|
hosh
Oct 12, 2007, 4:44 AM
Post #1 of 17
(4717 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
Is there any good reason not to get the Nikon D40x? I'm not a photographer, but my wife really likes taking pictures. Of everything. I don't know anything about cameras, but have about $1000 to blow on a camera for her for Christmas and I'd rather not buy a piece of crap camera just because it looked nice in the store. I tried to read reviews on-line of different brands, but they're cluttered with technical camera jargon that I don't understand. Thus, I am calling upon my fellow climbers who know a thing or six about cameras and photography, hoping that one of you will lend me some assistance. I can get the D40x with two lenses (I think a 25-55mm and 55mm-200mm?) for about $899. Is that a good deal on a good camera or is it a good deal on a crappy camera or is it a crappy deal on a crappy camera? I just have no way of really knowing...
hosh.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 12, 2007, 5:02 AM
Post #2 of 17
(4705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
THe bottom line, for non specific work there are no bad cameras made in 2005-2007. Every camera on the market can produce a full 2 page photo in the best magazines.
If the price is right and you like the camera it's good. The D40/X is very compact and travelable (not a word in real life). Not sure how much less the 6MP D40 is these days but if it's a bunch lower you might consider it or the D50 as well. Remember the first paragraph!!
Since you don't sound like photographers (yet) a two lens kit should be great.
The only real downside of the D40X is the crippled lens mount. What that means, quite simply, is you can't use legacy glass (used glass that has been produced for the last 4 decades). Some people consider this a downside, but since 90% of all entrly level SLR buyers never buy more than the kit lens(s) this really isn't an issue for you.
|
|
|
|
|
hosh
Oct 12, 2007, 5:40 AM
Post #3 of 17
(4701 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
Please enlighten me. Though I don't know crap about cameras, and have no real intention to get into the whole world of photography, there's a real chance that my wife may develop a real interest. Thus, I'm looking to get a good product and not just a piece of crap that she'll have to replace one day. is $1000 a reasonable budget for a good camera?
hosh.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 12, 2007, 5:58 PM
Post #4 of 17
(4670 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
hosh wrote: Please enlighten me. Though I don't know crap about cameras, and have no real intention to get into the whole world of photography, there's a real chance that my wife may develop a real interest. Thus, I'm looking to get a good product and not just a piece of crap that she'll have to replace one day. is $1000 a reasonable budget for a good camera? hosh.
In theory all cameras will need to be replaced one day. But personally I'm still shooting a 2003 vintage DSLR about 50% of the time. it's slow as a fat man running a 400m dash but it's still got plenty of IQ and is quite a bit smaller than my 2006/07 DSLR.
Good lenses last a while, if not virtually forever with a little TLC.
$1000 is a good budget and the D40X will definitely get her off the ground running.
|
|
|
|
|
hosh
Oct 13, 2007, 5:18 AM
Post #5 of 17
(4649 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
I've got a friend who's a professional photographer (for surfing mostly) and I just realized, Duh, call him! he said that I might as well have already bought the camera. he told me that he's shooting with a D200 right now and is waiting for the D300 to come out, but that for what my wife is looking to do, a D40x will be just fine. If he says so, then I'm as good as sold, he's a pro and knows more about this than I ever will. I respect his opinion as if it's gospel truth when it comes to cameras!
To pico23, thanks all the same for your input!
hosh.
edit to add:
A pic of my buddy and his camera that I found on the internet...
Dang, that's more lens than I'll ever need!
(This post was edited by hosh on Oct 13, 2007, 5:27 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 13, 2007, 5:46 AM
Post #6 of 17
(4642 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Sounds like what I said...yeah, 600mm lenses are needed for surfing.
hosh wrote: I've got a friend who's a professional photographer (for surfing mostly) and I just realized, Duh, call him! he said that I might as well have already bought the camera. he told me that he's shooting with a D200 right now and is waiting for the D300 to come out, but that for what my wife is looking to do, a D40x will be just fine. If he says so, then I'm as good as sold, he's a pro and knows more about this than I ever will. I respect his opinion as if it's gospel truth when it comes to cameras! To pico23, thanks all the same for your input! hosh. edit to add: A pic of my buddy and his camera that I found on the internet... [image]http://surfermag.com/features/onlineexclusives/berniecamera_300.jpg[/image] Dang, that's more lens than I'll ever need! |
|
|
|
|
dobson
Oct 13, 2007, 6:32 AM
Post #7 of 17
(4637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2004
Posts: 104
|
You may also want to consider a high-end compact. You will generally get better images and easier use for the cost.
The downside to the compact is the lack of versatility. With a DSLR, you can purchase many high quality and/or specialized lenses. The DSLR also has better potential image quality, but I would be surprised if the kit lens outperformed a good compact.
