Help: D40, D60 Or D80

[numbercharm]

Im already decided to buy DSLR this week but i cannot make a decision of which one will i buy......D40, D60 or D80....I wanted to buy NIKON D80 but it would still take me a month or two to buy it.....NEW YEAR CELEBRATION is coming so i wpould like to capture the moment with a new DSLR ehhehehehehehehehehehe....and my bro is getting married this january as well..........haayyyyyyyyzzzz


do you guys agree that D40 is much advisable to buy compare to D60..JUST BUY NIKON SB 400 FLASH AND A 55-200MM VR.....

AS WHAT THIS LINK SAID

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

PLS HELP me decide!!!!!!!!

 

[luminosity]

I strongly advise you to avoid both the D40 and D60 (which are basically the same camera). I've owned it, and it feels too small, almost like a toy camera. More importantly, it does not have an internal autofocus motor. This limits your selection of lenses. Old Nikon AF lenses are often cheaper than their newer counterparts, but are still as good optically, if not better at times.

I'd try to save up for a D90 if I was you, rather than get the D80 (which is now three years old).

 

[Steven1621]

I love my D40. It was my first DSLR and I don't regret the purchase at all. It's a great camera for learning photography. Unless you have very particular lens requirements, I don't think the lack of an internal focusing motor will be an issue. You can use the money that you save to buy lenses or other camera equipment. Trust me, photography becomes an expensive hobby before you know it.

 

[termina3]

Is there a reason you aren't considering Canon (or for that matter, Olympus or Sony)?

I shoot and prefer Nikon... but that doesn't mean that you might not like one of the other brands.

 

[bashveank]

Although I despise Ken Rockwell I have to agree with him on that one. The D40 is cheaper and has lower noise levels.
However, if have any way at all to get the D80 than I would highly recommend that one. One of your most invaluable lenses will be a fast prime and you'll be spending $400 more for a fast prime that will autofocus on the D40/60.

 

[compuwar]

Although I despise Ken Rockwell I have to agree with him on that one. The D40 is cheaper and has lower noise levels.
However, if have any way at all to get the D80 than I would highly recommend that one. One of your most invaluable lenses will be a fast prime and you'll be spending $400 more for a fast prime that will autofocus on the D40/60.

The counter-argument is that rather than spending more money on a body that'll be replaced in 2-3 years, spending $400 more on a lens is about $30-40/year over the lifetime of the lens- and you can get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for $385 or 50mm f/1.4 for $439 at B&H- nowhere near $400 *more*. In fact, the delta is going to be in the $150-250 range, not $400- plus you'll get a kit zoom lens with the D40 and f/1.4 vs f/1.8. The prices come close to even if you elect for the f/1.4 AF-D lens (I'd also guess the HSM lenses are going to AF faster than the AF-D lenses would on a low-voltage body like the D80.)

Finally, we don't know at what point Nikon will stop putting focus motors in their mid-range cameras, so going to HSM or AF-S at least ensures forward compatibility with a higher level of confidence than going to AF-D.

 

[numbercharm]

PIXEL is not an issue

As for kenrockwell

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm



Forget Resolution

Resolution, expressed in megapixels, is no longer relevant. Forget it when comparing cameras.

As of 2008, resolution is nothing more than a sales pitch to get you to pay more. I've made great-looking 12x18" (30x50cm) prints from a three megapixel camera, and fantastic 20x30" (50x75cm) prints from a 6 MP camera.

I usually shoot my higher-resolution cameras turned back down to 6MP anyway!

Even the very cheapest cameras here have at least 6MP, so ignore pixels.




D40 over d60 and d80

Sure, I own more expensive cameras, but whenever I grab a camera for my own personal vacations or family photos, it's almost always my remarkable and super lightweight Nikon D40. There isn't anything reasonable I can't do with Nikon's least expensive D40. There is no real reason to pay more for a Nikon D60 or D80. Save your money for more important things, like another lens or flash, or just pocket the difference and enjoy a vacation.

For $499 or less, complete with an exceptionally good 18-55mm lens, it's a no-brainer. (I paid $600 for my D40 in 2006 and still love it.)

I wouldn't bother with the more expensive Nikons unless you really want to spend money, or will be using it all day, every day, or just have to have a bigger screen on the back. Don't worry about durability: I've made 25,000 shots on my D40 and it still looks and works like new.

I only use my more expensive cameras when I'm shooting all day. If I'm spending more time carrying it than using it, I grab my Nikon D40.



DO YOU GUYS AGREE!!!!!

 

[jaduffy108]

As to Ken Rockwell...he has a valid *generalized* point regarding the MP wars, but on the other hand...most of what Ken says is non-sense.

Which Nikon to get? If you're looking for better IQ with the simplicity of a p&s, get the d40...it makes great images. If you want to develop photography skills, get the d80. Forget the D60...imo.

As someone else suggested, save up for a D90. $880 at B&H. Buydig.com has a D90 kit for $1035.

Good luck....

 

[wheelhot]

D40 if money is a concern to you, D80 if you want a proper DSLR with proper buttons to change common functions (Exposure, Aperture, ISO and etc).

Like other says, you can ignore the D60 because the D40 and D60 is essentially the same camera.

 

[luminosity]

I got a shot tonight that neither the D40/60 or D80 would have had a prayer of getting, but that the D90 probably could have also gotten (I have a D300). The internals of the 90 are very similar to the 300.

The ISO was cranked up to 5000, and it was still a good shot in very poor lighting (even with a 1.8).

