D40 vs. all the others

[Ruahrc]

Canon introduced the EOS system and lens mount in 1987. It shows no signs of going anywhere - you can bet on L glass being around awhile, and you can bet an L offering bought in 1987 will still perform fantastic on a 2009 body. Nikon, on the other hand, fell right into this situation with the line devotion to DX and then the recent release of FF - incompatibility and poor IQ abounds. Lenses designed for a crop sensor perform poorly on FF.

Any specific examples of "poor IQ abounds"? Last I knew Canon users were buying Nikkor 14-24s and modding them for EF mount because it is so good. Canon makes plenty of lenses (all of them labeled EF-S I believe?) as well which do not cover the full frame. L lenses are not for everyone, and fool is the man who thinks it's his L lenses that are making his pictures good.

Good point - personally though, I find Canon's distinction in their naming convention an awful lot easier to follow. If it's L, it's solid. Take for example, a very popular, very solid lens by Canon:

70-200 F2.8L IS - Or, the Nikon equivalent (I think...)
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED

Uhhhhh. Yeah. I like L. It's pretty simple. Not to say you can't learn the Nikon naming convention, but Canon hasn't fiddled around with their lens lineup like Nikon did. If you buy L, it's going to look good on FF or crop.

You could cut off all the extra tags from the Nikon too and get it about as short. The real code for Canon's lens is EF 70-200 F2.8L IS USM BTW- not that different than Nikon's offering.

I don't really see where the Nikon naming is any more confusing, DX lenses for DX bodies, and FX lenses for FX or DX bodies. Canon has it exactly the same: EF-S lenses for crop bodies, and EF lenses for crop or FF bodies. I do amit though Canon has marketed their lenses well with easily discernible red rings and white barrels. Anyways, I am spending a lot more time shooting than I am looking through the lens catalog (at least I try to keep it that way!).

Despite my opinions on Nikon, I can't argue that one is ultimately better than the other. They're both on the top of the game, you can't really 'go wrong' with one or the other, I just think Canon has the whole experience tightened up more than Nikon does.

That's your opinion and there's no problem with that. I found Nikon's camera to be more intuitive to operate when I picked up my D80. Back then Canon had the edge in high ISO but I still went Nikon because I felt the camera handled much better and more intuitively. My point was that both systems are great and at this point it really is just about what you feel more comfortable with.

Re: "downgrading" to the D40, there really is nothing wrong with it. I used to think having the built in AF motor was a big deal too but when's the last time Canon made a lens that is not USM? Or Nikon releasing a non-AFS lens? I believe the most recent one was the 10.5mm DX fisheye, which is 5 or 6 years old. If you stick to recent releases or future new glass, it's all going to be AFS (or USM) from here on out.

If a shooter does not utilize high burst speeds then what is the point of having it? The imaging chain of the D40 is equal to the higher end bodies of its era- the image quality is the same.

Most importantly, if he feels the D40 is lighter and more usable then it's 100% the right camera to use. There is nothing more useless than the camera you left behind because it was too heavy, or the camera you leave in the bag because you're afraid to pull it out. The D40 in the hand outshoots the D3x in the car/house every time. It's not about the gear it's about the pictures. A good photographer holding an iPhone can shoot a novice holding a D3x into the ground 9 times out of 10.

Ruahrc

 

[Dmac77]

I personally shoot with a D60. I love the camera, and I found that it was much easier to operate the the Canon that I was looking at (I think it was an XSi), for me. The only thing that I dislike about the D60 is that it doesn't autofocus non-AF-S lenses. I would have gotten a D80, but I couldn't force myself to spend that kind of money on my first DSLR, but I got my camera just over a year ago, and the D80 was more expensive then. So you could even look at a used D80. B&H might even have some overstock ones for cheap. It's worth a look.

Also, the D60 does NOT have live view, at least mine doesn't. So take that into consideration.

Basically it comes down to what feels best in your hand, and what it the easiest for you to operate. Go and try them out for yourself.

