I've recently narrowed my choice between purchasing a Nikon D-40 or D-50. I like features from both that the other does not have. But I am open to other suggestions. Here's some information on what I need...
Budget - About $700 (Looking for multi-lens package).
Size - none
Features
How many megapixels will suffice for you? - 6.0
* What optical zoom will you need? - 10x-12x
* How important is “image quality” to you? 10, most likely, though I don't need RAW.
Do you care for manual controls? - YES
General Usage
* What will you generally use the camera for? - Variety, but not sports.
* Will you be making big prints of your photos or not? - Few.
Will you be shooting a lot of indoor photos or low light photos? Few.
Will you be shooting sports and/or action photos? - No.
Miscellaneous
Are there particular brands you like or hate? - Not impressed with my Nikon Coolpix3200.
Are there particular models you already have in mind? Nikon.
(If applicable) Do you need any of the following special features?
I like the ability to do wide angle, but I also need strong zoom ability. I plan on carrying a couple of lenses. I also would like the option of making short video clips, like my point and shoots do. Though I don't have a lot of technical know-how, I do know exaclty what I want in a shot (I have the art, though not the science) so I would consider myself not an amateur but a strong enthusiast.
I would definitely recommend the D50 over the D40. What features does the D40 have that you prefer over the D50?
The major drawback of the D40 is the lack of autofocus motor. That means that you will have to spend much more on lenses that have their own motor. The D50 is a great camera. I would definitely recommend it to you. Or, if that doesn't work out, I would look at the D80.
DSLRs do not have video ability. If that is important to you, check out the Canon S3 or Panasonic FZ50.
Unless you are going to be looking into certain types of lenses, primes and macros, or larger-aperture zoom lenses for low-light situations, you are not too likely to be affected by the D40's lack of a focus motor. From what you stated, it sounds like a D40 with kit 18-55mm + the new 55-200mm VR DX II is just what you're looking for. That would total out to about $780. You could go for the 55-200mm non-VR (stabilized) for about $80 less, but that could be troublesome, as camera shake could ruin some of your shots at full zoom.
If you are going to be looking into the lenses I mentioned at the beginning, then a D50 would be a better option, although it might be a slight amount of hassle finding one. As far as I know it runs for about the same price as the D40. The same lens setup would do you (although note the D40 kit lens, the DX II, is better than the D50's original DX), but you might end up spending more buying these lenses both separately.
Both cameras are capable of taking magnificent pictures, and don't let people tell you the D40 isn't worth every penny.
Honestly, the D50. Since you mentioned lenses will be important and most importantly, zoom, youll want the autofocusing body(D50). Keep in mind, 10X zoom on a DZLR will be VERY expensive.
I suggest doing alot more reserach before you make your purchase, and find out if DSLR is really right for you. Look at lenses first and foremost, thats what will stick with you after upgrading the body in the future.
The D50 costs the same, if not less than the D40, so why not go with the D50? Its got the VERY important internal focusing that the D40 lacks.
Tori is correct that DSLRs dont take video, altough I STRONGLY dissagree with the Panasonic FZ50 suggestion. That camera isnt one of the best, its horrible with higher ISO and indoor pics are hard to get prints of. You could do better than the Panna FZ50, namely the FZ30. Although, if video is important to you, buy a camcorder, cameras are a compromise when it comes to video.
__________________ Jason
"A coward dies a thousand deaths, a soldier dies but once."-2Pac
The 55-200mm VR AF-S provides 11x autofocusing zoom for $250. That's one of the least costly zoom lenses out there, and has very decent results by all accounts.
What is the least expensive you've seen the D50 available for from reputable companies? Amazon lists it for about $650, $100 over the D40.
Least expensive online so far has been from Tri-State Camera for $499. Another online retailer, Norman Camera has the D50 for $529. Doing a simple online search will provide more results too. Just make sure its a safe place to buy from!
My local camera shop is selling it for $560.
And even if you were to pay $100 more for the D50, its well worth it in my eyes as it will save you alot more money on lenses in the long run!
I should point out, Tri-State is on the fence, there have been good experiences and bad experiences, I have not purchased from them but they are listed in the "OK" list on the "where/where not to buy your camera" thread.
__________________ Jason
"A coward dies a thousand deaths, a soldier dies but once."-2Pac
"Zoom" is a subjective quantification for SLRs and SLR lenses - coming from point-and-shoots it is very confusing. I'm trying to approximate the reach one would have compared to the 18-55mm lens.
Most compact digitals (not point and shoots, you can point and shoot with yoru D40) have a lens that starts at about 36mm or 38mm. The 18-55 kilens starts at 28mm, quite a bit more wide angle. If you want to do any sort of comparison, take that into account.
__________________
Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30
When non-SLR users ask about "zoom", they want to know how much reach the camera will give them. Judging by my 3x Olympus P&S, the 18-55mm gives about the same reach (3x from the naked eye), although with a wider angle on the other end. As far as I am aware, 200mm gives about 10-11x in those terms, am I right?
Compare, say, with a pair of binoculars. Doesn't make sense in lens terms, but it's how non-photographers have been trained to think.
Another way to put this: is 55mm (really ~75mm) about 3x larger than @ 35mm?
Still making sense of the actualities of this myself; thus far I've been comparing in a loose sense, not going by actual specifications.
__________________ Nikon D40 + kit lens
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 D AF(...or not)
Last edited by fionndruinne; 04-22-2007 at 04:03 PM.
D-40 or D-50?
Linear Mode
