Anyone bought a Nikon D40?

[sebo]

The search function is currently not working so apologies if this is a repost.

I am looking at purchasing my first D-SLR and am thinking that the D40 may be a reasonable option.

Based on it's current price (£279.99 if you include the £60 cashback available) and it's features it seems a worthy contender.

I had a 35mm SlR - the Canon EOS 500 for around a year and enjoyed the flexibility of the fully-manual SLR but I now want to move over to digital. I no longer have the camera so I will be starting afresh.

So... anyone just bought the D40 - used it and have any feedback?

I have read a number of reviews on DP Review.com and Camerlab.com as well as some video reviews to get a decent feel for the camera.

Before I venture in-store to see what it offers in the flesh, does anyone have any feedback on it or recommend an alternative camera (based on features and value for money)

Sebo

[DavidY]

Two very nearly new ones here, not mine!

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread...

davidy

[Zad]

The big drawback to the D40 is that it can only use a fairly small range of lenses, those with integrated AF motors.

[sebo]

Zad said:

The big drawback to the D40 is that it can only use a fairly small range of lenses, those with integrated AF motors.

As you rightly say, a downside and one that has been reflected in the reviews I have read..

Suggestions as to alternative cameras... both new and second hand?

(PS havent reviewed the links in the previous email as need to sign up - will do this eve)

Seb

[iamlofi]

Zad said:

The big drawback to the D40 is that it can only use a fairly small range of lenses, those with integrated AF motors.

Nikon underestimated the popularity of this cam when they first released and dident make enough glass for it.

I belive there are some new lenses from Nikon and sigma coming out very soon

[Fordo]

Hi there- i've just bought a D40. With Nikon's £60 cash back, and a further 20% money off voucher from jessops, i found it a deal too good to miss.

The lack of motor drive in the camera body doesnt really bother me. It makes the body nice and compact, and to be honest, I dont ever see myselkf getting a lot of lenses. It does mean, if you want autofocus, you are limited in the lenses you can get, but again, that doesnt bother me too much either- i prefer manually focusing 90% of the time.

I've found it an excellent camera for the money. Including the cash back, theres no other dslr that comes with a prroper regarable li-ion battery and charger. Its also extremely quick from start up (something like 0.3 sec or something), and no noicable shutter lag either

If your spending a bit more, its probably not worth getting the d40x (which is pretty much the same as the D40, but has a 10 megapixel ccd).
At the price of the d40x, you can probably get other cameras with more features, but i think the cheaper d40, which cashback, offers great value for money.

hope that helps

Edited by Fordo on Sunday 26th August 21:43

[Brink]

Forget Nikon.

Get a Canon 400D.

[RobDickinson]

D40 is cheap. Thats about all that can be said for it (in the dSLR world).

It does produce good images, well they all do...

It lacks resolution, the drive motor, DoF preview, a whole lot of AF points (but your likely Manualy focusing anyhow heh), no braketing , no verticle grip, slow shooting etc etc.

The biggest issue is the lack of body motor, canon hasnt had one on EF so all the cheap sigmas etc come with basic motors, not so (for now) for Nikon, Nikons own lenses with motors are IMO at the upper end of consumer prices, the lenses you'd expect to use with a cheap dSLR ar manual focus.

Oh and an almost total lack of primes. And want a macro with AF, then its a lot of cash for the (very good) Nikkon.

If you want AF (and IMO your likely use it most of the time) then you'll end up spending more on one or two additional lenses than it'd cost to buy a decent body anyhow.

[iamlofi]

If you have a issue with the lenses that are compatible with the D40 here is a list of current ones that will work. And as i said before more are comming out very shortly

Nikon
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S VR Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8D IF-ED II
AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4D IF-ED II
AF-S VR Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED
AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D IF-ED
AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4D IF-ED II

AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II
AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II
AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E II

Sigma
12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM
17-35mm F2.8-4 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM
APO 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG HSM
APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM
APO 100-300mm F4 EX DG HSM
APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM
APO 300-800 F5.6 EX DG HSM
APO MACRO 150mm F2.8 EX DG HSM
APO MACRO 180mm F3.5 EX DG IF HSM
10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM
APO 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC HSM
30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
APO 800mm f5.6 EX DG HSM
APO 500mm F4.5 EX DG/HSM
APO 300mm F2.8 EX DG/HSM
80-400mm f4.5-5.6 EX DG OS

[uberscruff]

RobDickinson said:

D40 is cheap. Thats about all that can be said for it (in the dSLR world).

It does produce good images, well they all do...

It lacks resolution, the drive motor, DoF preview, a whole lot of AF points (but your likely Manualy focusing anyhow heh), no braketing , no verticle grip, slow shooting etc etc.

The biggest issue is the lack of body motor, canon hasnt had one on EF so all the cheap sigmas etc come with basic motors, not so (for now) for Nikon, Nikons own lenses with motors are IMO at the upper end of consumer prices, the lenses you'd expect to use with a cheap dSLR ar manual focus.

Oh and an almost total lack of primes. And want a macro with AF, then its a lot of cash for the (very good) Nikkon.

If you want AF (and IMO your likely use it most of the time) then you'll end up spending more on one or two additional lenses than it'd cost to buy a decent body anyhow.

