PDA

View Full Version : D40 vs. D50



JPRATT
09-26-2007, 07:40 PM
have friend looking between these 2 cameras. For those that have both, What made you go with the d40 over the d50, or the other way around. he doesnt plan on buying a lot of lenses, he'd be happy with the 2 lens d40 kit. But at the same time he still has the d50 in the back of his mind.

If possible to give some feedback would be great.

fionndruinne
09-26-2007, 08:18 PM
The D50 is getting harder to find, as it has been discontinued, and because the D40 is very popular. Personally I recommend the D40, it is a much newer camera with a better processor, enhanced menus, better high ISO performance, lighter weight... it lacks a few features since it is a more targeted model for the entry-level crowd, but the only major one is (of course) the lens motor situation. I'd say the only real reason to get a D50 over a D40 is if you want to take advantage of the excellent, cheap 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor, a small legend which won't autofocus on the D40. Otherwise, or if budget is not so tight, I'd recommend the D40 or the D80. Personally I think it an easy decision, if as you say your friend would be happy with the kit lenses.

One word to the wise, though; the D40 two-lens kit includes the budget 55-200mm Nikkor, an outdated model without stabilization, which is a must with a telephoto lens that is not large aperture. Stick with the 18-55mm kit, and purchase the 55-200mm VR Nikkor, a great piece of inexpensive glass with vibration reduction (VR), for only about $50-60 more.

rawpaw18
09-26-2007, 08:31 PM
I he would be happy with the two lens kit, then D40. If he is looking to expand his lens collection then the D50 for using non AF-S lenses or some third party lenses ie: Sigma HSM lenses.

cvicisso
09-27-2007, 06:23 AM
have friend looking between these 2 cameras. For those that have both, What made you go with the d40 over the d50, or the other way around. he doesnt plan on buying a lot of lenses, he'd be happy with the 2 lens d40 kit. But at the same time he still has the d50 in the back of his mind.

If possible to give some feedback would be great.Well, I don't meet your criteria of owning both (or either for that matter! :D), but I can tell you that I debated the purchase of these two cameras ad nauseum - until I finally decided on a third! :eek:

Usually, a question like this sparks debate over lens motors and other features, but I think that the way your question was very specifically worded ("he doesn't plan on buying a lot of lenses, he'd be happy with the 2 lens D40 kit") makes this an absolute 'no brainer': GET THE D40!! No kidding - he doesn't even need to think about it. The D40 was born for this exact type of customer, and I think is an absolute perfect fit! It's an awesome camera for all the reasons already mentioned. Yes, so is the D50 - but the D40 is much, much newer and my D70 experience has me always thinking about that warranty now! :rolleyes:

Also - I think fionndruinne is spot-on with that VR lens advice. Tell your friend to SKIP THE TWO LENS KIT - buy the single lens D40 kit instead and spend an extra few clams (total) for the 55-200 VR.

Let us know how it turns out!

Rooz
09-27-2007, 06:36 AM
One word to the wise, though; the D40 two-lens kit includes the budget 55-200mm Nikkor, an outdated model without stabilization, which is a must with a telephoto lens that is not large aperture. Stick with the 18-55mm kit, and purchase the 55-200mm VR Nikkor, a great piece of inexpensive glass with vibration reduction (VR), for only about $50-60 more.

i agree with this.

JPRATT
09-27-2007, 08:22 AM
Thanks all for the info provided. I will send him this link tonight, which I'm sure will help him on his choice. Which he seems to be leaning more towards the D40 anyway. So I'm sure this advice will make his decision solid now. He mostly plans to use the camera for kids, cars(still/moving), and landscape.

Thanks a bunch peeps. :cool:

cvicisso
09-27-2007, 11:25 AM
JPRATT - seeing your Pentax signature, purely out of curiosity - and not at all trying to complicate things, did you try to sell your friend on any of the new Pentax dslrs?

JPRATT
09-27-2007, 01:44 PM
JPRATT - seeing your Pentax signature, purely out of curiosity - and not at all trying to complicate things, did you try to sell your friend on any of the new Pentax dslrs?

