Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: D40, or D80

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    370
    like I said, those who don't own it don't understand.

    Lens compatibility isn't an issue for everyone. I had the 50mm f/1.8 for a day and it was not what I needed. The issue was not the focusing, but the focal length. It just didn't work for me. I realize it is an awesome lens for some, but a wider angle is what I need and that is available for the D40.

    I have yet to hear someone who owns the D40 say that they are disappointed with it.

    Of course, if money is not an issue go wth the D80. I agree that it is hard to compare the D40 and D80. But if you don't need/want all the features of the D80, the D40 is a great choice if you like the lens selection. And it does have several improvements to the D50. Whether or not those improvements matter to you is personal preference. It also loses a few things you might wish you had - again personal preference. You really won't go wrong with any of these cameras! I'm sure I would have been as thrilled with any of them. It ultimately comes down to what you need and what feels right in your hands.
    "Saturate yourself with your subject and the camera will all but take you by the hand." ~ Margaret Bourke-White

    Nikon D80 ~ Tamron 28-75/2.8 ~ Nikon 50/1.8 ~ Tamron 90/2.8 Di Macro ~ SB-600

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    1,148
    Kellie, I know my comments seem strong. Especially since really, the D40 is better than point and shoot cameras. and in the same price range as a few of those.

    But I don't think there is a more limiting DSLR on the market that has been produced in the last couple of years. That is where my comment comes from. I have been somewhat baffled, at the stripped down feature set. Especially the lens compatibility. But hey, maybe that is part of the marketing plan. They know that someone coming from film to digital (that owns Nikkor glass) wouldn't be buying the D40 anyway. And for purchasers of the D40, lens selection might cause them to upgrade quicker than they otherwise would have.

    Really, even if you want wider, if you are looking for prime, I don't know of one that is compatible with the AF on the D40.

    I bet D40 owners upgrade faster than D50 users have. There are quite a few D50 users that may not upgrade for another generation or two of DSLRs
    Nikon D70s
    Nikkor 50mm 1.8D (If you don't have it you need it)
    Nikkor 18-200mm VR II
    SB-600
    Bogen/Manfrotto Tripods/Heads
    NAS (D300, Nikkor 80-200mm (or 70-200mm)f/2.8, Tamron 90mm Macro)

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    370
    See, I haven't been bothered by the feature set at all. I have the fn button dedicated to white balance and I use customizable auto ISO (max ISO set to 1600 and min ss set to 1/30 so it only increases ISO if the ss goes below 1/30). I never change the IQ (set to jpeg/fine) and use AF-A all the time so I don't need to change the AF mode either. Anything else I want to change is very easy to access via the menu which I have customized to my needs using the My Menu option. It takes about 2 seconds to get to metering and AF options. I don't miss the top LCD as this is my first dSLR. I just use the info in the viewfinder or huge, clear LCD. I also LOVE the in camera editing options and color histograms which I use to check exposure on 99% of my pictures. I have used the color adjustment option to fix pictures much faster than fixing them in PS.

    I can certainly see why people would feel limited by the D40 if they are used to many more options at their fingertips. But I feel that I am capturing pictures much faster than I would if I had to mess with a bunch of settings each time I shoot. I think I am definitely the type of person this camera is marketed for and I'm not embarrassed to admit that.

    I'm not sure that people will upgrade sooner because of lens compatibility limitations, however. People who buy the D40 should be aware of the lens selection first. And it sounds as though all new lenses will be AF-S anyway. If they want to use the other lenses and have to be able to AF, than obviously the D40 is not the best choice. The other features aren't much different from the D50. There are less dedicated buttons, but that might not matter to those who use customizable auto ISO and program the fn button to do what they choose.

    Anyway, I definitely don't think the D40 is a better camera than the D50. It just has all of the features *I* want and a few extra pluses that I love (editing options, color histogram, LCD resolution and size, etc.) If I already had several non AF-S lenses, I would have given up those extras and gone with the D50.

    Sometimes I just feel bad for this wonderful little camera. Even before it was released people were bashing it. For some of us, it is exactly the camera we want. It isn't for everyone, but no camera is, IMHO.

    Oh and the prime I am going to purchase is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM which will AF with the D40 and is the focal length that I need.
    Last edited by Kellie; 02-01-2007 at 09:14 AM.
    "Saturate yourself with your subject and the camera will all but take you by the hand." ~ Margaret Bourke-White

    Nikon D80 ~ Tamron 28-75/2.8 ~ Nikon 50/1.8 ~ Tamron 90/2.8 Di Macro ~ SB-600

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    370
    I also want to add that I upgraded to the D40 from the Panny FZ7. That was a great little camera, but the noise at ISO 200 was horrendous. The grain drove me bonkers and the ability to get an acceptable picture using ISO 1600 (or even 3200 in some cases!) amazes me. So, you can see why even with its "limitations" the D40 is a HUGE improvement to typical p&s and superzoom bridge cameras.
    "Saturate yourself with your subject and the camera will all but take you by the hand." ~ Margaret Bourke-White

    Nikon D80 ~ Tamron 28-75/2.8 ~ Nikon 50/1.8 ~ Tamron 90/2.8 Di Macro ~ SB-600

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    1,148
    I had to look further myself on the primes... I was wrong that there aren't any.. Seems there aren't any Nikkor ones. I found the helpful link below... then I came back and see you mentioned the 30mm... Kewl.

    And actually Sigma claims to have quite a few primes that will auto focus with this camera... Here is a great article on that.
    http://www.sigmaphoto.com/news/news.asp?nID=3289
    Nikon D70s
    Nikkor 50mm 1.8D (If you don't have it you need it)
    Nikkor 18-200mm VR II
    SB-600
    Bogen/Manfrotto Tripods/Heads
    NAS (D300, Nikkor 80-200mm (or 70-200mm)f/2.8, Tamron 90mm Macro)

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,929
    In the end, lenses are the most important part, not the body. Bodies come and go, the good lenses usually stay with the user. With that said, the D40 just doesnt have all that much to offer in the lens selection. For me that makes the decision easy. However, if you are looking for a learning tool (until you upgrade) then it may be the camera for you.

    Im not bashing the D40, just pointing out that lenses typically are the most important part. Some people are thrilled with this camera and I guess, thats al that matters.
    Jason

    "A coward dies a thousand deaths, a soldier dies but once."-2Pac


    A bunch of Nikon stuff!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    I honestly think that if there had been a D40 a year ago I would now be shooting with one. Last year, when I bought my D50, my plan was use the kitlens for a while eventually upgrade to the 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 VR and be done with all investments for the years to come. Funny how things can change...

    Anyway, for most users the D40 is all they will ever need. You have full manual control over exposure, but if you like you can just snap away and the results will still be great. It's versatile yet easy to use, the image quality is great straight out of the camera (unlike with some higher end DSLRs). You can get various nikon lenses with a lot of zoom and a wide angle (ranging from an 18-55 to 18-200).

    When getting into photography with an dSLR, how many people actually see themselves triggering multiple flashes, how many see themselves using a lens with no zoom, how many will actually miss the top LCD (there point and shoot after all never had one either). I believe many people will appreciate all the things the D40 can do for you automatically. I know that when I took the plunge to DSLR I used to think this way, and I assume that there are many who share this line of though. Therefore, I think that introducing the D40 was a very smart move of Nikon, to buy this one is a much smaller step to take for people then any of the other DSLRs. And once people start using Nikon, odds are pretty big they will continue using it.

    Anyway, now that my photography skills have improved, and I have gotten into photography a lot deeper than I would ever have thought I am glad I don't have a D40, because I believe that would be too limiting for me.
    Last edited by Prospero; 02-01-2007 at 01:57 PM.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    370
    I spent hours reading reviews, spec lists, etc. and nearly 2 hours in the camera store playing with the different models. I'm curious if the limitation everyone refers to when comparing the D40 and D50 is just the lens compatibility. Because other than that, I don't see how they are much different. Do the 2 extra AF areas, bracketing and 1/2 EV steps really make that much difference in growing as a photographer? I just don't see how it is any more limiting. If lens compatibility is what everyone means, then yes, I agree that is limiting to some photographers but I don't think it keeps one from improving their photographic skills (just my opinion of course).

    Again, I don't think one is better than the other. I know the D50 is an excellent camera.
    "Saturate yourself with your subject and the camera will all but take you by the hand." ~ Margaret Bourke-White

    Nikon D80 ~ Tamron 28-75/2.8 ~ Nikon 50/1.8 ~ Tamron 90/2.8 Di Macro ~ SB-600

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellie View Post
    I spent hours reading reviews, spec lists, etc. and nearly 2 hours in the camera store playing with the different models. I'm curious if the limitation everyone refers to when comparing the D40 and D50 is just the lens compatibility. Because other than that, I don't see how they are much different. Do the 2 extra AF areas, bracketing and 1/2 EV steps really make that much difference in growing as a photographer? I just don't see how it is any more limiting. If lens compatibility is what everyone means, then yes, I agree that is limiting to some photographers but I don't think it keeps one from improving their photographic skills (just my opinion of course).

    Again, I don't think one is better than the other. I know the D50 is an excellent camera.
    I think lens compatibility is the big deal. Of my lenses only one would focus on a D50. If I want a constant f/2.8 standard zoom (in the range 18-70) the only lenses available with autofocus are the Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 and 28-70 f/2.8. Furthermore, the selection of af-s primes is limited, there are none in the traditional portrait range (having taken into account the cropfactor).

    That said, I use my 10-20 most of the time and that would also have been possible on a D40. However, I do find myself using the upper and lower af points frequently, especially with vertical compositions.

    Other than that the differences are slight, and in some aspects (image quality, buffer size, and more) the D40 is even better.
    Last edited by Prospero; 02-01-2007 at 01:04 PM.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by Prospero View Post

    That said, I use my 10-20 most of the time and that would also have been possible on a D40. However, I do find myself using the upper and lower af points frequently, especially with vertical compositions.
    I understand that. I can see myself possibly wishing for more AF points in the future. I'm just so used to a single AF area and needing to recompose that I am still using that method.

    Now having said all of this in defense of the D40, I will admit that I hope my skills improve enough to warrant purchasing a semi-pro model within a couple years. This little one will always be a nice back up, though.
    "Saturate yourself with your subject and the camera will all but take you by the hand." ~ Margaret Bourke-White

    Nikon D80 ~ Tamron 28-75/2.8 ~ Nikon 50/1.8 ~ Tamron 90/2.8 Di Macro ~ SB-600

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •