Nikon D40 an lack of autofocus
Discussion
Hi guys,
In my quest for a new camera I stumbled upon a deal in CostCo for a Nikon D40 + 18-55 kit lens for about £350 inc VAT. Seems pretty good to me.
I've just read some reviews though and apparently this camera doesn't have a built in autofocus motor so (for autofocus) I would be restricted only to motorised lenses. Could anyone tell me how much of a 'problem' that may be? Is the kit lens good for autofocus?
Ultimately, I don't want to spend a fortune on extra kit and nor do I want to be carrying tons of stuff around. A reasonable zoom ability would be nice and so is the ability to take macro shots. Can I get away with the kit lens for macros (and general use) and get an extra telephoto lens? Also how easy is it to change lenses and not get the sensor dirty?
Sorry for all the questions! This SLR business is all quite new to me. I love the quality of SLR's... and the convenience of compacts!
In my quest for a new camera I stumbled upon a deal in CostCo for a Nikon D40 + 18-55 kit lens for about £350 inc VAT. Seems pretty good to me.
I've just read some reviews though and apparently this camera doesn't have a built in autofocus motor so (for autofocus) I would be restricted only to motorised lenses. Could anyone tell me how much of a 'problem' that may be? Is the kit lens good for autofocus?
Ultimately, I don't want to spend a fortune on extra kit and nor do I want to be carrying tons of stuff around. A reasonable zoom ability would be nice and so is the ability to take macro shots. Can I get away with the kit lens for macros (and general use) and get an extra telephoto lens? Also how easy is it to change lenses and not get the sensor dirty?
Sorry for all the questions! This SLR business is all quite new to me. I love the quality of SLR's... and the convenience of compacts!
Kit lens will be have fast accurate autofocus, by virtue of the fact it's AF-S.
The only problem with the D40 is that if you want to extend your lens collection you are limited as you say to those with an on board motor.
Problem is, these are always a fair bit more expensive, which since the D40 is a budget camera never really made sense to me. There are some cracking lenses you will miss out on by not having an AF motor, such as the 50mm f/1.8 and the 80-400VR to name but two.
The only problem with the D40 is that if you want to extend your lens collection you are limited as you say to those with an on board motor.
Problem is, these are always a fair bit more expensive, which since the D40 is a budget camera never really made sense to me. There are some cracking lenses you will miss out on by not having an AF motor, such as the 50mm f/1.8 and the 80-400VR to name but two.
Don't do it. Anything you save on the body you'll lose by having to be limited to a smaller range of more expensive lenses. If you're in the market for a cheap DSLR the Pentax K100d is now available for that sort of price and is a superb choice. (I'm biased - I chose one over the equivalent EOS. Not familiar with the Nikons though.)
_dobbo_ said:
Kit lens will be have fast accurate autofocus, by virtue of the fact it's AF-S.
The only problem with the D40 is that if you want to extend your lens collection you are limited as you say to those with an on board motor.
Problem is, these are always a fair bit more expensive, which since the D40 is a budget camera never really made sense to me. There are some cracking lenses you will miss out on by not having an AF motor, such as the 50mm f/1.8 and the 80-400VR to name but two.
The only problem with the D40 is that if you want to extend your lens collection you are limited as you say to those with an on board motor.
Problem is, these are always a fair bit more expensive, which since the D40 is a budget camera never really made sense to me. There are some cracking lenses you will miss out on by not having an AF motor, such as the 50mm f/1.8 and the 80-400VR to name but two.
I've been looking into buying a D40 as well. The way I see it is that the above is true, for now. The fact Nikon has released their cheapest body without a focus motor seems (to me) to be a clear indication that they will be going with AF-S on all of their lenses in future, including their cheaper ones.
I could be entirely wrong with that assessment of course...
uberscruff said:
The fact Nikon has released their cheapest body without a focus motor seems (to me) to be a clear indication that they will be going with AF-S on all of their lenses in future, including their cheaper ones.
I could be entirely wrong with that assessment of course...
I could be entirely wrong with that assessment of course...
I hope you are right, an 80-400VR with AF-S and second generation VR at a similar price point to the existing one would see me melting my credit card in a hurry. Think I'm hoping for a bit much though...
uberscruff said:
_dobbo_ said:
Kit lens will be have fast accurate autofocus, by virtue of the fact it's AF-S.
The only problem with the D40 is that if you want to extend your lens collection you are limited as you say to those with an on board motor.
Problem is, these are always a fair bit more expensive, which since the D40 is a budget camera never really made sense to me. There are some cracking lenses you will miss out on by not having an AF motor, such as the 50mm f/1.8 and the 80-400VR to name but two.
The only problem with the D40 is that if you want to extend your lens collection you are limited as you say to those with an on board motor.
Problem is, these are always a fair bit more expensive, which since the D40 is a budget camera never really made sense to me. There are some cracking lenses you will miss out on by not having an AF motor, such as the 50mm f/1.8 and the 80-400VR to name but two.
I've been looking into buying a D40 as well. The way I see it is that the above is true, for now. The fact Nikon has released their cheapest body without a focus motor seems (to me) to be a clear indication that they will be going with AF-S on all of their lenses in future, including their cheaper ones.
I could be entirely wrong with that assessment of course...
If you are right about Nikon going all AF-S lenses in the future: I would guess that even the cheaper lenses with autofocus motors will still be more expensive than the same lens without a motor.
I have checked around on some other forums and the general consensus is the same as here: the D40 may be cheaper in the short term, but the limited and expensive lens upgrades will make it more expensive in the long term.
I'm considering a Pentax K100D now - that has auto focus and built in shake reduction (I don't have the steadiest hands!).
DJ_AS said:
If you are right about Nikon going all AF-S lenses in the future: I would guess that even the cheaper lenses with autofocus motors will still be more expensive than the same lens without a motor.
I have checked around on some other forums and the general consensus is the same as here: the D40 may be cheaper in the short term, but the limited and expensive lens upgrades will make it more expensive in the long term.
I'm considering a Pentax K100D now - that has auto focus and built in shake reduction (I don't have the steadiest hands!).
I don't have a great deal of faith in my prediction, which is why I'm considering the pentax too...
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff