Nikon D40 or D40 w/Kit?

[SwEetAbbOttMeOHmy]

I like the 18-55mm for Close ups and family pictures, I like the 55-200mm lens for portraiture & some distance photo's. I would love to have a 18-200mm VR lens though.

 

[JIP]

I would start with just th 18-55 and leave it at that. The 55-200 is a real cheapo lens and if you really want a decent long lens I would stay away from it. Someone else mentioned the 18-200 and I would stay away from that one too as you are really paying for size and coveience rather than image quality. A good way to go for a long lens might be somethinglike this http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/449088-GREY/Nikon_2161_70_300mm_f_4_5_6G_AF_S_VR.html if you are on a budget you might get it wihout the VR but 70-20 or 300 is probably as wide a range as I would go.

 

[ANDS!]

I couldn't agree more. When I started looking at cameras I was first drawn to D40x and after doing a lot and lot of research I ended up purchasing the Canon 400D for the same price. I have not been dissapointed, this camera performes better than I expected.

How do you know the D40 wouldn't perform just as well (and the D40x is much more expensive than the D40 which is what the fella is asking about).

The D40x is NOT a bad camera. I do not know why people keep on blasting it as such. Is a professional going to use it? Of course not. Is it a perfectly good camera for a hobbyist to save some cash on (a NEW body) and learn on while taking great pictures? Absolutely.

As to the OP - dude, get the 18-55 kit lens. Sure there are better lenses out there, but you'll be kicking yourself if you get the 55-200 and realize "Oh hell, I can't get wide shots of my friends/family!".

 

[openedmind]

How do you know the D40 wouldn't perform just as well (and the D40x is much more expensive than the D40 which is what the fella is asking about).

1. The D40 is a 6 megapixal camera, the D40x and the Canon xti are 10
2. Both the D40 and D40x have limited choices of autofocus lenses to choose from.
3. The D40x and the xti are priced the same (yes the D40 is cheaper)
4. Read the reviews, the quality of the canon is more often compared to nikons d80 not the d40 or d40x.

http://www.dcviews.com/reviews/Canon-Rebel-XTi-Nikon-D80/Canon-Rebel-Xti-Nikon-D80-review.htm

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/digital_rebel_xti-review/

I know that before I spend my hard earned money, I do a great deal of research. I'm only offering my opinion (and that of the reviews above).
I'm sure you'll be happy with any of the cameras mentioned here. Just trying to help. Sorry if I offended you ANDS, you obviously own a Nikon and I'm sure you're happy with it.

 

[NateS]

Openminded: I own a Nikon and agree wholeheartedly with you about XTI over the D40x.

How do you know the D40 wouldn't perform just as well (and the D40x is much more expensive than the D40 which is what the fella is asking about).

The D40x is NOT a bad camera. I do not know why people keep on blasting it as such. Is a professional going to use it? Of course not. Is it a perfectly good camera for a hobbyist to save some cash on (a NEW body) and learn on while taking great pictures? Absolutely.

As to the OP - dude, get the 18-55 kit lens. Sure there are better lenses out there, but you'll be kicking yourself if you get the 55-200 and realize "Oh hell, I can't get wide shots of my friends/family!".

And my response to this is the following. Get the D40x body only and a 50mm f1.8 or 35 f2 or....oh that's right.....you can't unless you want to manually focus all the time. Not to be rude but the D40/D40x leaves a large gap for certain upgrades and this is something to be heavily considered before purhcasing a camera. Primes make for some incredible lenses and many are very affordable for the quality you get.


That said, the D40 and D40x are great cameras, they just have a (in my opinion) very large limiting factor. I owned a D40 kit for 2 months and took a $100+ loss to get rid of it for a D70s body only. Added the 50mm f1.8 and it is so much better (for me) than the D40 setup. People need to seriously consider whether they will want to expand to primes and other non AF-S lenses before making their purchase. I obviously made the wrong purchase initially.

To the OP: If none of those things matter to you, then by all means, the D40 is a great camera. I would suggest getting it with the kit lens (not bad for a kit lens, just nasty bokeh IMO), and find yourself a used 55-200 non VR lens. I just picked one up for 110 shipped in perfect condition and in good light with steady hands it takes incredible pictures.

