*Close This Please*

[Tumeg101]

I really don't know a lot about Macro lenses. But see these links: Link 1, Link 2, and your best friend: Google.

I think the 18-135 is worth the investment. It has a longer focal length that would let you take some pictures that otherwise you may have trouble taking with the 18-55 lens.

Differences between D40 and D40x:

- The D40x has 10 megapixels
- Lower ISO capability. From 200 (D40) to 100 (D40x)
- Faster continuous shooting rate, from 2.5 fps to 3 fps

- But the D40x has a slower flash sync, of 1/200. Instead of the 1/500 of the D40.

Wow... super helpful, thanks... and how about for my edit of my last post? lol
(About the D80)

 

[66217]

EDIT:
After looking a pictures that the D40 takes... I really see no dif between my sony cybershot point and shoot camera, and these pics...

Strange. Do you have the link to the photos?

The quality of the photos of the D40 and the D80 are if not the same, almost exactly the same.

 

[Tumeg101]

Strange. Do you have the link to the photos?

The quality of the photos of the D40 and the D80 are if not the same, almost exactly the same.

I am just looking at the cameras page on flickr, and going to recent ones... did the same with the D80 just now, and the D80 of course looks better, but I guess not too much dif...
lol sorry for the extra posts >.< I am set on the D40 with 18-135mm, lol
Thanks for alll your help roco!!

EDIT:
Now are there any other extra 'frills' that I may need\want? like... maybe photoshop(I can of course get student discount) or is that not a need, just something extra... what is some cheap\free photo editing software for the PC? Mainly something like light room or iPhoto, with just the minor adjustments

 

[Westside guy]

When looking at sample photos on Flickr, you have to remember that the D40/x shots are going to be done almost exclusively by people who've never owned an SLR before - they're likely to be using the D40 as a point-and-shoot. D80 purchasers are more likely to have been film SLR users (assuming the D80 is their first dSLR).

It's the photographer, not the camera.

 

[66217]

Westside guy said it perfectly: it's the photographer, not the camera. Also, take into account what type of lens they used.

And if I am correct, I think the D40 and the D80 have the same sensor.

See this link. It's interesting.


As for your question. You won't need Photoshop that much, I rarely use it. Most of the time a program like Aperture or Lightroom is enough. As for iPhoto, I think it lacks features.

Do you have a Mac?

 

[Tumeg101]

Westside guy said it perfectly: it's the photographer, not the camera. Also, take into account what type of lens they used.

And if I am correct, I think the D40 and the D80 have the same sensor.

See this link. It's interesting.


As for your question. You won't need Photoshop that much, I rarely use it. Most of the time a program like Aperture or Lightroom is enough. As for iPhoto, I think it lacks features.

Do you have a Mac?

Nope, no mac =\
Was originally going to buy a macbook then wait a year and buy camera... but I want a camera loads more, lol...
I may buy a mac mini, or just keep waiting and get an iMac (low end)

 

[Tumeg101]

How close exactly could I get with the 18-135mm lens? Like... how far could I zoom? I am going to a hockey game at the end of the month, and was thinking about bringing the D40 with 18-135mm lens (I would have to get the 3-5 days shipping ($9 more)) But was wondering if it was even worth it, idk where we will be sitting but I expect up at the top of the stadium... maybe closer, but I was just wondering if I even have a chance of zooming close enough to get any decent shots...
It is a LA Kinds Hockey game btw...

 

[Mechcozmo]

How close exactly could I get with the 18-135mm lens? Like... how far could I zoom? I am going to a hockey game at the end of the month, and was thinking about bringing the D40 with 18-135mm lens (I would have to get the 3-5 days shipping ($9 more)) But was wondering if it was even worth it, idk where we will be sitting but I expect up at the top of the stadium... maybe closer, but I was just wondering if I even have a chance of zooming close enough to get any decent shots...
It is a LA Kinds Hockey game btw...

It'll probably be pretty dark. That lens won't be fast enough. 135mm is, on the Nikon body, about 200mm which is roughly 4x what your eye sees (assuming I'm doing the math right-- anyone?). That's okay as telephotos go.

Before you jump onto the Nikon boat... a final suggestion.

Pentax K100D -- $600 (including 18-55mm lens)
This body also has built-in shake reduction, which is _very_ nice to have. Any lens can be made into a stabilized lens, and any Pentax K-mount lens (basically, any lens made since ~1970) will mount and work on this camera.
50-200mm lens -- $250 (comes to 75-300 with crop)

That's $850. Ultra II SD cards are about $20, and a camera bag varies from $20 to $80.

My friend has that exact same setup and takes some amazing pictures. Here's his flickr page: Linkety

 

[Tumeg101]

thanks for the suggestion, but I think im sticken with nikon =\

And what is a good telephoto lens that could work for the hockey game, and some baseball games? Nothing too expensive...
I was looking at the 55-200mm f/4-5.6g... I am geussing that might be too slow to shoot in the dark?? Is this a decent lens? I might just get the lower standard kit lens, and then buy this one...
Or the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6g... this one is more powerful, and has vibration reduction... How about the D40, 18-55mm Kit Lens, and then this... would that be a decent setup? And could this lens be used for macro?

 

[Blue Velvet]

Closed after request from OP.