How limiting really is the D40?

[TamiyaGuy]

I have a D40, and not having the option to autofocus is not really a problem for me. Sure, you may not be able to focus on super-fast action shots, but just bite the bullet and manual focus, ya lazy bastards!

Haha, +1. The D40 isn't that limiting to be honest. Sure, it won't autofocus with older AF/AF-D lenses, but for the most part, you won't need these lenses, and Nikon are only making more AF-S lenses nowadays.

Also, the 6mp sensor is more than enough for 8x10 prints, and actually surprisingly good for 30" x 20" prints. And the high ISO quality is really superb; I took a photo of my completely black cat (black is the worst colour for high-ISO noise), and there was hardly any noise on it at all. Sure, it might show up on a 30x20 print, but it was absolutely fine for viewing on a monitor and as an 8x10 print.

So depending on what you want to do, the D40 can either be not limiting at all, or very limiting. Your choice

 

[NateS]

With regards to #1: If you look at it as an opportunity to be less dependent on automatic systems, the lack of AF is not a limitation; it is a learning tool. Not being facetious, but what better way to become more familiar with your camera?

Good luck with tracking a moving object with manual focus at f1.8......basically impossible. Even with AF it takes practice to get a good focused picture at such a large aperture.

I'd recommend a used d70 over a d40. The street price for a mint used one is cheaper then a new d40, and you'll have all the features of the d80 that you're worried about missing in the d40.

The D70 is basically a D80 with a d40 sensor, and a smaller lcd screen.

I'm not positive on this, but I don't think the D70/D70s has the same sensor as the D40. My only reason for saying this is because my previous D40's high ISO performance was substantially better than my D70s. If they had the same sensor the high ISO performance would be the same as well.

I have a D40, and not having the option to autofocus is not really a problem for me. Sure, you may not be able to focus on super-fast action shots, but just bite the bullet and manual focus, ya lazy bastards!

Again, I'd like to see you try this at f1.8 or f1.4 on a moving object. Even if you had autofocus it would be a challengewith only 3 AF points. Shooting at such a large aperture it is critical to do as little recomposing as possible when you gain focus. I don't think you'd ever get a 100% focus shot with MF on a moving object at f1.8 or larger unless it was luck. Has nothing to do with being lazy.

Haha, +1. The D40 isn't that limiting to be honest. Sure, it won't autofocus with older AF/AF-D lenses, but for the most part, you won't need these lenses, and Nikon are only making more AF-S lenses nowadays.

Also, the 6mp sensor is more than enough for 8x10 prints, and actually surprisingly good for 30" x 20" prints. And the high ISO quality is really superb; I took a photo of my completely black cat (black is the worst colour for high-ISO noise), and there was hardly any noise on it at all. Sure, it might show up on a 30x20 print, but it was absolutely fine for viewing on a monitor and as an 8x10 print.

So depending on what you want to do, the D40 can either be not limiting at all, or very limiting. Your choice

Only problem is that an AF-S varient will cost 2 times as much as the non AF-S variant. By the time you buy one or two pricier AF-S lens you will have eaten up the cost savings of getting the D40 in the first place.

 

[TamiyaGuy]

Only problem is that an AF-S varient will cost 2 times as much as the non AF-S variant. By the time you buy one or two pricier AF-S lens you will have eaten up the cost savings of getting the D40 in the first place.

Yeah, I suppose. But newer AF-S lenses don't just have an internal focusing motor; they are much better optically as well compared to their AF counterparts. But it's a bit swings and roundabouts, really...