Equipment Nikon D40x

Hi Guys,

I've been reading about the upgraded Nikon D40 (now with a 100% more X) - And as far as I can see it's probably on a par with the Canon 400D (more so that it's big brother the D80)

What's the opinion of the Photography High Council? Any good? I'm a bit of noob when it comes to DSLRs, so go easy on me.

Ta,

GOO

 

I wouldn't buy the D40(x). As I understand it the D40x cannot auto focus a huge range of lenses since it doesn't have a focus motor in the body. It's worse than EF-S in that respect.

If the 350 quid price point is what you're after then get a 350D.

2p

 

Dirty Nikon!

 

mind the troll XD

 

Eh?

Can I poke him with a pointy stick?

 

Vote for the eyes

 

I bought the Canon 400D over the D40 simply because of the previously stated lens issue with the D40. I couldn't see myself having the cash to upgrade past the kit lens for a while.

 

Can someone clear up the Nikon, autofocus motor issue for me as I don't really understand it.

Do only some nikon lenses have the auto focus motor built and and only some bodies have it built it? So a body with autofocus motor can autofocus any lens? and a body without it can only autofocus with lenses that have a motor?

 

My understanding of the D40 and D40x is that they moved the motor from out of the camera body, and into the lens. Therefore the camera is smaller, lighter, and cheaper, but the lenses are heavier and waaaaay more expensive than comparable models even on other Nikons. You can use legacy lenses, but would be stuck with manual focus only.

 

Seems like mookboy's got it there.

So I assume only AF-S and older AF-I lenses would work with the D40(x)?

 

That's it as I understand it too. That's why it's worse than EF-S.

 

Way more expensive? I bought my 55-200 Nikon DX for just over £100, brand new. D40 + 18-55 was about £380. I could do with a Sigma 10-20 to complete the set, but that'll have to wait (about £280).

 

When motherboards got rid of legacy ports it was a point of happieness, no? So why, when Nikon decides to do the same, everyone wigs? You think that Canon isn't moving to the same business model to save money? Who here, besides me and the Dane, have AF or AF-I lenses? All they are doing is drawing a line in the sand as to legacy hardware. Get over it. The D40X is, from a flash and ergonomics stand point, a better solution the then the 350D and 400D (IMHO, mostly menu, flash and handling based). As a professional Nikon user (it pays my rent) and an occasional Canon user, I can say I would buy a D40x and an AF-S lenses for home use over the Canon equivalent at this point without reservation. At 10mp, the IQ for everyday print is the same. Those that whine about high ISO are not looking at real life use; at non-200% screen magnification the 400D and D40 are the same (properly exposed). The lack of internal focusing motor is a non issue at a consumer level body. The DX line is fine for what most people use on a day to day basis.

Like everthing, try to look beyond the hype, and look at what you are actualy using the system for. Then test, hands on and look at real results. Hold it, shoot it, smell it, feel it. When you feel your needs excel the D80/30D, then your real life needs are defined by IQ and system constraints. If you are boxing above your weight class, as most of us are, then be kind enough to admit that hardware and fan-boyism are making the desicions for you. Both systems, at the entry level are fantastic. period. When you feel you need a D2xs/D3 or a 1DsMKII/MKIII to match your skill, then you can harshly judge one over the other. But point to a lens in either line up that you feel will hold you back along with the pictures that prove the point, I dare you. Especialy with the recent progress that Sigma has made with it's EX line.

Internet hype only get you so far in a creative field, just search for old school film users on Flickr and see what they can do. The camera is only a part of an image. really. There are plenty of people still shooting the Kodak 14n/Nikon D50/Canon 300D/Fuji S2pro that blow me away. or even 35mm film. or even worse, a Holga.

This is not a photographer's issue, this is truly a hardware spaz/pixel peepers thing. I love hardware as much as the next guy, but let's keep it real. I'd hate for this to become a N vs C forum like DPReview. Before you worry about this, habibi, let's see some images. Fun stuff, like dogs/cats or the delicious night shots of trailing tail lights on a country road. I kid because I love.

Simply not true, I'd like to see you back that with real prices and weights Vs EF and EF-S lenses.

