Nikon D40... the cheapest SLT camera

[Dao]

sooo what is the conclusion here?
would you recommend D40?

The point is any entry level dslrs are good. You can capture wonderful photos with it if it is what you are looking for.

All dslr cameras have limitations. Sony people will prefer Sony camera, Canon people will prefer Canon, Nikon people will prefer Nikon... Olympus ... Pentax ... I really do not think in the entry level DSLR market, one is much better than the others. (even in the upper level)

If you are tight in budget at this moment, and really would like to get a dslr camera now but do not know what to get, I do not see anything wrong with going with the D40 or any other entry level dslr cameras.

Use it for a year or two, once you learn more you will know what you like to get next in regarding camera body.

 

[Ejazzle]

I love my d40!

 

[g4pfk]

Hi
I bought a D80 great camera, because I could"nt afford a D300 & lenses, now I have a collection of lenses & needed a second body, a couple of months ago on ebay D50s were on sale new classed as refurbished for £159 with 12 months guarrantee, it suits me, the D40s are going for more - think of the future glass can be used for a log time bodies age but appreciate them.
Just my input

graham

 

[skieur]

I wouldn't consider live view as part of my decision process. If you're coming from a point and shoot, you might get hung up on it, but my advice is: don't. Using the viewfinder to see exactly what's happening through the lens, in real time, as our eyes see, is the whole point of an SLR.

I'd consider the viewfinder to be a much more important aspect of buying. I find the viewfinders on Canon and Nikon to be good, especially with full-frame and film SLRs. On other brands, the viewfinder seems like an afterthought. I will concede, however, that Sony's AF system is stupidly fast -- faster than even Canon USM or Nikon AF-S.

In-body IS might be nice, but, keep in mind, when IS/VR is in the lens, you can see happening through the viewfinder. In-body IS might give you a useless icon or an almost-useless stabilization scale, but that's it.

To say that Sony"s AF system is stupidly fast sounds downright silly. That is like saying that the image quality is stupidly better. Shows where you are coming from.

With extensive experience I am certainly more use to a viewfinder than perhaps anyone on this site so I am definitely not hung up on live view. However live view adds flexibility to get shots that are not possible or extremely difficult through the viewfinder. In street photography raising your eye to the viewfinder of a large DSLR or a small DSLR with a large lens can grab a lot of attention and destroy the moment and the shot. Using live view and a tilt screen means that no one is even aware that you are taking pictures. Shooting over the heads of crowds with live view and a tilt screen can get the perfectly framed photo of the celebrity or stunt etc. For landscapes, lying in sand or mud to get a low angle is no longer necessary. Live view with a tilt screen gets the shot. Kids also tend to pose and be artificial when a camera gets raised. Shooting from the hip with live view and tilt screen produces more natural shots. For public relations work as well, live view and tilt screen gives me more flexibility to get the shot and that is what I am paid to do.

As to seeing what is happening in stabilization all you really need to see is whether you are moving the camera and Sony's in body stabilization meter shows that.

skieur

 

[skieur]

I love my d40!

I understand that the autofocus on the D40 only works with the most recently produced Nikon lenses.

skieur

 

[drumsforlife15]

I understand that the autofocus on the D40 only works with the most recently produced Nikon lenses.

skieur

I love my D40, but this is the reason that I'm starting to think of upgrading the body to a D80 or D90 so my lens selection isn't limited.

 

[Dao]

I am not trying to start a liveview war, but I think Liveview really a personal preference. For me, I have not use it that much. Well, actually I have not use that feature yet because I have not been to situation that I need to use it.

It is a nice feature to have when you really need it, but it is not a must have feature for me. I will say if 5% or (even less)of your photos really need to use the liveview, than liveview is not a must have feature. If half of your photos were taken with liveview, then it is a MUST have feature.

So I will not personally using liveview as the camera buying factor. Of course, it is just me, other people may think differently since everyone have different preferences or priorities.

 

[epp_b]

To say that Sony"s AF system is stupidly fast sounds downright silly. That is like saying that the image quality is stupidly better. Shows where you are coming from.

Sorry, I didn't mean that way. I meant "stupidly" as in "it stupifies me" or "it amazes me". Let me rephrase: it's unbelievably fast. Seriously, it's about as fast as the human eye focuses. That's fast.

As to seeing what is happening in stabilization all you really need to see is whether you are moving the camera and Sony's in body stabilization meter shows that.

Well, to each is own. When I'm using shutter speeds that are typically too slow for the focal length, in-lens IS/VR is helpful so I know when I've got it just steady enough to take the shot.

I understand that the autofocus on the D40 only works with the most recently produced Nikon lenses.

Only lenses marked AF-S and AF-I will AF on the D40. Sigma and Tamron make lenses that will AF on the D40 as well.

 

[skieur]

I am not trying to start a liveview war, but I think Liveview really a personal preference. For me, I have not use it that much. Well, actually I have not use that feature yet because I have not been to situation that I need to use it.

It is a nice feature to have when you really need it, but it is not a must have feature for me. I will say if 5% or (even less)of your photos really need to use the liveview, than liveview is not a must have feature. If half of your photos were taken with liveview, then it is a MUST have feature.

So I will not personally using liveview as the camera buying factor. Of course, it is just me, other people may think differently since everyone have different preferences or priorities.

Whether you use liveview or not depends on how good your liveview is, and that depends on what camera you have. Moreover, if you are a beginner, it is going to be difficult to predict what kind of shooting situations you are going to be in.

skieur

 

[benhasajeep]

I have D300's, D50, Canon 20D, and still picked up a D40x. One reason is it was inexpensive. Another is I believe even though it is considered an entry level DSLR. It is better than my prosumer Coolpix 8700 that I carry when I travel. I do feel not having a body af drive motor it is limited. But that really only affects people like me who have older nikon lenses. Anyone buying one new would of course get an appropriate lens to use with it. I will buy a jack of all trades large range zoom for it and basically use it like my 8700.

For the price and what you are getting I don't think there is anything wrong with buying one now.

 

[skieur]

In the area of resolution the Nikon D40 has 1540 lines according to Popular Photography and when using in camera noise reduction that resolution lowers by around another 10% or more, and lower than EXCELLENT in that magazines criteria.

Other cameras at 10, 12, 14 megapixels have resolution at 2000 to 2300 lines of resolution which is a considerable difference. Even with noise reduction at higher ISOs, their resolution will still be beyond the Nikon D40s regular resolution before noise reduction.

More resolution means better quality larger prints for display purposes.
Since prints are displayed at eye level in homes, galleries, studios, and other displays it does not make sense to say they are viewed from any distance. To look at details most people will look at them from the same distance as they would a portfolio or an album. I have seen a number of people even look more closely at them. That is why photo quality is defined as 300 dpi because that is the resolution where colours and tones blend together to form a photo.

Beyond prints, resolution makes a difference in postprocessing. Cropping dramatically reduces resolution and sharpness, so if you begin with more resolution, the result after cropping is a better quality image. Resizing to a slightly different format has the same effect. In any area of postprocessing you can only work with the detail that is present in the photo and the quality and amount of that detail is based on resolution.

skieur