Nikon D40X.....urgent, please need advice

sanjin · Apr 9, 2007

I came accross one camera store in Toronto where I could get a Nikon D40X and a Nikon AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED for 1200 canadian dollars. I`m leaving Toronto in 2 days, so I need to make up my mind fast.
I am still torn between buying a D80 or a D40X. I do not want included lenses from either one, as I plan on buying the lens above mentionned and after that another super wide angle lens. I`m just an amateur photograph, picturing landscapes, architectures, some portraits, family vacations and occasionnaly few night shots. It seems to me that both D80 and D40X are very capable cameras. My budget is however limited and I would rather spend the extra 400$ of the D80 price on this AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED lens. What do you think of this idea? Is it a fairly good SLR that can still perform well in diverse situations? Or am I better of buying a D80 and using a cheap lens? Thank you for advices

Don Simon · Apr 9, 2007

Well one thing I'd ask is, do you really need the VR? That surely adds quite a bit to the cost. Also with a 55-200mm and a super wide (by super-wide I assume you mean something like 12-24mm) you're going to have a fairly large gap there. As for bodies, bear in mind the D40x doesn't have an autofocus motor so it will not allow autofocus with lenses which don't have internal focus, whereas the D80 does have such a motor. This might not matter in terms of new lenses (especially if Nikon release IF versions of common primes) but it could rule out a number of used lenses.

xfloggingkylex · Apr 9, 2007

no brainer, D80 if you have the money to do so.

sanjin · Apr 10, 2007

Thank you for replies,

I really thought D40X had autofocus. That is quite important for me, I think it`s nice to be able to shoot pictures fast, sometimes, you just don`t have enough time to adjust the focus.
So what would you recommend me as for the lenses. I was thinking to let go of the 70-200 and get Nikon`s VR 70-300, Sigma`s 10-10mm and maybe one basic lens to fill out the gap.
However, I`m so new into DSLR world, so I would really need some of your insight and thoughts on this. Thank you

sanjin · Apr 10, 2007

Sorry mistake, instead of 70-200, I meant 55-200 and sigma 10-20mm

Don Simon · Apr 10, 2007

Sorry I probably didn't explain properly; the D40x does have autofocus, however it doesn't have an autofocus motor. Most newer Nikon lenses have internal focus, i.e. all the autofocus mechanism is inside the lens and therefore do not require an AF motor in the camera. With these lenses (for example the 55-200mm) you would have autofocus. However there are several Nikon lenses which don't have internal focus, and most other-brand lenses too. On those lenses therefore you will not have autofocus. In this case it means you would retain autofocus on the 55-200mm and the Sigma 10-20mm (as long as the Sigma is an 'HSM' model it should have internal focus).

The super-wide sounds ok, if you think you would go that wide. As for the telephoto lens, if you don't mind me asking again, are you sure you need VR? I'm just thinking you could save quite a bit by getting the same lens without VR. The main reason this interests me is that you say you'd fill the gap with a "basic lens". But between 20 and 55mm is a fairly large gap in terms of commonly used focal lengths; from moderate wide-angle through to short telephoto. Also all your lenses would be fairly slow with no aperture wider than f/4. If you're fairly confident that most of your work would be either super-wide or telephoto, and in reasonably good light, then it sounds like a good set-up, but otherwise I might be inclined to think more about that 'gap' and maybe consider a decent wide-to-standard zoom or a fast prime to fill it.

sanjin · Apr 10, 2007

Hi,

Thank you for your feedback

OK, I`ll start by answering about VR 70-300. I`m going to be traveling a lot around Europe and Adriatic coastline this summer. I want to take some realy nice pictures of buildings, ships etc, without everytime having to use a tripod to be able to take a sharp quality pic. That`s the main reason why I was thinking about getting VR, that and the fact that that lens will still be usable in 20 years from now (if staying with Nikon bodies).
As for the gap, well, I`ve decided to go with Nikon D80 and it comes with 28-135 mm lens. So than, my lens would include 10-20 mm, 28-135mm and 70-300mm.
But, tell me what lenses do you recomment me now that I explined what I`ll be doing with a camera. Thank you really very much

xfloggingkylex · Apr 10, 2007

ZaphodB said:
Sorry I probably didn't explain properly; the D40x does have autofocus, however it doesn't have an autofocus motor. Most newer Nikon lenses have internal focus, i.e. all the autofocus mechanism is inside the lens and therefore do not require an AF motor in the camera. With these lenses (for example the 55-200mm) you would have autofocus. However there are several Nikon lenses which don't have internal focus, and most other-brand lenses too. On those lenses therefore you will not have autofocus. In this case it means you would retain autofocus on the 55-200mm and the Sigma 10-20mm (as long as the Sigma is an 'HSM' model it should have internal focus).

The super-wide sounds ok, if you think you would go that wide. As for the telephoto lens, if you don't mind me asking again, are you sure you need VR? I'm just thinking you could save quite a bit by getting the same lens without VR. The main reason this interests me is that you say you'd fill the gap with a "basic lens". But between 20 and 55mm is a fairly large gap in terms of commonly used focal lengths; from moderate wide-angle through to short telephoto. Also all your lenses would be fairly slow with no aperture wider than f/4. If you're fairly confident that most of your work would be either super-wide or telephoto, and in reasonably good light, then it sounds like a good set-up, but otherwise I might be inclined to think more about that 'gap' and maybe consider a decent wide-to-standard zoom or a fast prime to fill it.

isnt internal focus where nothing moves on the lens to focus? In that aspect not all AF-S lenses do that I am pretty sure.

The terms can be confusing, but basically the motor that does the focusing is either in body or in the lens, in the case of the D40, it has to be in the lens, which means any lens without a motor in it wont have autofocus.