 

Why do you insist on bashing the hobby photographer, Jumeira_Johnny? Every post you make seems to be shouting about how all of us shouldn't be dreaming about such expensive camera equipment.

I am by no means 'boxing above my class'. I enjoy being out with my camera taking photographs. I care about the IQ, I want to look at my photos, share them with others on the web and generally learn the skills for composition and capturing the best light. So why I not be allowed to buy equipment I can afford even if it is designed for the professionals.

Yes, you can take some simply stunning photos with the kit lenses in the bottom of the dslr pool but when I look at my photos on my screen and I can see defects causes by the lens or the body (less so from the body) I start to look at how I overcome this problem by improving my equipment.

I know for sure I need to replace my EF-S 18-55 POS because the lens is fundamentally flawed. I am looking at getting a Sigma 17-70 as it has been recommended by loads of people and the IQ is great for the price. I fail to see how this would be outside my class?

Back on topic.

Goo, go to a camera shop, tell them you want to try out the D40x and they should let you have a play with it. Get an idea of how it feels, take some shots and ask them to show you some lenses that you could add to your arsenal. You will find pretty much any DSLR body will do what you ask it no matter who makes it.

 

for the record, that's how I knew I bought the right camera. I used to read threads like these religiously for validation that I bought the right thing. Now I just take pictures.

GOO, I agree with Jamie. Go handle some of these models and see how you like them. Bottom line is that the D40x has the same sensor as the D80 but has fewer focus points, slower buffer, and no built-in lens motor. I think it's a perfect beginner camera. You need to really pick your camp (canon or nikon) because you are really gonna spend your money on lenses, bodies will come and go. Also don't discount the D50 either.

 

Sorry, I think that perhaps I have mis-stated my case. I am by no means bashing the hobby photographer (since part of me is one), or anyone for that matter. I do however believe that 9 times out of 10 people buy more camera then they need, often at a hefty price premium over what would be fine for them. If anyone took that the wrong way, I sincerly apologise.

I love holding a nicely made camera and thankfuly I have the Voice Of Reason (Damn it woman, get me a sandwich) to keep me grounded. And I try to, at least I thought, offer even handed advice in terms of what Canon and Nikon have on the market. So I'm not saying that buying a 5D is wrong, I just try to remind people that there is an alternative view point that includes buying what you need; not what you are secretly dying to own. Again I apologise if that came across as bashing, I never ment that. Holding a camera and using it is by far better then buying it sight unseen. But I am keenly aware of the "I walked in for a CF card and walked out with with $3,000 in lenses" syndrome. Just ask the Voice Of Reason. I still think the D40 lens issue is overblown, since most people end up buying an AFS or HSM lens in the begining anyway.

My main point was to try and show, that at any given price point, the choices that are availible are neck to neck in terms of quality and IQ, plus or minus a few points. That lenses are better now then they have ever been. And that a lot of what you read out there is subjective. I like that we have this forum here, since we actualy tend to focus on pictures more then anything. It shows that people genuinely like taking photos. That alone is re-freshing.

 

Whatever you decide on, Onestop-Digital are pretty awesome (but dont have the D40x yet). They even refund whatever customs sting you for

http://www.onestop-digital.com/catalog/index.php

 

You've taken my comment out of context. I was referring to the differences between the D40 compatible lens and stuff for the other Nikon DSLR's. Not other brands. This is a conclusion I found time and time again on other forums when I was researching buying a D40 - also in many reviews, that the camera's lack of back compatibility is an issue. Looking at the lens prices at the time, this was further compounded by the fact that I couldn't see myself being able to afford a telephoto for a very long time for a D40, but based on a friends recent purchase of the well regarded Sigma 70-30mm I could see myself affording that sort of thing instead. In addition, one way of comparing the brands and their affordability, was that I knew I could easily get an older, EF lens off eBay for pennies which would work quite happily on a 400D - not something I could do with the D40 from the Nikon back catalogue (and I was dead set on getting one considering how well reviewed it is/was - my 400D was a last minute decision in the shop).

I feel you've gone off the deep end there without any real need.