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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 13, 2007, 4:59 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5
Default

Hi all again,

What is the difference between Nikon D40 and Nikon D40x?

Is D40x 's resolution 10.2 meg?

Price for40D is ~ 599 compared to759 for40Dx. If D40x 's resolution is truly 10.2 meg, I think it does bang for the buck.

How about a combination of D40X with Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR II?

Should the picture be similar to D200 with the same lense? Since both have the same resolution...

What is your opinion?

Sincerely thanks for your opinion!

Long
longhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 13, 2007, 6:39 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
ecap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 259
Default

problem with d40's is that there is no af motor. you have to buy a lens with af motor in the lens so that reduces lensupgrades to very few lenses and hardly any third party lenses.
ecap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2007, 9:28 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 48
Default

i'd alsobe interested to hear some opinions on this matter. the only one that i've really seen so far come ken rockwell - who says the 6mp to 10mp is insignificant. i understand that the overwhelming factor in getting good pictures is knowing how to use the camera, but... will the 10 mp look better (especially when printing very large pictures)?? Is the difference significant/insignificant/nonexistent?
culveric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2007, 3:28 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 92
Default

I use a 6MP DSLR (a KM 5D) which has always seemed to have plenty of detail in it's images for me. I haven't compared it to a 10MP DSLR but I would not have thought that for normal use that the difference would be significant, except when cropping significantly or creating large prints. You also have to factor the lens into the resolution equation. A good high resolution lens on the 6MP camera may out resolve the 10MP camera with a low resolution lens.

Where the 6MP DSLR wins hands down is in image noise. The 6MP sensor used in these cameras is an excellent performer, with little in the way of noticeable noise untl iso800+ and even then it is low. The 10MP sensor used definitely has a lot more noise at high iso and doesn't even bother going to iso3200 becuse of that (unlike the 6MP cameras).

The comment about the D40's not being able to use lenses unless they are equipped with an in-lens motor is very relevant, unless you only intend to buy new lenses. You miss out on a vast number of older lenses from second hand sources that are cheap and usually very good performers.

I would look at something like the Pentax K100D if going for a 6MP camera or the Sony A100 for 10MP or perhaps Pentax K10D.
Ikki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2007, 4:28 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

On the 6 vs 10 topic - I own both the PentaxK10 (10 mp)and the K100 (6 mp). It all depends on what you do with your camera and pictures as to whether the extra mp are important or not. I've printed 8 x 10 pictures from the K100 that are excellent, so if your main purpose is to print that size or smaller, I don't think you gain much by going with 10 mp. To back that up with a rather extreme example, I posted some full frame pictures taken with the two cameras and resized to fit here. I can't tell without looking at the exif data which is which. You can see a difference with the 100% crops, but it isn't as much of a difference as you might think. I've never actually tried to print bigger than 8 x 10, so don't know the point where the 10 mp will give you an advantage.

If the Pentax cameras are any example, the 10 mp sensor is noisier than the 6 mp one. The noise can be dealt with reasonably well with software, but you do lose detail - think that's the compromise for getting 10 mp. For many people, that's not worth giving up.

I'd be interested in seeing sample photos of the D40X vs. the D40. There may be other "intangeables" between the two cameras - auto white balance, jpg processing, etc. However, the pictures I've seen from the D40 are excellent and I wonder if the D40X would offer anything other than the extra mp. If that's the only difference, I'd stick with the D40, unless you are shooting wildlife, simply because that 6 mp sensor is very good in lower light. It's probably just me, but I don't "get" the D40X at all, while the D40 makes sense to me.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2007, 5:12 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

Ikki and Mtngal make very good points.