In short, if you plan on expanding on your investment by buying lenses (expensive), tripods, and other accessories; get the DSLR. If you simply want a tool to take good photos consider a compact.
|
|
|
|
|
hosh
Oct 13, 2007, 7:42 AM
Post #8 of 17
(4629 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
We've got what I think is a good (enough) compact (Panasonic FX3, 6 megapixles), but I know that my wife is looking to experiment a little more with photography. I love my wife, and she takes great care of me. We're going to Hawaii in November, and it might be nice for her to have as an early Christmas present a reasonably nice camera. We've got the money (at least at the moment) and I think she deserves an upgrade from the compact. Besides, if she gets a nice new camera, maybe she'll let me have the compact (and she may be a little more prone to buy me the ice tools I'm asking for as a Christmas gift!) 
hosh.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 15, 2007, 5:28 AM
Post #9 of 17
(4593 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
hosh, you clearly understand marriage...some of my married and unmarried friends don't get it.
it's not just about being a good bean flicker  , that is...(uh, never mind for another thread)...it's about strategizing long term.
You my friend have figured it out.
hosh wrote: We've got what I think is a good (enough) compact (Panasonic FX3, 6 megapixles), but I know that my wife is looking to experiment a little more with photography. I love my wife, and she takes great care of me. We're going to Hawaii in November, and it might be nice for her to have as an early Christmas present a reasonably nice camera. We've got the money (at least at the moment) and I think she deserves an upgrade from the compact. Besides, if she gets a nice new camera, maybe she'll let me have the compact (and she may be a little more prone to buy me the ice tools I'm asking for as a Christmas gift!) hosh. |
|
|
|
|
hosh
Oct 15, 2007, 6:58 AM
Post #10 of 17
(4581 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
Even if I don't get the ice tools, she's still worth spending the cash for the camera. I'd hate to wake up one day and wonder, "Could I have done something to make my wife happier?" and realize that the answer is "yes." I like staying ahead of the curve. Besides, I love her and it's fun to see her face when she gets gifts that she isn't expecting (she thinks I hate it when she takes pictures, because I've been complaining about it a lot lately...).
hosh.
|
|
|
|
|
jankymutt
Oct 31, 2007, 5:00 PM
Post #11 of 17
(4390 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 16, 2006
Posts: 3
|
Hosh,
I've been heavily researching the D40, D40X and the D80. It seems like if you can afford it, buy the D80. The price has come down a lot (esp. with the anticipation of the release of its successor in the near future).
You get many more features with the D80, the most important being the internal focusing motor. This will allow you to use just about any Nikon lenses. The D40/X do NOT have an internal focusing motor, meaning only the new (read: more expensive) AF-S/AF-I lenses will auto focus on the camera. The older lenses DO work but you have to manually focus them.
It's totally up to you on how important that is and how much it will affect you.
If you're only going to use the kit lens then you will probably be fine with the D40/X. Finally, I think the D40X is not worth the extra $200-300. The few extra features you get would probably be better spent on lenses or accessories.
Hope that helps. 
(This post was edited by jankymutt on Oct 31, 2007, 5:01 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
codhands
Oct 31, 2007, 6:01 PM
Post #12 of 17
(4377 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 21, 2005
Posts: 499
|
Hey man that is a sweet camera, and you can get them at costco with two different lenses as a kit. I was going to get the same thing for us around Christmas but I think if I have the money I'm going to get the Nikon D80, it's a little bigger and heavier but has some different functions that D40x doesn't have. I think the 40x would give you guys plenty of options. One thing about that camera is that you have to actually use the Viewfinder, the LCD on the back doesn't show what what you are going to be taking a picture of like a lot of the point and shoot cameras. Haven't heard from you for a while I hope Juneau's treating you okay. Any exciting climbing news from this summer? You ought to come visit beautiful leavenworth sometime!
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Oct 31, 2007, 10:41 PM
Post #13 of 17
(4360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
I have agree, if you shop around, you can get the D80 for the price range you are looking at. In the long run, the D80 have more lenses availaible.
Don't overlook the Nikon D70 with or without the s. While 6MP seems small, it's plenty and it's a great camera.
|
|
|
|
|
Basta916
Nov 11, 2007, 12:12 PM
Post #15 of 17
(4183 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2007
Posts: 311
|
Hi, Don't know if I'm too late and you have a camera. But if you don't and still looking at D40x I have a suggestion.
Look for a camera with 18-200 vr lens
D40x is great for travel, small, compact, and with 18-200vr ready to shoot anytime and no need for a backpack with lenses
|
|
|
|
|
vegasguy
Nov 11, 2007, 4:16 PM
Post #16 of 17
(4169 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 150
|
I will also vote go with the D40x. I have had mine since it came out and love it dearly. The best selling factor for me was how small and compact it is, it can't be beat when taking pictures at the rocks.
|
|
|
|
|
kevinheiss
Nov 12, 2007, 9:54 PM
Post #17 of 17
(4126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 26, 2004
Posts: 272
|
Unless your wife is interested in getting into photography and learn the basic, I would just stay away from SLR (Nikon D40) since it is bigger and weigh more then point & shoot cameras.
If she really loves and you think she will get more into it over the next years, then for sure get here the D40.
In the end, like someone already said, most camera out there can give you amazing pictures.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