 

[Trish1977]

There are about 1001 different opinions and therefore answers to this question and to the question of whether or not to buy a D40 (which was not even asked).

I just bought the Nikon D40 kit with BOTH lenses and love it so far. I think it is and will continue to be a great camera to learn with and get some great photos at the same time. It's also lightweight and small in size which is a good thing for some situations. I took it to an NFL game the first day I bought it and took over 400 photos with it (and mainly the 55-200 lens). The 55-200 lens was great for shots of what was going on on the field (because it ZOOMS in closer), but if I wanted to take a photo of my husband sitting next to me I had to switch to the other lens. I probably would not have been allowed into the stadium with my D1X, but I was with the D40.

Here is ANOTHER opinion about the D40 and lenses (from www.kenrockwell.com):

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]My favorite SLR camera just happens to be the cheapest SLR camera: the incomparable Nikon D40. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Nikon D40, for only about $480, comes included with an excellent 18-55mm lens, built-in flash, battery and charger. My D40 is so light that I forget I'm carrying it, and it lets me easily make extraordinary images.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Even with 6 megapixels I can make stunning 12 x 18" prints. If you can't make a sharp shot with the D40, a more expensive camera isn't likely to help you. Contrary to what salespeople try to get you to believe, megapixels have nothing to do with sharpness. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Call me a renegade, but honestly the Nikon D40 is superior to the more expensive D40x and D80 for two reasons very important to full-time professional photographers. First, the D40 is twice as sensitive to light as the D40x and D80. (The D40's ISO defaults to ISO 200 instead of the less sensitive ISO 100, making for sharper photos in any light.) Second, the D40 is far more flexible with flash in daylight. The maximum unimpeded shutter speed of every Nikon other than the D40 when used with flash is only 1/250 second, while the D40 easily shoots at 1/500 with flash with no loss of performance.[/FONT]​

 

[sabbath999]

I personally think the Nikon 18-55 kit lens gets a bad rap... for what it is (an EXTREMELY inexpensive basic lens), it is sharp and takes good pictures.

Is it as good as a $1500 f/2.8? No. But, it is more than worth the $60 or so bucks you are paying for it in a kit.

Heck, if you decide you don't want it after using it, put it on eBay and you can sell it for about what you paid for it.

The 55-200 VR is, again, a good lens considering what you pay for it. No, it is not as good as the 70-300 VR, not by a long shot, but it costs half as much. You do get what you pay for.

It also takes good pictures.

If you get a kit with the 55-200 in it, MAKE SURE it is the VR version of the lens. A lot of these kits are sold with the inferior older 55-200 non-VR version.

 

[NateS]

I just couldn't get past the horrible bokeh. Maybe I had a bad copy of the kit lens or something, but it was not pretty and could easily ruin a picture. Sure it's a cheap lens, and I'll probably be picking one up to go with my D70s, but I'm sure glad to have the 50mm f1.8 in the bag for portraits. I do find myself needing the wider end though and will be great for auto shows, city stuff, and general walk around.....just not great on closeups IMO.

 

[Sideburns]

Sideburns: Sorry, I wasn't very clear. :blushing: I thought there were 2 skus defined as:
1. Camera + 18-55mm lens (sku: D40)
2. Camera + 18-55mm lens + 55-200 lens (SKU: D40 Kit)

But it looks like both are defined as a kit. So, my revised question is, do I want a one-lens kit or the two-lens kit? Is the extra $155 worth the 55-200 mm lens? (pricing based on what I found in circuitcity.com)

P.S. I'm a chick, not a dude.

My primary subjects are my kids, although one of the reasons I want a better quality camera is to experiment in other stuff. I think photography is fun and I'd love to make it a hobby. Does this really sway anyone's opinion either way? Probably not!! :mrgreen:

ahha. sorry man. Thought you didn't understand the concept. Seems you got it...lol.

 

[sabbath999]

ahha. sorry man.

Except she isn't a man...

 

[Sideburns]

Except she isn't a man...

You'd think I would notice that...