And yet despite all of these drawbacks, it still manages to be a very good, usable camera. Obviously not recommended for gadget junkies or very serious photographers, but it has everything you need to take a good photo. Having said that, I wouldn't mind if you could get one or two AF primes for it.

[gizmo.mp3]

I'm looking to get a DSLR soon too (finally). FWIW I think 6.0 MP just isn't enough on a DSLR, it gives you very little room to move regarding crops etc before you start being unable to print at a decent size (not that I print stuff very often, but that's not the point).

If I went out and bought one tmrw it'd be a D40x and a Tamron/Sigma 18-200 lens (plus a manual shutter release for long-exposure goodness) - nicer to hold and a few better features than the 400D (IMO of course). Although I keep being tempted to go up a level and get a 40D or a D200...

[Fordo]

6 mp is easily enough. i descided when i was buying a camera, not to fall into the megapixel trap. If you have to crop, then you havent taken your photo properly

seriously though, for the price, its an awesome camera. I couldnt really justify spending any more on a camera. Wish i could, more resolution and features would be great.

But, as a first dslr, at that price, i dont think it can be beat. the piece of glass on the front is way more important than how many megapixels it has (in my opinion).

[VxDuncan]

gizmo.mp3 said:

I'm looking to get a DSLR soon too (finally). FWIW I think 6.0 MP just isn't enough on a DSLR, it gives you very little room to move regarding crops etc before you start being unable to print at a decent size (not that I print stuff very often, but that's not the point).

If I went out and bought one tmrw it'd be a D40x and a Tamron/Sigma 18-200 lens (plus a manual shutter release for long-exposure goodness) - nicer to hold and a few better features than the 400D (IMO of course). Although I keep being tempted to go up a level and get a 40D or a D200...

...and there in lies the problem. You can't use a tamron or sigma 18-200 lens on the D40 or D40x as it's doesn't have an AF motor. Of cousres there's the Nikon 18-200VR but that's a lot more than the camera. The Entry level Nikon is the D80 if you want to buy lenses at sensible prices in the future.

[Piglet]

A friend of mine is looking at one as her first DSLR, she's got bog all money to spend and really only wants something to run in an auto mode to take photos of her kids. She's bought compact after compact and finds the shutter delay irritating given that she's got three young energetic boys to photograph!

For her the D40 with the standard lens on it is perfect. She's unlikely to want to put "specialist" type lenses on it and the AF issue isn't really a problem for her.

It's cheap enough at the moment that she can afford to buy it, play with it for a couple of years and then, if she gets the bug, trade up to something else whilst leaving the D40 for the kids to learn on.

I think it very much depends on each person's needs...

[Mad Dave]

Two friends of mine have bought the D40 and use it solely on auto mode - it produces very impressive images and the metering is very good. Unless you have aspirations of becoming a pro photographer then it appears to be a good camera at a very reasonable price - it's compact camera money for an SLR!

[Liveaxlebladder]

I've had my D40 for a couple of months now and I'm really pleased with it, It was first digital camera having made the jump from a film SLR which I didn't seem to hardly ever use anymore, I'm now taking photos again...alot! It's compact, light and handles well and despite the lack of pixels gives damm good results. The issue regarding lack of available lenses won't matter to me as I shall probably only ever get a 55-200 to suppliment the kit 18-55.
To sum it's great entry level DSLR at a cracking price.

[Legend83]

What about the Pentax K100D? I am looking to get my first SLR and this has had excellent reviews and appears a bargain at Jessops for £299 including 55mm lens.

[Cuban]

I have the D40 and have been totally delighted with it.

I am sure it depends on personal preference AND the levels you hope to or are
capable of achieving. but I was concerned about making the jump to a DSLR and the
D40 has made the process very easy and most enjoyable.

I don't think the lack of lenses (at this time) will cause me any issues. I have
the AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED and 55-200mm f/4-5.6 AFS G lenses
and they cover all I need at this time.

I've taken around 2000 images so far and while I am very much an amateur, I am
enjoying the learning curve and my images can be found below if you want to check
some out (it states which camera the image was taken with)

I've many more from my travels in the last month or so to add (this weekend I
hope), so do keep an eye for updates on www.aauk.biz/cuban

[pmacFTO]

I started off with a D50 a year ago and love it - the D40 is a wee bit limited for my liking and it depends on how much control you want.

The other option is picking up a s/h D70s but it is a bit older now altho very capable.

Lenses are the thing that can really make the difference tho - the "glass" is possibly more important than the body you put it on IMHO - I have spent a fair bit on better lenses and really noticed a marked improvement in my pics.

DSLR's are fun whichever one you get really - go to a shop and hold them all - that can be a big deciding factor too...

Check the biggest site on the web for photo stuff - www.dpreview.com They have separate forums for all the different brands/models of DSLRs

[heelantoe]

iamlofi said:

Zad said:

The big drawback to the D40 is that it can only use a fairly small range of lenses, those with integrated AF motors.

Nikon underestimated the popularity of this cam when they first released and dident make enough glass for it.

I belive there are some new lenses from Nikon and sigma coming out very soon

To be honest this is not really an issue if you haven't already got older Nikkor lenses. All the current DX lenses (designed especially for digital sensors) are AF-S and all the new lenses that come out have this too.
Only some of the older design zoom lenses and the fixed prime lenses don't have an AF-S motor.

If your thinking of the D40 it really is a great camera for the money and the £60 off just makes it even better ;-)