No complications taken what so ever... I asked him if he thought about the K100D since he wanted a entry level dslr. But he seems pretty set on Nikon since using a D200, and D70. He was happy with the outcome of Nikon. So being the good guy that I am :D I'm just trying to help his choice/decision between the D40/D50 a little easier for him. Cause i too just a year ago went through this same scenerio. :confused:

Gintaras
09-27-2007, 02:04 PM
I have heard D40 (also D40x) is most amateur friendly DSLR (correct me if I am wrong).

Actually I am seriously thinking about giving D40 to my wife with 18-70 and 50-200VR or may be getting 18-50 kit plus 18-200VR.:rolleyes:

I would love to hand her XTi in case i upgrade to 40D but... XTi is more complex and less amateur friendly.

tonay
09-27-2007, 04:09 PM
I have the 2 lens D40 (upgrade to the VR model). You can get the 2 from amazon as the seller for cheaper than the "kit" right now.

cvicisso
09-28-2007, 12:23 PM
I have heard D40 (also D40x) is most amateur friendly DSLR (correct me if I am wrong).

Actually I am seriously thinking about giving D40 to my wife with 18-70 and 50-200VR or may be getting 18-50 kit plus 18-200VR.:rolleyes:

I would love to hand her XTi in case i upgrade to 40D but... XTi is more complex and less amateur friendly.If my wife were interested in shooting an easy-to-use dslr, and I was considering upgrading my own from a base-level Nikon or Canon to the prosumer model of that brand, I would absolutely positively pass on to her the system I currently have - regardless of how much more 'amateur friendly' the other one is purported as being. At that (intro) level, Nikon=Canon for all practical purposes.

If/when she has issues, who is she going to ask questions of? You're the resident expert on the XTi - so she's got in-house tech support. PLUS, you guys can SHARE LENSES!!! Switching to another brand - and keeping the old one - in the same house just seems like an expensive and counter-productive option to me. Just my $.02.

Give her your XTi and teach her to use it. :cool:

JPRATT
09-28-2007, 03:08 PM
I have the 2 lens D40 (upgrade to the VR model). You can get the 2 from amazon as the seller for cheaper than the "kit" right now.

Do you happen to have a link for this? This is exactly the setup my buddy is trying to get. Also do you already have the kit? If so how was shipping and all that stuff? Trusted sellar? :D

Admiral_Cecil
09-28-2007, 03:30 PM
Hello,

If you are getting a D40, get the 10 MP version D40x and 18-135mm lens. That should give enough wide angle and long zoom w/o too high of cost and not need to carry so many lens.

Keep in mind D40 and D40x the battery life is slightly less and can not use primes (ie 24mm or 50mm aka non-zoom lens).


If using primes, then get a D80 with the 18-135mm kit.

fionndruinne
09-28-2007, 05:29 PM
I disagree, strongly - why pay $200 more for a boost in megapixels, when it's unnecessary? Heck, that's almost the cost of the 55-200mm VR right there.

Yes, the D40x is a great camera, with really good image quality for a 10MP, but the D40 is such a better value. And the 55-200mm VR is a better option for telephoto than the 18-135mm.

jcon
09-28-2007, 05:30 PM
On the idea of choosing a D40X over the D40, I would opt for the D40. From what I have seen the D40 performs better than the D40X which was basically just crammed with useless pixels that werent need in the original D40.

tonay
09-28-2007, 06:23 PM
Here is the link for the camera
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-18-55mm-3-5-5-6G-Zoom-Nikkor/dp/B000KJQ1DG/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-8676224-4437730?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1191024965&sr=8-1

Today amazon has it for $507. Tomorrow it will be back to $498.

Here is the link for the lens
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200mm-4-5-6G-AF-S-Nikkor/dp/B000O161X0/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-8676224-4437730?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1191024965&sr=8-2

I bought it for $229 and amazon already refunded me the difference. They have a 30 day guarntee as long as you buy from the seller "amazon".

Here's a link for the 2 lens "kit" with the lesser lens for $700 - I think the vibration reduction is worth 30 bucks.

As far as shipping - I qualified for a free trial of "Amazon Prime" and got free 2 day shipping. Plus I live in FL so no sales tax.