Lastly, I do want to say that having the anti-dust system is a godsend. I originally had purchased a D40, but it got a really annoying piece of dust on the sensor 1 day after I bought it, I took it back and exchanged it for a D60, and yesterday was the first time that I have noticed any dust in the camera, that wasn't removed by the anti-dust system. But the dust didn't show up in my photos from yesterday, because the D60 is able to detect dust with a reference photo which is a great feature, that Canon's have too.


Don

 

[heesey1010]

Thanks for all the replies!
I went to Best Buy and just fooled around with some of them the other day...I have to say that either company's entry levels are easy to handle and the menu systems are fairly intuitive (although I didn't play with them enough to know that for sure). I've always been a Canon kind of person in the P&S area, although Nikons are good as well, so I'm probably going to be leaning toward one of the Canons.

I've also gone head-first into the camera rumor world now (I used to be all big about macrumors...still am), and I guess it's about that time where Nikon might be releasing the D4000 (an update finally to the D40) and Canon might be releasing the T1.

It's good to know though that either way I go, I won't be disappointed. I just want to make sure I get the biggest bang for my buck ...and with all these deals on XS's/XSi's and even T1i's...it's hard to resist right now haha. Thanks again for the advice.

 

[Ruahrc]

Do keep in mind that digial camera bodies are pretty expendable, so don't fret too much over maximizing your value on the body. Anything you get now will serve fine as you learn photography and when you have advanced enough to want to upgrade all the current stuff will be nearly obsolete anyways.

The lenses, however, hold their value much better as they don't get new versions every year like bodies.

My D80 bought 2 years ago is not worth nearly what I paid for it, but the 18-200 lens that I bought at the same time can be sold used for a significant portion of what I paid. So if it's between buying a slightly worse body but a slightly better lens, or a slightly better body but a slightly worse lens, go for the better lens every time. This probably does nto apply very much to camera kits where body and lens are included as the lens is usually the same, but if you do decide to buy a body and lens separately...

Ruahrc

 

[AlaskaMoose]

I personally shoot with a D60. I love the camera, and I found that it was much easier to operate the the Canon that I was looking at (I think it was an XSi), for me. The only thing that I dislike about the D60 is that it doesn't autofocus non-AF-S lenses. I would have gotten a D80, but I couldn't force myself to spend that kind of money on my first DSLR, but I got my camera just over a year ago, and the D80 was more expensive then. So you could even look at a used D80. B&H might even have some overstock ones for cheap. It's worth a look.

Also, the D60 does NOT have live view, at least mine doesn't. So take that into consideration.

Basically it comes down to what feels best in your hand, and what it the easiest for you to operate. Go and try them out for yourself.

Lastly, I do want to say that having the anti-dust system is a godsend. I originally had purchased a D40, but it got a really annoying piece of dust on the sensor 1 day after I bought it, I took it back and exchanged it for a D60, and yesterday was the first time that I have noticed any dust in the camera, that wasn't removed by the anti-dust system. But the dust didn't show up in my photos from yesterday, because the D60 is able to detect dust with a reference photo which is a great feature, that Canon's have too.


Don

I agree with you. The dust removal system is a very nice feature to have. My 40D has it, which is a good thing because I change lenses often. I learned the habit of turning the camera so the lens points down to the ground, and then turn it ON. This increases the chance of dust falling away from the sensor when the dust shaker by the sensor comes on. I also dust the lens' mount side with a lens brush every now and then, to avoid bringing dust into the camera. When I replace lenses, I point the camera downward.

However, my Rebel XT doesn't have dust removal, so I use a VissibleDust Arctic Butterfly when needed.

 

[neil1980]

Another D60 owner here.

Sensor cleaning seems to work a treat. I shoot a lot of my photos at motorsport events so can get quite dusty but haven't had a spec of dust appear on any picture so far

As someone else mentioned there is no live view on the D60 either but I really dont consider that a negative... If I had it I'd never use it anyway as you can see everything a lot clearer through the viewfinder than on an LCD screen.