DSLR for a young family

[Happy Hour]

I read through that till about post 20ish.

The only thing they are bitching about is that it cant AF with lenses without an internal AF motor, thats pretty much it. How that doesn't make it a good beginner camera, I fail to see.

I will say this though. The D40 is not for someone who is going to want to invest money into a vast arsenal of lenses.

Yet it with its base 18-55mm lense and the 55-200mm vr lense i was talking about is perfect for a beginner.

As far as functions of it and the way it works, I find it easier to use vs my brothers XTi, that may just be because its my camera.


But to say that a camera isn't for a "noob" because they can't upgrade lenses just seems silly to me. Its a great starter camera that will get you into photography, if you want to go further you could sell it and buy something else. But if you dont, its still just a great starter camera that can take wonderful pictures.

Also, if you happen to come along a cheap lense that doesnt have an internal AF motor, just broaden [sp?] your photography skills and learn how to manually focus.

You obviously don't have kids! If you did you would realize that AF Is A HUGE convince when trying to catch a kid bouncing around the house! Second I don't think anyone with a Investment of a dlsr wants to limit them selfs to never upgrading! I have lenses from 30 years ago that fit on my new dlsr,and i use them everyday. I don't know if the lenses for a D40 are compatible with any others but they would still limit you to not having AF(I think) on a new one when you upgrade. I'm not a Nikon shooter . but that isn't the only post on this site that has recommended NOT buying it! As far as a P&S I totally agree with MAV you cannot get the pic he posted with a P&S Though I use mine often, I am less than satisfied with the results after knowing how it could have looked with my Dlsr.

 

[Parkerman]

You obviously don't have kids! If you did you would realize that AF Is A HUGE convince when trying to catch a kid bouncing around the house! Second I don't think anyone with a Investment of a dlsr wants to limit them selfs to never upgrading! I have lenses from 30 years ago that fit on my new dlsr,and i use them everyday. I don't know if the lenses for a D40 are compatible with any others but they would still limit you to not having AF(I think) on a new one when you upgrade. I'm not a Nikon shooter . but that isn't the only post on this site that has recommended NOT buying it! As far as a P&S I totally agree with MAV you cannot get the pic he posted with a P&S Though I use mine often, I am less than satisfied with the results after knowing how it could have looked with my Dlsr.

Yea, but a beginner isnt going to have old lenses, because if they do... then they are not a beginner. And the AF lenses can work with other camera's if i remember right, mainly the higher end nikons.

"Second I don't think anyone with a Investment of a dlsr wants to limit them selfs to never upgrading!"

That was just silly to say, you are going to put false information into peoples minds. You can upgrade... You just have to pay a little bit more for AF-I lenses. Its not like you are stuck with the kit lens and can never get anything else. You can always upgrade, but with a kid... he shouldn't be wasting money on all different types of lenses.

a D40 is NOT for someone who plans to want to be a "Pro". However... It is perfect for someone who wants to learn the ropes, or just wants to take great pictures but not have to pay out the ass for a camera.


To sum this up... the D40 is a great camera. Its only limitation is that you have to buy AF-I lenses, thats it, But there are several AF-I lenses out there.

 

[Mav]

To sum this up... the D40 is a great camera. Its only limitation is that you have to buy AF-I lenses, thats it, But there are several AF-I lenses out there.

blah!

My daughter who was moving around here on my D40 with a 50mm f/1.8D AF-D (not AF-S or AF-I, so no autofocus on the D40!) shot at f/2.8, 1/60s, and Auto ISO at 1400. Due to cleaner high ISO, this looks better than if I had taken it on my D80! The metering works just great. You can use any Nikon F-mount lens back to 1959 on the D40 except for a few intrusive fisheyes which you can't use on a lot of other cameras either. All you have to do is use an external meter, or just guess at the exposure using the histograms until you get it right with the older lenses.

Bam! :mrgreen:

I love using primes on my D40 so much. It's such a small and compact camera which makes it a perfect match for small little prime lenses. Manually focusing "can be" difficult, but usually only at apertures larger than f/2.8 where the focusing screens no longer show any difference. After I get back from vacation in late Feb I'm going to order a Katz Eye screen for my D40 and start using my primes with it a lot more. That'll let me get better results at apertures larger than f/2.8. You don't need to be shooting at maximum aperture just to enjoy primes.