I couldn't beat it and I'm very satisfied w/ Amazon and worth ever penny I spent on the camera. I'm sorry I waited so long to pull the trigger.

fionndruinne
09-28-2007, 08:49 PM
I used my Amazon Prime trial when purchasing my D40 over Amazon as well. Nice, fast free shipping, but one would have to order from the site a lot to justify that $89 charge past the trial period.

cvicisso
09-28-2007, 10:06 PM
I disagree, strongly - why pay $200 more for a boost in megapixels, when it's unnecessary? Heck, that's almost the cost of the 55-200mm VR right there.

Yes, the D40x is a great camera, with really good image quality for a 10MP, but the D40 is such a better value. And the 55-200mm VR is a better option for telephoto than the 18-135mm.I completely agree. The whole point of the D40 being such a great deal, is that... it's a such a GREAT deal! Start cramming unnecessary MP in there (and more $$) and the deal becomes much more ordinary. Plus, (with the D40X) you lose the incredible flash sync speed of the D40 and probably some low-light sensitivity (that last part is just speculation by me - I don't have any references or data to back it up). You ONLY gain MP and a teensy bit higher frame rate with the D40X... yawn...

Gintaras
09-29-2007, 05:34 PM
If my wife were interested in shooting an easy-to-use dslr, and I was considering upgrading my own from a base-level Nikon or Canon to the prosumer model of that brand, I would absolutely positively pass on to her the system I currently have - regardless of how much more 'amateur friendly' the other one is purported as being. At that (intro) level, Nikon=Canon for all practical purposes.

If/when she has issues, who is she going to ask questions of? You're the resident expert on the XTi - so she's got in-house tech support. PLUS, you guys can SHARE LENSES!!! Switching to another brand - and keeping the old one - in the same house just seems like an expensive and counter-productive option to me. Just my $.02.

Give her your XTi and teach her to use it. :cool:

about right BUT not exactly.

1) i am not sure if i need 40D over XTi, i will wait for all reviews and then think twice. currently XTi can do all i want.

2) upgrading to 40D is big cost plus every decent Canon lens starts from 700 and goes to 2000Euros. so as i say think twice before you do it. while D40 plus 18-200 is about 650-700 Euros max.

3) pairing D40 with 18-200VR can be excellent package for a woman who probably will never like the idea of carrying a set of lenses in her bag. and with D40 i will also have the possibility to play around and compare Canon system to Nikon.

4) D40 plus 18-200VR costs a lot less than 40D plus a single decent lens.

5) i completely agree that D40 is a winner over D40x cause it costs 200 euros less while who needs 10mil pixels stuck on a small sensor? i wish my XTi be 8mp which is more than enough unless you want to print large posters. i do not find any advantage of 10mp on my XTi.

6) i could consider Pentax 100D kit for her all for 450 Euros, which is nice DSLR plus IS on board, but i see Nikon and Canon systems still ahead no matter absent in-camere IS.

all in all time will tell if i do this or that. as concerns glass, i believe kit lens can do excellent, i just re-discovered XTi kit lens and it does amazing job for me...AFTER i learnt how to shoot with my DSLR.

cvicisso
09-30-2007, 12:28 PM
Gintaras - well put. I see your point a little more clearly now. I assumed your XTi to 40D upgrade was imminent, but since you're still on the fence and you're relatively certain that your wife will be happy with a one lens setup - the D40 does make for an attractive setup.

I would definitely go in the store and actually put the 18-200 VR on the D40 and let your wife handle it if this is the route you think you're going to go however. While certainly compact relative to other dslr zooms with that kind of range (are there any?), the 18-200 VR is absolutely GINORMOUS when mounted on the diminutive D40. I think ken rockwell has an example pic on his page somewhere - probably on his 18-200 VR review page (a lens which he absolutely worships btw).

Also, since it sounds like you'll be upgrading from the D40 kit lens and leaving the replacement lens on pretty much full time, what happens to the old kit lens? You can't buy a new non-gray-market D40 without at least one kit lens - and since you won't be able to use it on your XTi, part of your purchase price will be collecting dust (and is therefore slightly less of a good deal).

