Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

D40 vs. D80

No idea, I don't live in the US and at any rate I don't think we're really allowed to discuss prices of things which someone might be looking to sell outside the marketplace.
 
The Rules said:
Selling outside the Marketplace. All threads offering items for sale or trade, asking to buy items, or asking for pricing advice on items to be sold must be posted in the Marketplace forum, which is accessible only to qualified members and subject to additional rules; see the Marketplace Rules for details. Members not eligible for the Marketplace forum may not start threads elsewhere for such purposes.
Click to expand...

Probably because they think it will result in the whole place filling up with ads. I know you're not trying to sell here but it's pricing advice, and they do moderate on this topic. Check ebay past prices, small ads etc.
 
Have you thought about a Fuji S5Pro? I have an S5 and also a D40x which I use as a second body. The S5 has superior colour and also much better dynamic range. Additional advantage is that the lenses are compatible with both cameras :)
 
Mr Ski 73 said:
Have you thought about a Fuji S5Pro? I have an S5 and also a D40x which I use as a second body. The S5 has superior colour and also much better dynamic range. Additional advantage is that the lenses are compatible with both cameras :)
Click to expand...

I've got one too, it is a great camera but the RAW files are immense (around 30mb) and it's fairly slow. I am also not sure that you could find one easily nowadays, it's another camera which is effectively (or genuinely) discontinued.
 
leighonigar said:
I've got one too, it is a great camera but the RAW files are immense (around 30mb) and it's fairly slow. I am also not sure that you could find one easily nowadays, it's another camera which is effectively (or genuinely) discontinued.
Click to expand...

Agree RAW files are big but it is the best way of preserving the fuji colour. I convert to TIFF which is actually even bigger before PP, depends how fussy you are I suppose.
 
Mr Ski 73 said:
Agree RAW files are big but it is the best way of preserving the fuji colour. I convert to TIFF which is actually even bigger before PP, depends how fussy you are I suppose.
Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with preserving fuji colour, they just couldn't figure out how to compress the things, coupled with having two layers of pixels (so 12mp). It has been demonstrated that even lossy compressed RAW files from Nikon cannot be meaningfully distinguished from uncompressed RAW files. As Nikon and Fuji cameras work in the same colour space I thus conclude that we could compress the fuji RAWs and still have the same colour. Indeed, I believe HU3 has such a tool, but the camera just can't do it. It is a deficiency, not a feature.
 
leighonigar said:
It's nothing to do with preserving fuji colour, they just couldn't figure out how to compress the things, coupled with having two layers of pixels (so 12mp). It has been demonstrated that even lossy compressed RAW files from Nikon cannot be meaningfully distinguished from uncompressed RAW files. As Nikon and Fuji cameras work in the same colour space I thus conclude that we could compress the fuji RAWs and still have the same colour. Indeed, I believe HU3 has such a tool, but the camera just can't do it. It is a deficiency, not a feature.
Click to expand...

If you know of a way to compress the RAF file in HU into a format that is smaller than a 69MB TIFF which I can then PP in Photoshop then I would be very interested.
 
Wait a second... don't you have a working D40 and a broken lens? Wouldn't you be better off just buying the 18-55 IS?
 
K-

I loved your response to the guy that has 2 D40s.. ;)


Anyway, if you CAN get $500 for your D40 then sell it NOW... used, they are only going for $275-$325 for the bodies.

I remember being in college and the money thing sucked, but you really need to wait it out. I had lots of stuff I wanted to upgrade during school, but i waited and within a year or two of finishing I had bought everything...

If the D40 works OK for you right now then I say stick with it, order a replacement 18-55 (maybe with VR) and call it a day for now. The only really tangible thing you'll get with the D80 is quicker access to all the settings and controls. That is nice of course, but not worth it in your situation. (right now)

FWIW
 
I doubt very much that you could get more than a couple hundred bucks for your used body-only D40. Before you try to sell it, though, it would be important to have a camera dealer check it over to make sure that it's really that 18-55 lens that has been the problem and not the D40 itself.

The D200 selling at Best Buy is a real deal, definitely worth investigating, as the quality of that camera is excellent. However, that doesn't solve the problem of lenses...... You really need decent lenses, especially with that camera. If it were me I'd hang on to the D40 and buy a couple of good lenses, work with those, learn more about photography, continue saving money and then in a year or so when you know more what you would really need, buy whatever camera is available at that time.
 
Lens it is, then.

I'll bring it to a shop and see about it, usually later on in the quarters I never have time to freelance shoot anyway. I kinda doubt that D200 will still be there by the time I even get the money but, such as life.

Thanks for all the help.

Wait a second... don't you have a working D40 and a broken lens?
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Angle, ANGLE.

Remember the 1.5x crop factor on the D40, therefore, none of those are wide angle zooms. Especially the 80-210, where did that even come from? I would think that these lenses will be worse than the 18-55 that you had, though, clearly the 80-210 is better than the 18-55 in that range.

The ones worth looking at are the Nikon 18-55 you had, the one with IS, the 18-70, to a lesser extent the 18-135, the 18-105 VR, the 16-85 and the 18-200mm. Of those the 18-70 or 18-105 VR are probably a good quality/price mix, though I have not actually tried the 18-105

Tamron, Sigma and Tokina make a bunch of lenses. The 17-70 Sigma is fine (I have one) and there are a number of 18-50mm f/2.8s which are ok to greater or lesser extents. REMEMBER that you need HSM/AF-S/whetever these people call it. I'm sure you can figure out which off brand lenses will work, so I'm not going to actually mention it (not least because I would have to trek through the wilderness of the internet to make sure I was right).
 
Go buy yourself a Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX lens and learn with that. It is inexpensive and will do autofocus on the D40. It will give you a better chance at understanding photography.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
cube said:
No, that has 1 year warranty by whomever.

I understand Adorama is a Nikon authorized dealer, so this should have 1+4 year warranty by Nikon (please check):

http://www.adorama.com/NK1855DX2U.html
Click to expand...

Apologies, I did not see the US warranty version, my point was meant to be simply that you could buy a new one with some kind of warranty for the same money as that craigslist guy was asking, and therefore that that was a bad deal. Thanks for the correction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back