I've noticed that most of the people complaining about the D40 don't own them, in a lot of cases don't even shoot Nikon, and a lot of times what they claim is blown way out of proportion and really only half true, or not true at all, or just a personal opinion which may or may not be relevant to others looking for advice. HERE is the big thread on this. Read through that whole thing and then people can decide for themselves.

 

[Parkerman]

blah!

My daughter who was moving around here on my D40 with a 50mm f/1.8D AF-D (not AF-S or AF-I, so no autofocus on the D40!) shot at f/2.8, 1/60s, and Auto ISO at 1400. Due to cleaner high ISO, this looks better than if I had taken it on my D80! The metering works just great. You can use any Nikon F-mount lens back to 1959 on the D40 except for a few intrusive fisheyes which you can't use on a lot of other cameras either. All you have to do is use an external meter, or just guess at the exposure using the histograms until you get it right with the older lenses.

Bam! :mrgreen:

I love using primes on my D40 so much. It's such a small and compact camera which makes it a perfect match for small little prime lenses. Manually focusing "can be" difficult, but usually only at apertures larger than f/2.8 where the focusing screens no longer show any difference. After I get back from vacation in late Feb I'm going to order a Katz Eye screen for my D40 and start using my primes with it a lot more. That'll let me get better results at apertures larger than f/2.8. You don't need to be shooting at maximum aperture just to enjoy primes.


I've noticed that most of the people complaining about the D40 don't own them, in a lot of cases don't even shoot Nikon, and a lot of times what they claim is blown way out of proportion and really only half true, or not true at all, or just a personal opinion which may or may not be relevant to others looking for advice. HERE is the big thread on this. Read through that whole thing and then people can decide for themselves.

Yea, I personally own the D40. The only real thing that is bitched about with the camera is the whole AF thing. Which.. it doesn't bother me.


You can't go wrong with either the xti or the D40. the D40 produces more colorful images compared to my brothers xti though.


*edit* and what i should have said in my previous post is that you are limited to lenses with built in AF if you want to autofocus. If you dont mind manually focusing. You can use any Nikon lens.

 

[Emerana]

on the point and shoot issue...you should have both I think.

I have gotten some great pics with my powershot sd600 and it takes video which is GREAT. its also tiny and a great camera for mom to throw in the diaper bag. Its great when you have to be part of the action and you still want to take some snap shots.

But the down side is you miss alot because they are on the slow side. As soon as you kid hits 1 year old, you will get alot of photos one second after the one you wanted. This is where the dslr is great for. They are quick and you can get amazing photos out of them that are 100% worth the lugging them around (my camera bag is part camera bag, part diaper bag).

There is a middle ground if you dont think you want to fuss with lenses. I dont have this one, but I almost got it. I hear it is a really good one.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...t_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance

 

[monkeykoder]

There are several lenses you can't use but typically you wouldn't want to use them anyway If you want to AF with more lenses you could always find a used D50 and be VERY happy with it.

 

[Mystwalker]

Am using a 30D for toddler shots.
Was using P&S before daughter started walking/running.

Point and shoots work well when babies are young - as in lying there looking cute or crawling around at a snail pace.

Once babies start moving, good luck with a point and shoot. Also babies even when moving at snail pace have their "cute moments" which you may miss with point and shoot cameras - I know I missed a bunch.

I upgraded to 30D because I was always missing these "cute moments".

XTi, 30D, 40D, or even D40x ... I have 30D, have played with my friend XTi, returned the D40x, and am drooling over 40D. Now that I think about it, probably all the same unless you are doing pro work - this coming from an amateur.

Today, I believe it is much more important to get nice lense instead of that super camera body. I guess if you have the budget, get both

For under $1000, you can get a new 30D with 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS. For inside pictures (baby/toddler) I believe the IS is important. For under $100, you can add the 50mm F/1.8 and increase ISO and speed for the fast moving toddler. For the price (< $100), the 50mm F/1.8 is INCREDIBLE!

I believe you can get D40x for even lower then 30D. I do not think the D40x took photo as fast as 30D though. I hear the 40D is even faster. Unless you can get baby to "pose" for you, you will want ability to shoot fast because not even baby knows what priceless expression they will show next.

When your child gets older, you can upgrade lense.

 

[vonbonds]

Thanks for all of the replies so far. I have a lot to think about. I do agree with Mav though, the problems he mentioned with a P&S are the ones I have run into already with my nieces and nephews. By the way, cute baby!

