor in the lens doesn't add all that much cost.
Many auto focus lenses also have an image stabilization system that does add significant cost.

B&H and KEH current(01/02/2011 8:08pm CST) pricing, with links:

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF Autofocus Lens for Nikon AF-D, will work on D70, not on the D40 or D60, $569

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Nikon AF, will work on D70, D40 and D60, $899

Savings on that one lens alone, $330. Better than I originally said. No image stabilization in either lens.

Nikon 105 F2.8 D MICRO AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS, will work with D70, not on the D40 or D60, $484

Nikon Telephoto AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR (Vibration Reduction) Autofocus Lens, will work with D70, D40 and D60, $889.95

Savings on that one lens alone, $405.95. Better than I originally said. This one does include image stabilization in the newer lens, but if you are shooting macro you will either be on a tripod or using flash most likely anyway so what does it matter?

Nikon 80-200 2.8D AF-D, will work on D70, not on D40 or D60, $889

Nikon 80-200 2.8D AF-S, will work on D70, D40 and D60, $1269

Savings on that one lens alone, $380. No image stabilization on either lens.

Nikon 50mm 1.4D, will work on D70, not on D40 or D60, $319.95

Nikon 50mm 1.4G, will work on D70, D40 and D60, $434.95

Savings on that one lens alone, $115. No image stabilization on either lens.

If you purchased all the lenses above, total savings would be $1230.95. I don't know about you, but that qualifies for "far cheaper" for me.

Allan

 

[flea77]

A few more I found looking around:

Nikon 60mm 2.8D Micro $454, Nikon 60mm 2.8G Micro $539 = Save $85
Nikon 85mm 1.4D $1189.95, Nikon 85mm 1.4G $1699.95 = Save $510
Nikon 28-70 2.8D about $1100 (amazon), Nikon 24-70 2.8G VR $1699.95 = Save $599.95
Nikon 300mm 2.8D KEH $3,389, Nikon 300mm 2.8G VR B&H $5,799 = Save $2410

Sure there are more but I think that is enough. While VR lenses usually are more expensive, newer ones with built in motors can be substantially (at least in my opinion) more expensive as well. If you buy any one of the lenses I mentioned in either post you have more than paid for the difference in camera bodies. If you buy two lenses, you paid the difference and made out like a bandit.

Allan

 

[Derrel]

I think the D40's images look better than those from the D70. The D40 outfit is the one I would go for.

 

[djacobox372]

I'd prefer the d70 to the d40, the sensors and image quality are nearly identical, but the d70 has better external controls and a AF motor, which VASTLY increases your choice of lenses. The only downside of the d70, compared to the d40, is the lcd screen size which is pitiful.

However, that price for the d70 outfit is FAR to high.

A d70 body sells used for around $250 on ebay these days, the lens included is only worth around $75. I would not pay more then $375 for that lot.

The prices on the other outfits are better, but still not great.

You might also want to consider a d80. D80 outfits with lens sell for around $425 on ebay.

 

[Joem]

I'd go D70.
i owned one before my D700.

joe