You need to talk me out of it

[manaheim]

baaahhaaaaaa!!!!

I think you were molested by a pack of D40's as a child....

There are many many D40 owners on this forum.... If your ASSertion of careless build quality of the D40 is true why do we not see a plethora of complaint threads by users??

...because they don't know any better?

In all seriousness, with the amount I use (and inadvertantly abuse) my D300, I'd probably break a D40 within a month.

As I always say... right tool for the job. The D40 may well work for some people just fine, but you cannot by any stretch of the imagine argue that it is "just as good" as a D300, D200 or even a D80.

The D40 is cheaper for a reason... it is made more cheaply to allow more people to get into the DSLR space. Cheaper always means less features, and/or less rugged construction... or stolen. If you happen to live in a world where cheaper stuff is better, then I would very much like to move out of my world and join you in yours.

AGAIN: I am not peeing in anyone's cheerios, here. If you have a D40 and it works good for you, then awesome. Just be careful with it 'cuz it's fragile.

 

[Bifurcator]

baaahhaaaaaa!!!!

I think you were molested by a pack of D40's as a child....

There are many many D40 owners on this forum.... If your ASSertion of careless build quality of the D40 is true why do we not see a plethora of complaint threads by users??

Because their fingers are stuck together and can't type. Superglueing all the parts that fall off of the typical D40 can be rather messy.

 

[Ben-71]

Sure, one can take very nice pictures with a D40,
but the D300 costs more because of quite a few
reasons, from dust/humidity sealing, to noise at
ISO 1600, to 'feel', etc'.

 

[shivaswrath]

You'll have a camera that will actually AF with all the current lenses in Nikon's lineup.

I'm on board with VI, built in AF, DRAMATIC improvement in the high ISO range, 51 AF spots (9 or 15 cross-hair type?). . .these are great reasons to upgrade, and reasons I have considered putting my D40x into the backup list. . .however, I'm waiting for the D700 to drop since I'm in love with the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8, and want to take full advantage of FF. . . .

Get the lens first though, bodies drop at a staggeringly fast pace (look at the D3 - already $500 cheaper than when it first came out!!!) And with the lens, you can enjoy the pictures more soon as you save up for a cheaper body. . .(I've been saving for the 14-24 for far too long, and renting it is getting old!). . .

Shivas

 

[Joves]

OK how I see it is like this, have you out grown the D40X? Besides not being able to use all of Nikons lenses with full functionality and, lower high iso performance, why do you think you need to upgrade. Ofcourse I say get the body but then Im not a fan of the lower end cameras so, take my advice with a block of salt. You will be satisfied with the D300 for a long time and, can get glass as you can afford it later.