So here is my quick question. What makes the Nikon D40 better than the Olympus E-510? Just by purely looking at the specs it appears the Olympus offers more (greater MP and faster FPS) for about the same price (using B&H as my pricing reference).

 

[Parkerman]

Thanks for all of the replies so far. I have a lot to think about. I do agree with Mav though, the problems he mentioned with a P&S are the ones I have run into already with my nieces and nephews. By the way, cute baby!

So here is my quick question. What makes the Nikon D40 better than the Olympus E-510? Just by purely looking at the specs it appears the Olympus offers more (greater MP and faster FPS) for about the same price (using B&H as my pricing reference).

I cant say much for the Olympus SLR.. I've never used one so I cant say anything good or bad about it.

Also, dont let megapixels sell you on a camera, in all honesty thats what companies want to happen. They want you to see this bigger number and automatically assume its way better.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

Check that out if you want. He also has some good reviews on cameras.

 

[Mav]

Today, I believe it is much more important to get nice lense instead of that super camera body. I guess if you have the budget, get both

I believe you can get D40x for even lower then 30D. I do not think the D40x took photo as fast as 30D though. I hear the 40D is even faster. Unless you can get baby to "pose" for you, you will want ability to shoot fast because not even baby knows what priceless expression they will show next.

Yeah it's all about the lens! And yes, the 30D shoots faster at 5 fps. The D40x does I think 3 fps, and the D40 2.5 fps. Dunno what the XT/XTi do but probably around 3 also. My D80 also shoots at 3 fps and I don't think I've lost any shots where 5 fps would have helped. I lose most of my shots from my flash not recycling quickly enough , which is yet another reason to try to shoot via natural light as much as you can. Faster shooting and you can catch that perfect expression!

Thanks for all of the replies so far. I have a lot to think about. I do agree with Mav though, the problems he mentioned with a P&S are the ones I have run into already with my nieces and nephews. By the way, cute baby!

So here is my quick question. What makes the Nikon D40 better than the Olympus E-510? Just by purely looking at the specs it appears the Olympus offers more (greater MP and faster FPS) for about the same price (using B&H as my pricing reference).

Thanks! She gets looks everywhere, I'm already worried.

I know next to nothing about the Olympus system so I can't tell you any good/bad things either in specific terms. The 4/3rds sensor is on the smaller side which means it won't be as good at high ISO where you could be shooting at a lot. And since the format is almost brand new, you won't have nearly the selection of used lenses that you'll have with the other systems. There's also next to no support from the third party manufacturers like Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina. Not sure of pricing new, but the Olympus might save you a little up front, but then just cost you far more down the road. I can go to www.keh.com and find zillions of dirt cheap used lenses for my Nikon (or Canon if I shot that) - almost anything I'd want. Like long discontinued professional lenses that used to sell for $1000 going for under $400 still in great shape and perfectly usable, but just not "current". Olympus stuff would be few and far between. As far as I know the bodies work great though. And yeah, don't get "sold" on megapixels. Even blown up to 3 feet wide the mere 6MP in my D40 looks outstanding. There are actually a number of advantages to having less megapixels.

 

[Happy Hour]

Yea, but a beginner isnt going to have old lenses, because if they do... then they are not a beginner. And the AF lenses can work with other camera's if i remember right, mainly the higher end nikons.

"Second I don't think anyone with a Investment of a dlsr wants to limit them selfs to never upgrading!"

That was just silly to say, you are going to put false information into peoples minds. You can upgrade... You just have to pay a little bit more for AF-I lenses. Its not like you are stuck with the kit lens and can never get anything else. You can always upgrade, but with a kid... he shouldn't be wasting money on all different types of lenses.

a D40 is NOT for someone who plans to want to be a "Pro". However... It is perfect for someone who wants to learn the ropes, or just wants to take great pictures but not have to pay out the ass for a camera.


To sum this up... the D40 is a great camera. Its only limitation is that you have to buy AF-I lenses, thats it, But there are several AF-I lenses out there.

You took that in the exact opposite way I put it. I was stating "I was not sure" If the lenses were not compatable!!! And if they werent it would be a pian to start all over When you upgrade! I don't know where you got i said he will never upgrade. and never said Do not buy the D40 I was making him aware of What majority of people on here say about it! So get off your high horse NOOBY.no need to hijack this guys tread because you don't understand how to read.

