Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 16, 2006, 2:46 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 111
Default

Can you please give me the pros and cons relative to the two cameras above. Including setting up the D40 to the same zoom range of the S3 with a Tele adapter.

Changeling

Changeling is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 17, 2006, 12:16 AM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 42
Default

Difference between the two cameras has a lot to do with price, convenience and versatility. It has very little to do with image quality. I am assuming that price matters, because nobody NOT on a tight budget would buy the D40. If you had $2000 to spend, you'd be able to buy a much better camera. So I'll keep price constraints front and center here.

Shop smart and you can get the Canon PowerShot S3 for $350. Comes with outstanding macro, midrange and zooom. The built-in 12x lens is said to be the 35mm equivalent of a 432mm zoon lens - pretty good equipment for even a serious amateur. And for a small price (currently $100 from Amazon) you can add Canon's excellent 1.5x converter lens, which would take the effective strength of the camera up to 648mm! For all this, you've spent under $500. And you'll be able to take pictures whose quality rivals that of cameras costing five times as much.

I assume that the Nikon D40, when it appears, will be released like the D50, with an 18-55mm kit lens and that the package will sell for close to $600 (street price, not list). You'll spend $200 more at least for a lens that will zoom to 200mm or 300mm - still way less powerful than the S3's built-in zoom. NOTE that the lens you'll get for this price will be a good one, but it won't be BETTER than the lens in the S3. Lens technology has improved a great deal. Dslr lenses are big because they have always been; but they aren't better just because they're bigger, not these days, and certainly not in the under $1000-for-a-total-package category. So you've now spent $800 or more on a camera that's less convenient to carry about, less powerful and far less versatile than the Canon S3 that you got for less than half the price.

If you're going to get TWO cameras and you have less than $2000 to spend, then these two would be great choices. If you're going to get one, and you're not sure - then go with the S3. It is not more a toy than the D40, in fact, perhaps less of a toy, inasmuch as the Nikon is very much a "starter camera" while the Canon S3 is at the top of its class - a class that rivals and in most respects equals or surpasses the low-end dslrs.

Lot of psychology here, though. A lot of people HAVE to buy a dslr, they just do, to prove to themselves that they're "serious," perhaps in the same way that people who are weekend cyclists feel the need to spend $1000 on a bike (when a $500 bike would do them just as well). I am not mocking or scorning here. I already have an S3 myself, and now I'm agonizing over whether to buy a Pentax K100D.

Good luck with your choice.

WP
Dallas
Polytrope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 4:37 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

You might not see a difference in image quality in bright daylight, or other good light. But otherwise, image quality differences can be quite noticeable in some situations. Most of the differences are due to a much larger image sensor in the DSLR.

The D40 at ISO 1600, for example, will look as good as the S3 at ISO 400. If you want to shoot in low light without a flash, or shoot with a fast shutter to stop action, that can help.

The larger sensor needs larger lenses to get the same field of view (meaning same image size) , so that does increase the cost. Another impact of the larger lenses, with longer focal lengths, is a narrower depth of field. Which makes it possible on the DSLR to take portraits, for example, with the subject in focus but the background blurred.

List price on the D40 with kit lens will be $599. A decent 70-300 lens can be purchased for under $200, bringing you to a 450mm equivalent focal length (EFL). While it might not be advisable to add a teleconverter to that, it might be possible to extend that to a 630mm effective length (with only manual focus capabilities). For a better quality long telephoto zoom, you might instead spend $800 on a 135-400 zoom which would have a 35mm EFL of 202-600mm.

In general, you would consider the DSLT if you desire some of it's capabilities not available in the less expensive camera, such as for higher quality sports shooting, or professional quality portraiture.

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 5:58 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

The Nikon D40 wins hands down in my book. Much larger CCD, much better high ISO performance, much better image quality compared to those smudgy P&S images with excessive N.R. EVEN at ISO 200. The Nikon D40 have much better things than the S3.

The Nikon D40 is also CHEAP, that makes it trash the S3 even more. In the first place, the Nikon D40 shouldn't be comparing to the S3. (Funny that it should) It shouldAT LEASTbe comparing to an R1.

Comparing to dSLR cameras, I can get the Nikon D40 and spend the difference on a darn good glass that would blow all the 10 M.P. dSLR camera kitsin image quality and high ISO performance. Don't talk about an S3.
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 6:59 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:

hello how many of the digital camera you want to buy awaiting your reply thanks

Please, no thread jacking. (Start a new thread if you have something to say)
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 7:41 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Which country "NIKON" cooperation are you from?
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 8:03 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Trust me, those posts are not from Nikon. Nikon doesn't spam forums, and if they did they would certainly use corrct spelling and grammer. This is some knucklehead spamming the forums and hopefully the posts will be removed by the mods soon.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 8:05 AM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I just noticed them. I'll remove them now. It's a Spammer ignoring our rules about no commercial posts in the forums.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 8:16 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:

Trust me, those posts are not from Nikon. Nikon doesn't spam forums, and if they did they would certainly use corrct spelling and grammer. This is some knucklehead spamming the forums and hopefully the posts will be removed by the mods soon.

Oh dear, I should have known that...I believe that sometimes Canon, Nikon, Sony, and (or) other manufacturer personals visitthe forums often, to check on the people's reactionto-wards their new products, &the competitionsetc...(To think that I was aboutto send him/her a P.M. regarding the Nikon cameras & lenses. :shock

Anyway to be back on the topic, I already said that the Nikon D40 is no comparison to the Canon S3 I.S.; butif you want to compare them, then the Nikon D40 will win hands down! Regarding price, the Nikon D40 still wins IMO UNLESS you think the zoom of the S3 I.S. is essential for you.

The superb high ISO performance of the Nikon D40 will win the I.S. on the S3 anytime.

This is my take on the comparisons.
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2006, 9:16 AM   #10
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Changeling,

A lot depends on what you want to use the camera for. There is simply no debate that te D40 will win in every photographic comparison between the two cameras. But, it's also a cost-benefit thing. Will you use the added features the D40 provides? Will you buy the necessary lenses and accessories? Are you OK with lugging around extra lenses and flashes?

Ken's advice is right on the money. But, I'm curious whyyou want 600mm in focal length. This isimportant because what you want to shoot may require other capabilities beyond focal length. Want to shoot sports? No way the Canon is really going tocut it for serious sports work.Wildlife? No way you're going to get sharp images with the S3 and TC - BUT, to get those sharp images with a DSLR you need better quality lenses - which means more money. The point I'm making here is that you can't use tunnel vision when determining what the right tool for the job is. You have to find out what the right tool is FIRST then find a camera that meets those goals.Sometimes, those goals can be met with a $200 4mp digicam. Sometimes with a superzoom. But sometimes, a given goal can only be metby spending very large sums of money on a DSLR and the RIGHT lens and accessories.

So, which of these cameras is right for you depends on what your goals are.


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:00 PM.