I think it really all boils down to this: the D40x, for $759, is a stripped down, very basic camera which has no AF motor and therefore only a few lenses available, while the Canon XTI has no such limitations and is available for around the same amount, assuming $759 includes a kit lens on the Nikon. The Sony Alpha, also around the same cost, adds built-in shake reduction and dust removal. The D40x has to be one of the worst deals out there.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 7, 2007, 2:36 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10
Default

I'm not any kind of expert, but calling a D40 or D40x a camera you could outgrow is, IMHO not accurate. I think a lot of Ken Rockwell's opinions and he makes it clear that the Nikon D40 is not a toy. The D40x, he feels, isn't worth the extra bucks, as 10 megapixles isn't a big advantage over 6. I just picked up a D40 and the pitures are fantastic! Ken feels that the D40 is actually a better camera than the D80. It has the Same CCD and engine as the D80! Also, the kit lens with the Nikon (18-55mm) is superior to the XTI kit lens. As I have seen stated many times before, if you are just starting out, the AF-S lenses are not an issue. Also, there are more lens choices on the way.

I paid $544.00 for my camera and with next day shipping the total was $ 566.88. That's the best deal out there. I made my purchase through Amazon.com. My son also recently bought his first DSLR, a Nikon D80. He made his choice based upon the fit. His hands are larger than mine and he found the D40 to be too small for him. This may be a consideration when choosing a camera.
This is a photo of my grandson taken with my D40.:|
Attached Images
 
ansdguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 7, 2007, 4:59 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 92
Default

Ken is entertaining, but I don't take him too seriously.

Sure the D40 will take great photos but it is feature poor compared with many other cameras and won't take older lenses, not that Ken is bothered as I am sure that he has all the new type lenses that he needs. The same argument applies to it's 10MP sibling the D40X except that it comes with more resolution (on very good lenses) and more noise. They also do not have exposure or white balance bracketing or depth of field prieview.

They are great if you want to take higher quality images than a p&s can provide but as a camera to grow into, they are lacking the neccessary feature set and adjustability options.

I would argue that saving a few pounds and getting a feature reduced camera is not worth doing when you consider that it is a major purchase that will hopefully last you a long time. Those missing features may become irritating as you become more experienced as will the need to buy new lenses rather than benefit from the second hand market. Have a look at other DSLR's as well. Remember that some other entry level DSLR's are lacking features like the Canon EOS350D/400D has no spot metering. The next level of cameras is not a great deal more and come with all the missing features and adjustability.

Lastly, having in camera stabilisation is well worth paying a little more for, it's not a universal panacea for camera shake but it helps a lot. Check out the Sony A100, Pentax K100D & K10D, Samsung GX10, Olympus E510 (to be released soon).
Ikki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 7, 2007, 5:31 PM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Ikki wrote:
Quote:
Ken is entertaining, but I don't take him too seriously.

Sure the D40 will take great photos but it is feature poor compared with many other cameras and won't take older lenses, not that Ken is bothered as I am sure that he has all the new type lenses that he needs. The same argument applies to it's 10MP sibling the D40X except that it comes with more resolution (on very good lenses) and more noise. They also do not have exposure or white balance bracketing or depth of field prieview.
They also have stripped focus performance vs. even the D50.

The d40x is a great bit of comedic value. See how many people are willing to pay for the pipe dream that more MP = the holy grail. When people shooting with 6mp cameras with full feature sets are, in fact, better off.

If you like Nikon, buy the older D50 if you can - it's a better camera. Otherwise save for the D80.

But virtually every other entry level DSLR is a much better buy than either D40.

It is, as I've stated before, penny wise and pound foolish to buy the D40.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 7, 2007, 7:39 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 200
Default

I fully agree with you, andsguy - the D40 is the best deal at the moment, although Canon are being competitive with the 350D. The people who darn the camera seem to have a bias towards other brands. I have done a lot of research and read countless reviews, user opinions, and forum posts on this and the dpreview fourm, and eventually made the same choice as you with the D40.

Having first decided on the lenses I might need, the D40 was the best choice as my first DSLR. Either Nikon or Sigma provided suitable lenses at a reasonable cost. I did look at the D80 but it was too big and the D40 had more than enough features for my needs. As Ikki pointed out, all entry level products will be feature limited in order to differentiate the higher level products. An example is the lack of exposure bracketing on the D40. I have had this feature on two previous cameras and only used it for the initial evaluation purposes. My first compact even had WB and focus bracketing!I use spot metering on my H5 + TC a lot for bird images so this was an important feature. I accept that you cannot anticipate all your feature needs, but it is foolish to pay for bells and whistles if you don't use them.
1eyedeer 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 3:14 AM.