 

[Mav]

You took that in the exact opposite way I put it. I was stating "I was not sure" If the lenses were not compatable!!! And if they werent it would be a pian to start all over When you upgrade!

Once again, any Nikon F-mount lens from 1959 and newer will mount to the camera and you can take photos with it, with varying degrees of support. No autofocusing or metering on any old MF lens, but you can still take photos with it with manual metering and manual focus. 1986 and newer "AF" lenses will all work and now you get metering, but still no autofocus on the D40/x. AF-S/AF-I is what you need for autofocusing, and there's a pretty nice selection of these lenses at various price ranges. This is nearly a 50 year history of lenses all of which you can use minus 1960's era invasive fisheyes for which you need a full time mirror lock-up.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

I don't know where you got i said he will never upgrade. and never said Do not buy the D40 I was making him aware of What majority of people on here say about it! So get off your high horse NOOBY.no need to hijack this guys tread because you don't understand how to read.

You did imply that you "cannot" upgrade, which is a false statement.

Second I don't think anyone with a Investment of a dlsr wants to limit them selfs to never upgrading!

There's two groups of people. People who have a D40 and people who don't. The "majority" of people who decide to buy a D40 seem to love them despite its limitations, whether they were aware of it or not before buying. And the "majority" of people who don't have a D40 think it's a bad camera to buy which is why they don't own a D40. :lmao:

 

[Parkerman]

You took that in the exact opposite way I put it. I was stating "I was not sure" If the lenses were not compatable!!! And if they werent it would be a pian to start all over When you upgrade! I don't know where you got i said he will never upgrade. and never said Do not buy the D40 I was making him aware of What majority of people on here say about it! So get off your high horse NOOBY.no need to hijack this guys tread because you don't understand how to read.

You obviously don't have kids! If you did you would realize that AF Is A HUGE convince when trying to catch a kid bouncing around the house! Second I don't think anyone with a Investment of a dlsr wants to limit them selfs to never upgrading! I have lenses from 30 years ago that fit on my new dlsr,and i use them everyday. I don't know if the lenses for a D40 are compatible with any others but they would still limit you to not having AF(I think) on a new one when you upgrade. I'm not a Nikon shooter . but that isn't the only post on this site that has recommended NOT buying it! As far as a P&S I totally agree with MAV you cannot get the pic he posted with a P&S Though I use mine often, I am less than satisfied with the results after knowing how it could have looked with my Dlsr."

Here was my reply to the blue part... I perfectly understood and read what you were saying...
"And the AF lenses can work with other camera's if i remember right, mainly the higher end nikons. "



Here is my reply to the Black and red.. I even had what you orginally said quoted in my post...


" "Second I don't think anyone with a Investment of a dlsr wants to limit them selfs to never upgrading!"

That was just silly to say, you are going to put false information into peoples minds. You can upgrade... You just have to pay a little bit more for AF-I lenses. Its not like you are stuck with the kit lens and can never get anything else. You can always upgrade, but with a kid... he shouldn't be wasting money on all different types of lenses. "


I'm not on a high horse, and way to go on the maturity level. I took what you said the exact way you typed it. You had it set at a full sentence which ended with "upgrade" I assumed you were talking about lenses, not bodies... But I had already covered my thoughts on the upgrading of bodies at the beginning of my post. So, i wouldn't be trying to make cuts at me for not understanding how to read.. when apparently its not a shining point for you.

What I am simply trying to do is keep false information from the thread. The only downfalls about the D40 is that you cant autofocus with lenses that dont have an AF motor built in, and it doesnt have bracketing. Thats are pretty much theones.



And to vonbonds,I apologize if you feel that I've messed up your thread. I just don't people to be feeding you false information. I mean, just reading of something can stick with you forever... you could be at the store and be like, i remember someone saying that i could never upgrade if i bought this camera... which isnt true. But i do apologize, I was just trying to help.

 

[MACollum]

If you want a DSLR, I say go ahead and get one. Once you see some great shots of your little one, you'll never want to stop taking pictures and you'll end up upgrading anyway. You'll have a few months' to practice and get familiar with your camera before the baby starts moving so much you can't get a good shot.

I wish I was into photography when my kids were babies. I bought my first digital camera (P&S) when my daughter was 2 months but I wasn't really into photography, I just wanted pictures of my daughter's beautiful baby smile!