Gintaras
09-30-2007, 03:12 PM
cvicisso, right, my idea is simple and i am sure my wife will not want more lenses... as for kit lens, i think this might be the case, but why not have compact nice lens when you feel like you are not going to carry a longer lens around? i would not bother much about this as kit lens sometimes comes handy.

for instance: i also thought about kit lens when i bought XTi but since a few months i re-discovered this little cheapo and we fell in love... so no matter i plan ordering 10-22 and may be also 70-200L Canon lenses pretty soon this little cheapo will remain with me. and as i never will make money on selling kit lens why not just keep it and have fun???:)

e_dawg
09-30-2007, 03:48 PM
I completely agree. The whole point of the D40 being such a great deal, is that... it's a such a GREAT deal! Start cramming unnecessary MP in there (and more $$) and the deal becomes much more ordinary. Plus, (with the D40X) you lose the incredible flash sync speed of the D40 and probably some low-light sensitivity (that last part is just speculation by me - I don't have any references or data to back it up). You ONLY gain MP and a teensy bit higher frame rate with the D40X... yawn...

Guys, i have no idea what you have against more megapixels. "cramming in unneccessary / useless MP", Only 4 more MP? Only 67% more resolution? That's a big difference. In linear terms, it's 30% more pixels in each dimension. You can crop / enlarge something 30% bigger without a big hit in quality.

If you think of it another way, it's like only having a 200 mm lens with a 6 MP, but with 10 MP, it's like having a 260 mm lens after you crop to the equivalent resolution.

Most of the time you don't need it, but sometimes you do, and it's a sick feeling when you have a once in a lifetime shot and didn't have a long enough lens, and now you can't enlarge it to the desired size because you only had 6 MP to work with. You can't really print 13x19 very well with 6 MP. With 10 MP, you can.

And it's not like you're sacrificing any performance or quality to get the extra resolution. The low noise performance and dynamic range of the D40x is every bit as good as the D40, if not better:

Imatest results on imaging-resource.com and dpreview show the D40x also has higher dynamic range than both the D40 and the D80 -- about 2/3 of a stop more than the D40 and about 1/2 of a stop more than the D80 from 200-800 ISO. In fact, the D40x has the highest DR of any dSLR except for the Fuji S5 Pro.

It's not a big difference, but people pay big bucks to get 2 more stops of DR from the S5 Pro; the D40x gets you a third of the way there (and adds 4 more MP) for $200. How is that not a good value?

fionndruinne
09-30-2007, 03:57 PM
The quality of the lens you stick on a camera means a lot when it comes to cropping. 10MP with a kit lens isn't all that great for heavy cropping.

Sure, it's not bad that the D40x has more MP, but for $200 more? That's the point. It still has less going for it than a D80, and is coming a lot closer to the D80 price point.

As for the dynamic range increase, that's hard to test accurately, really, and I'd have to see more to convince me.

e_dawg
09-30-2007, 04:15 PM
Plus, (with the D40X) you lose the incredible flash sync speed of the D40

To address this reason for this, let's refer to Imaging Resource's D40x review (http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D40X/D40XA5.HTM):



The D40x's x-sync speed for flash use is 1/200 second, down from the D40's 1/500 flash sync speed. What's up? It turns out that the D40, like the D70, D70S, and D50 before it, had a relatively slow mechanical shutter, but "gated" the CCD for its shortest shutter speeds. This means that the CCD itself is actually exposed to incoming light for a longer period of time (perhaps 1/100 - 1/200 second), but the camera manipulates the chip's control voltages to only allow light collection for a much shorter period of time. This makes it easy to produce very brief exposures without the expense of a really high-speed mechanical shutter, and as a consequence also permits very high x-sync speeds. The downside is that large light overloads can cause streaking or smearing in its images. See our discussion of "Shutter Control vs CCD Gating (http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D80/D80A5.HTM#ccdgating)" in our D80 review for more detail on this topic.

[...]

It turns out that the D70's [and D40's] shutter only governs relatively long exposures: Shorter exposures are controlled by "gating" the sensor chip, starting and stopping its light-gathering electronically. This lets you achieve very fast shutter speeds economically, but has the limitation that the sensor's surface is actually exposed to incoming light for a period of time much longer than the exposure itself. Normally, this causes no problems, but as we see above, massive light overloads can bleed charge into the CCD's transfer registers while the image data is being read out. The result is horrible streaking.

In the shots above, the sun itself was directly in the field of view, so it's very much a worst-case example. The same thing can happen with much smaller areas of strong highlight, as would be found with the sun glinting off chrome or some other reflective surface. Very annoying, to say the least.

cvicisso
10-01-2007, 09:10 AM
e_dawg - thankyou for the information about the flash x-sync!

