d40 vs a200

[bpro35]

i came across this deal on a d40 with 2 lens's for 550. (18-55mm and 55-200mm)

or i can get a a 200 with 1 lens for 500. (18-70mm)

 

[wgp1987]

D40 IS LAME ... NIKON MAKES GOOD CAMERAS, BUT IF YOU ARNT GOING TO MAKE MAJOR INVESTMENTS IN LENSES THEN GET THE SONY. ITIS THE BEST ENTRY LEVEL SLR .... BUT SPEND THE XTRA 50 AND GET THE CANON XS FOR 550

 

[epp_b]

Well, that wasn't ignorant at all... /sarcasm

If the 55-200mm lens is the VR version, then it's a pretty good deal.

 

[manaheim]

D200 is unquestionably a better camera. 18-70 is a pretty usable range for a lot of circumstances. You'll certainly wind up wanting more lenses soon, but I would do the D200 no question.

 

[CW Jones]

its an a200 tho not a D200 he was talking about... lol I don't have anything to add just trying to clean up some confusion

 

[manaheim]

its an a200 tho not a D200 he was talking about... lol I don't have anything to add just trying to clean up some confusion

Was it? I assumed it was the Nikon, but that wasn't clear from the post, actually.

Now I'm confused.

F it... buy a Canon AE1.

 

[epp_b]

He was talking about the Sony A200.

 

[R-NAGE Photography]

Well he should get a D200 both of those other ones suck!! LOL....JK

 

[TUX424]

i would jump on the D40, nothing like buying in to a solid system.

 

[tsaraleksi]

The D40 is pretty seriously hobbled in terms of features that would seem reasonable to include on an entry level camera, particularly the inability to focus with non-AF-S lenses and the poor autofocus.

 

[wgp1987]

listen all you nikon whores...... just cause it says nikon, doesnt make it a good value. the a200 runs circles around a d40 and d60. and as far as the "vr" lenses the alpha 200 has in body stabilizer that works with EVERY lens, self cleaning image sensor, 9 point auto focus, and longer focal length kit lens. a200 .... best entry level slr. again for $550, the canon xs is the way to go. or dish out 850 and get an canon xsi with the 18-55is/55-250is ...... as far as lenses go, when you get a sony camera, you have the option for zeis t* lenses (that kick ass) so dont think you cant get good lenses if you stick with sony. p.s. nikon isnt bad, just anything below a d90

 

[epp_b]

Yet another sensitive and thoughtful comment from wgp1987...

and as far as the "vr" lenses the alpha 200 has in body stabilizer that works with EVERY lens,

True, but you don't get to "see" the stabilization actually occurring, which is very useful. It's a toss up: do you want to pay for it in every lens and be able to see it happening, or do you want to only have to pay for it once and forgo the visual confirmation? It's you're choice, that's all.

self cleaning image sensor

Cleaning the sensor is so easy, self-cleaning sensors are nearly moot point. I wouldn't consider it as a deciding factor in a camera purchase.

9 point auto focus, and longer focal length kit lens.

True enough.

a200 .... best entry level slr. again for $550, the canon xs is the way to go. or dish out 850 and get an canon xsi with the 18-55is/55-250is ...... as far as lenses go, when you get a sony camera, you have the option for zeis t* lenses (that kick ass) so dont think you cant get good lenses if you stick with sony. p.s. nikon isnt bad, just anything below a d90

No doubt, you can get good lenses for Sony, but you'll be paying more for them. Nikon's cheap lenses may be built cheaply, but the optics are mostly very good.

 

[wgp1987]

Yet another sensitive and thoughtful comment from wgp1987...

True, but you don't get to "see" the stabilization actually occurring, which is very useful. It's a toss up: do you want to pay for it in every lens and be able to see it happening, or do you want to only have to pay for it once and forgo the visual confirmation? It's you're choice, that's all.

Cleaning the sensor is so easy, self-cleaning sensors are nearly moot point. I wouldn't consider it as a deciding factor in a camera purchase.

True enough.

No doubt, you can get good lenses for Sony, but you'll be paying more for them. Nikon's cheap lenses may be built cheaply, but the optics are mostly very good.

sensitive? i guess i comment with emotion, i have been working on that. its hard tho. photography is in my heart, and i only speak from the heart! lol

i never noticed that the sony stabilizer doesnt show while shooting .... ill have to check that out .... not to say the idea of dual stabilizers wouldnt be awsome (internal and optical)

i havent priced out zeis lenses, there are few people that shoot sony. and even nikon high end lenses are foreign to me.

all i know is we finally got nikon d60's back in stock at my store and its garbadge to me. i was taking shots with the d60 and the xs and the d60 underexposes like a champ. but i do believe that the d-lighting was off. and it was with the same s/a/iso .... but i do like the way the vr lens feels compared to the is lens, but with more points of af and live view (xs).... canon xs, $550 - sick ... sony a200 great ... nikon d60, no thanks

 

[photogincollege]

I actually might consider trying to get a d200 used, you can get it for around 500 or so, and an 18-70 used for around 100. Really capable setup, awesome camera and good lens, and most likely better then both those options (imo).

 

[DScience]

listen all you nikon whores...... just cause it says nikon, doesnt make it a good value. the a200 runs circles around a d40 and d60. and as far as the "vr" lenses the alpha 200 has in body stabilizer that works with EVERY lens, self cleaning image sensor, 9 point auto focus, and longer focal length kit lens. a200 .... best entry level slr. again for $550, the canon xs is the way to go. or dish out 850 and get an canon xsi with the 18-55is/55-250is ...... as far as lenses go, when you get a sony camera, you have the option for zeis t* lenses (that kick ass) so dont think you cant get good lenses if you stick with sony. p.s. nikon isnt bad, just anything below a d90

LOL LOL wow...that was extremely amusing. You think the xs is better than the d60, or the d40 for that matter?