Nikon D40 still a good option?

pm63 · Dec 19, 2007

Hello,

For a while now I've wanted a DSLR, Christmas is the time

Is the D40 still a good option for my budget (it's £300 with an 18-55).

I don't really want to spend over £300, so is it still a good option as a beginner DSLR?

Thanks.

Steph · Dec 19, 2007

This has been much debated on this forum. Use the search function with keywords such as 'D40 beginner' to find many threads about the subject. Also read this before making a decision.

And welcome to TPF.

Sideburns · Dec 19, 2007

If you can get the Canon Rebel XT for that price, I'd suggest it over the D40.

pm63 · Dec 23, 2007

Ahh damn. So to get a good starter DSLR, I'm looking to spend £500 ($1000)?

Why are DSLRs so expensive? You can get point and shoots with twice the resolution and probably as good image quality for half the price... Do manufacturers just price this high because people are willing to pay that much?

jstuedle · Dec 23, 2007

pm63 said:
Ahh damn. So to get a good starter DSLR, I'm looking to spend £500 ($1000)?

Why are DSLRs so expensive? You can get point and shoots with twice the resolution and probably as good image quality for half the price... Do manufacturers just price this high because people are willing to pay that much?

No, they don't have the quality. The sensor on a P&S is MUCH smaller, as are it's pixels. Search the forum, you will find many posts on the topic. Briefly, the smaller the pixel, the more noise in the image and worse the color saturation at higher ISO's. Also, the prism/mirror mechanism on a DSLR that permits through-the-lens framing/metering of the image and interchangeable lenses are other items that drive up the cost.

Basically, if you are a point and shooter and want to step up, the D40 will serve you fine. If you plan on becoming a serious advanced armature and maybe even a pro later, move up to the D80 or D300. If the D40's lens limitations are an issue, look into the recently discontinued D50, about the same price as a D40 with the internal AF servo the D40 lacks.

pm63 · Dec 23, 2007

jstuedle said:
No, they don't have the quality. The sensor on a P&S is MUCH smaller, as are it's pixels. Search the forum, you will find many posts on the topic. Briefly, the smaller the pixel, the more noise in the image and worse the color saturation at higher ISO's. Also, the prism/mirror mechanism on a DSLR that permits through-the-lens framing/metering of the image and interchangeable lenses are other items that drive up the cost.

Basically, if you are a point and shooter and want to step up, the D40 will serve you fine. If you plan on becoming a serious advanced armature and maybe even a pro later, move up to the D80 or D300. If the D40's lens limitations are an issue, look into the recently discontinued D50, about the same price as a D40 with the internal AF servo the D40 lacks.

Thanks. The only lens I really see myself wanting is an 18-200 telephoto.

Looking at various cameras side by side, the D40 would indeed be a good option for me if it wasn't for the lens limitations.

Would this lens be compatible with the D40? http://www.jessops.com/Store/s27553...)/details.aspx?&IsSearch=y&pageindex=1&comp=y

Just trying to get an idea of how much a telephoto would cost.

sabbath999 · Dec 23, 2007

No, that lens will not autofocus on a D40.

Basically, you need to either get a Nikon AF-S lens (AF-I lenses also work but have been out of production for years now), or pick one of the Sigmas that has an internal focusing motor. Here is a list of Sigma lenses that are D40/D40X compatible:

D40 Compatible Sigma Lenses (ckicky)

pm63 · Dec 23, 2007

Thanks for the list.

I have the option to get a Sigma 55-200 HSM lens for £100 instead of the full £150 when bought with the D40. I think I'll go for this, as it's the best deal and I really don't have the money to get anything more. For a starter SLR, it seems the best bet for the money.

Trenton Romulox · Dec 23, 2007

Sideburns said:
If you can get the Canon Rebel XT for that price, I'd suggest it over the D40.

That's because you're a Canon guy.

I won't even suggest a camera, I mean, damn, look at my signature.

Sideburns · Dec 24, 2007

Trenton Romulox said:
That's because you're a Canon guy.

I won't even suggest a camera, I mean, damn, look at my signature.

No, that's not because I'm a Canon guy. It's because in the long run...a 350D will long outlast a D40 if you're into buying nice glass.

I would have gladly recommended a D80, but it's a tad outta his price range.

I like Nikon just as much as I like Canon. I just can't afford two systems...
Hell, I can barely afford one.

pm63 · Dec 24, 2007

Well, today I went out and purchased a Nikon D40. Screw the lens limitations. It's probably the best little DSLR I can buy without spending £1million.

I also got a 55-200 Nikkor zoom lens, carrying case, cleaning cloth, UV filter, 2GB SD card and all that jazz. I still can't quite believe how much it all cost

So far I've tested it out at Christmas dinner (we have it on the 24th) on auto mode and it's a joy to use. The reasurring shutter click is addictive and I ended up taking a photo every 10 seconds. The 18-55 kit lens is perfect for indoor room use, just the right ammount of zoom and nothing more.

I still need to read the instructions and experiment, as I'm absolutely baffled by all the different modes and am yet to experiment with shutter/aperture etc.

So to sum it up, it's a blast

I can't compare it to other DSLRs as it's my first one, but I feel I'm going to be using it very often.

johnmh · Dec 24, 2007

The D40 with the kit 18-55 and 55-200 covers a pretty wide range. It's easy to use on auto - and I suspect an awful lot of people never change off that. Pretty simple to figure out the other fixed settings - portrait, landscape etc. Nice and small and light.

Val · Dec 25, 2007

D40 with 18-200 is a serious bit of kit at any level. Check out KenRockwell.com for an in depth review :thumbup:

pm63 · Dec 26, 2007

Sorry to ressurect this old thread, but now I realise I should have gone for the Vibration Recuction version of the 55-200, which I could have got on Amazon for slightly less than I paid for the standard one!

Will it make much of a difference?

Oh and with the 55-200 I also got a lens hood like the one in this photo on the right. When/where should I use it and what is the point of it?