I love this forum because I learn so much here. I recently purchased my D70 (it's still in the shop btw! :mad:), and one of my factors when considering it was the excellent flash sync speed (1/500 - like the D40s). I read a LOT of stuff online before making my purchase, but I guess I somehow missed this very important point. I had no idea that the faster x-sync was achieved by 'gating' the CCD (read: cheating! :p) like that! :eek:

Your x-sync point is solid - thanks again.

The MP issue I think is much more subjective, and up for personal preference (IMHO). I definitely see your point about cropping with a larger pixel count, and again - valid point. There is of course a practical physical limit, but we're obviously not there yet today - we still have some MP to tweak out of the APS sized sensor before we bust the size of the individual photons imposed on us by the laws of physics. As mentioned in the link you posted, the jump from six to ten MP is substantial.

I'm not really sure how to word my feelings on this, but I think fionndruinne said it really well. The D40 is an awesome deal because you get so much for such a small cost. Sure, you can tack on more features (like MP and frame rate), but then you're completely out of that price zone where the D40 rules. Now you're competing with many, many more cameras and it becomes a much more involved decision. As you approach the D80 in price, you really need to think 'is it worth it to give up that screw-drive lens motor in the camera body?' All the competing cameras (same price range, same MP count) have this feature. Some also have built-in IS, weather sealing, faster frame rate, live view, etc...

With the D40 - it's a no brainer. Superb camera (kit) for the absolute best price, and the ability to grow/expand in the future. NO competition. Six megapixels was enough for pros for a long time (a 'long time' in dslr terms that is! :p), so it's definitely good enough for me (for now... the D300 will be mine... some day... some day...).

Anyway - thanks again for the info.

e_dawg
10-01-2007, 10:27 AM
fionndruinne and cvicisso, good points. After all, I upgraded from a D40 to a D80 myself, but I do feel there is a place for the D40x... perhaps it should be $50-70 cheaper to make it a fair comparison from an enthusiast's standpoint. But I think Nikon got it right from a business standpoint, because they know the extra MP is a big deal with mainstream consumers (sometimes for the wrong reasons) and allows them to charge more than they should for the D40x.

e_dawg
10-01-2007, 10:30 AM
With the D40 - it's a no brainer. Superb camera (kit) for the absolute best price, and the ability to grow/expand in the future. NO competition.

I would say the Pentax K100D that comes standard with CCD-shift image stabilization for the same price is decent competition, and the significantly discounted Rebel XT with the 18-55 image stabilized kit lens upgrade is too.

fionndruinne
10-01-2007, 04:07 PM
The Pentax and the XT both have their imperfections (like the sometimes bad AF on the XT). The D40 doesn't really possess any wooden teeth, making it a more satisfying entry-level camera, I think.

sbnr
10-28-2007, 11:11 PM
Get the D50 instead because it can focus with older lenses like the excellent 50mm lenses [1.4 and 1.8], etc.

fionndruinne
10-28-2007, 11:29 PM
But has a smaller and lower-res LCD, smaller viewfinder with less magnification, older processor, poorer high-ISO performance, less battery power, lacks the "beginner-friendly" menu system, is larger and heavier, and doesn't support SDHC cards. In addition to being discontinued and less than easy to find.

Sure it may be a nice camera, but it's a generation behind, when all is said and done. I kind of think the 50mm f/1.8 is the only thing it still has going for it.

phatpat
11-05-2007, 08:56 AM
Sure it may be a nice camera, but it's a generation behind, when all is said and done. I kind of think the 50mm f/1.8 is the only thing it still has going for it.

I went with the D50 over the D40 this spring, and man do I like my 50mm f/1.8. It's not a "minor" plus.

tcadwall
11-05-2007, 11:05 AM
LOL!!!!

u guys DO realize that you brought up a 1 month-old dead topic that we certainly get enough of - without reviving it!!!!

:D

XaiLo
11-05-2007, 01:23 PM
When will this madness end. Will all of the D40 owners who own a 50mm f/1.8 please stand up.

:):confused::p;):D:o:rolleyes::cool::eek::)iiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii... lol and so on.