D40

[patm1313]

Because of my good grades (straight A's) my parents have offered to get me a camera. I think they were thinking more along the lines of a point-and-shoot, but hell, I'm not getting a camera if I have to deal with one second more of that P/S business. I will pay whatever my parent's arent willing to.

So, I find it time to get me an SLR. There's a whole bunch o' reasons why, but mostly it's because of the fact that my favorite subjects are constantly moving. For example, it's a pain in the arse to shoot Flame while he's constantly trying to explore. I might be able to pull off 10 shots in one minute with an P/S, but more like 50+ with an SLR.

Browsing the internet, I'm looking for some of the lowest cost SLRs out there, so I pick the easy way to do it all, go to Circuitcity.com, go to SLR cameras, and hit the Low to High button to arrange the list. I find the D40 staring right at me, and clikc on it. I find tons of cool features, and a modest price. I look up reviews, and for the most part, it has gotten nothing but good words.

So, I know some other people around here probably have some experience with the D40, so can you give me your quick input on it?

 

[torsten]

I've got a friend who has one and he loves it!!

other than that i can't help you much!!

 

[Stregone]

You can get a refurbished Canon XTi for just a little more. Will give you 10mp and no lens autofocus incompatibility issues. 7 AF points instead of 3.

http://www.adorama.com/ICADRXTIBKR.html

The D60 is more comparable to the Xti, but I couldn't find it used or refurbished anywhere. They are both around 600 new.

 

[Tula_Montage]

I use the D40 Its a lightweight, versatile wee camera and PERFECT as your first entry level SLR. When you start to get confident and understand technical jargon use it just like any other manual SLR.

 

[patm1313]

I use the D40 Its a lightweight, versatile wee camera and PERFECT as your first entry level SLR. When you start to get confident and understand technical jargon use it just like any other manual SLR.

Thanks Elle, your opinion means a lot.

I'm pretty much sold on the thing by now. The only problems I have heard with the D40 are the blurry highlight corners and the fact that it isn't compatible with older lenses. Neither of these really worry me.

 

[EddieA]

I might also suggest a Pentax K10D or K20D. You get a lot of great features like weathersealing and in-camera shake reduction (useable with any lens Pentax ever made) for less than you might think. Takes great pictures too. Just thought you might like to check it out.

 

[Joejr14]

Thanks Elle, your opinion means a lot.

I'm pretty much sold on the thing by now. The only problems I have heard with the D40 are the blurry highlight corners and the fact that it isn't compatible with older lenses. Neither of these really worry me.

You don't need to get a Canon XTI to get awesome shots of a variety of things.

 

[patm1313]

You don't need to get a Canon XTI to get awesome shots of a variety of things.

What were those taken with?

They are stunning!

 

[Tula_Montage]

I believe Joe uses the D80... Correct me if I am wrong. You have seen enough of my shots to know what the D40 is capable of

 

[TandJ]

Unless Joe has bought a new body, I think he is using a D50 as well.. Joe was one of the reasons I seriously looked at Nikon for an entry level professional DSLR.. thanks for feeding my addiction Joe.. *LOL*

I use a D50, which is now long gone from the market.. The D40 essentially replaced the 50 with a few more and few less bells and whistles.. Now of course we have the D60 which I understand is slated to replace the 40, so the cost of the 40 should start dropping pretty good.. I can't get into the tech's of the whole thing, but I am very happy with the cost vs performance of Nikons.. I am looking at D80 comtemplating on getting me one at the end of their production run, I know I can't even think of looking at the D300 yet..

The D80 would be a nice step for me, but I am currently looking more seriously into the Micro Lens that Nikkor has.. However that is truely a different subject..

Regards.. Tim of T and J

 

[Tula_Montage]

At the end of the day your lens is FAR more important than the body ever will be. I use the Sigma 105mm macro lens with my D40 and am extremely pleased with the results. I just need a decent lighting rig now

I really like the kit lens (18-55mm nikkor). You can achieve some good close ups of the reptiles as well as fantastic landscapes, portraits and everything inbetween. Like I said, if used correctly it is a versatile kit for a very low price. Theres no point in buying a D80 if you don't understand the technical side of photography. I will deffinatley be upgrading to the D300 at the end of the year

 

[patm1313]

Hey, thanks for the help guys (and gals). I got the D40 on wednesday. I am extremely pleased with the results. I did find that the lens didn't zoom as far as I would like, but oh well. I managed to find a 10 year old flash from my father's photography days that somehow works with the D40 and I'm now using it. Someday I will invest in a better lens.

 

[Sarynkitamo]

Hey, thanks for the help guys (and gals). I got the D40 on wednesday. I am extremely pleased with the results. I did find that the lens didn't zoom as far as I would like, but oh well. I managed to find a 10 year old flash from my father's photography days that somehow works with the D40 and I'm now using it. Someday I will invest in a better lens.

If you do, look into getting the 55-200mm VR. It's a pretty good lens, not particularly expensive and it's non-VR version is about $170 CND. It'd make what you've got a little more versatile.

I've recently gotten a D60 myself and I'm quite pleased with it. Haven't taken any pictures of Jasper since she's just had a feed, but I've taken pictures of my other pets, flowers and some of the local wildlife.

The older Nikon lenses DO apparently work with the newer camera bodies since Nikon hasn't changed the lens attachment system. Only thing is that the older lenses won't have the auto-focus, and the newer cameras rely on having AF in the lens.

You'll run into Canonatics (Canon Fanatics) who insist that Canon is better than Nikon, and Nikonatics who insist the opposite. But it's not the camera that really matters, it what you do with it.

 

[patm1313]

If you do, look into getting the 55-200mm VR. It's a pretty good lens, not particularly expensive and it's non-VR version is about $170 CND. It'd make what you've got a little more versatile.

Yep, the 55-200 VR is going to be my next lens. I'm also looking into a battery grip/timer so that I can take time lapses.

 

[patm1313]

And not to stir up trouble, but what did lovingoot post? I haven't been on often enough to notice it.

 

[Joejr14]

Yep, the 55-200 VR is going to be my next lens. I'm also looking into a battery grip/timer so that I can take time lapses.

I would suggest that the 18-200mm VR is a better overall lens for your money.....

That'll be my next lens purchase and once that's complete my 18-55mm kit lens will be history.

 

[Sarynkitamo]

I would suggest that the 18-200mm VR is a better overall lens for your money.....

That'll be my next lens purchase and once that's complete my 18-55mm kit lens will be history.

It's a nice lens, for sure, but it's much more expensive than the 18-55mm and the 55-200mm. There's no hassle about changing lenses, but is that really a significant problem when a $400 difference in price is concerned? (Comparing the 55-200mm lens's price to the 18-200mm since s/he's already got the 18-55mm)