 

[peapody]

I have experience with both the D40 and the D80. I got the D40 as a starters DSLR and that is what it was - just for beginners. I felt seriously hampered by the design and while you can easily adjust things here and there, I just didn't do it on that camera because it wasn't accessible. I spent most of my time on Auto mode just snapping away family shots or group shots - no attempt at artistic photos really - and that is just the truth of the matter. That isn't bad - but I could have done the same thing with a P&S.

Now I was able to come across a great deal for a D80 second hand that was well taken care of and had less than 1,500 shutter clicks - which isn't bad - for $400. I sold the D40 and kit lens to pay for the D80 body, and picked up an 18-105mmVR lens (a great walk around - for just $199) and a 50mm 1.8 (For just $100 - a great Prime lens that takes such artistic and moving photos). Some people just use the 50mm as their primary lens, or you can get a 18-55mm kit lens for $150 if you are on a budget. But I find those two lense are just perfect for the price and the use.

Anyway - once I found the D80 and went for it - man what a great move. The camera is heftier, more serious. Everything is viewable on the top LCD screen, and with the dials and information more accesible and present I found myself sitting on manual mode for 80% of the time, and now I am just learning more about photography - getting way better shots than the auto mode on my d40 ever got me.

So it really depends on how serious you are in regard to learning about photography and what kind of shots you want to get, and what you will be using the camera for. For kids family friends - D40/D60. For artistic shots that test your ability - it is more convenient to go for the D80. The kenrockwell review keeps on mentioning the camera for the price - well at this point in time you can get a D80 for almost comparable price, you get more features, more AF points, more lens compatibilty, greater learning curve, more MP if that floats your boat, beauitful viewfinder, overall great camera for the price. The D80 has the internals of the D200 I believe, for a consumer.

 

[cosmokanga2]

Anyway - once I found the D80 and went for it - man what a great move. The camera is heftier, more serious. Everything is viewable on the top LCD screen, and with the dials and information more accesible and present I found myself sitting on manual mode for 80% of the time, and now I am just learning more about photography - getting way better shots than the auto mode on my d40 ever got me.

If you can, go for the D80. The little screen up top, for displaying settings, thumb dial for shutter and index finger dial for aperture I can't live without. The D80, my dads camera actually, is what I am learning photography on. I started using auto but now with the ease of shooting manuel, it's all I use. I would buy the D80 for those three features in itself over the D40 and D60.

 

[numbercharm]

Thanx Guys!!

So i guess ill just go for d80....what i was thinkin was to buy d40 then just save for good LENSES......

 

[luminosity]

Is there any way you can save for the D90?

It's just a shade over $850 from Amazon as I write this.

 

[peapody]

Getting a D90 would be overkill for a total beginner in DSLRs IMO. Start low, but have room to grow with the D80 would be a smart thing to do. You may even not want to continue pursuing the hobby.

 

[luminosity]

Except that the price difference right now is almost minimal between new D90s and 80s.

 

[peapody]

Except that the price difference right now is almost minimal between new D90s and 80s.

Not really if you find the right deal. Like I said I was able to nab a D80 used for $400. They go around $500 body only normally on ebay for the right deal. I would never have gone for the D80 if it was close in price with the D90.

 

[JKitterman]

The D40 with the kit lens and the flash would be a good start. I have one and it does everything you will need it to do for New Years and the wedding. Read the set up guide on Rockwell's website and you should be fine.

 

[ChrisA]

do you guys agree that D40 is much advisable to buy compare to D60..JUST BUY NIKON SB 400 FLASH AND A 55-200MM VR.....

The 40 and 560 lack an in-body focus motor so be REALLY sure that you don't ever want to buy a lens that does not have a motor of it's own inside. If you can live with that limitation that the D40 is OK.

The D80 does have an in-body motor and works with more Nikon lenses.

Skip the 55-200 lens. Get the Kit 18-55 and the shoot at least 1,000 frames or maybe 5,000 frames then, only then deside what your second lens should be. So many begineers think they will need a long, slow zoom lens ike the 55-200 but then fin they don't use it much. But after you have some experiance you will know what kind of limitation the 18-55 has and buy a lens to address that. Perhaps you will want a wider lens or a faster lens or a macro lens.

But on the other hand if you fins that you are shooting that are impossible to walk up close to and are in good light then get the 55-200 but not many subjects are like that.

 

[luminosity]

I'd get at least one of three primes: The 28 2.8, 35 F2, or 50mm 1.8.

They are invaluable lenses. I have the latter, but if I could do it over again, I may have gotten one of the first two, just to come close to replicating the 50mm viewing angle on a film camera.

 

[compuwar]

So i guess ill just go for d80....what i was thinkin was to buy d40 then just save for good LENSES......

That's still the path I'd recommend. Good lenses can be added over time and hold their value and function for at least 3x the length of a camera body. There are enough HSM/AF-S lenses out there that the whole screwdriver focus thing is pretty overblown if you're just learning- as you'll be dealing with learning curve for long enough that you may get to 1/3 the lifetime of your body before you're at a place where the body makes that much difference *if then.*

People produced wonderful photographs on all-manual 35mm film cameras with ASA 100 film back in the day- any modern DSLR has an advantage over that.

Also, you're already considering getting a decent flash, so you're ahead of most folks just buying a kit. If you can learn to use the flash well, you'll be ok with that.

The D80 has the internals of the D200 I believe, for a consumer.

No, they share a sensor, the AF module and some other components, but the D200 has a way better meter (1005 segments vs 420) and if I recall correctly a better metering database (I'm pretty sure Nikon links the metering to the database,) the D200 has four channels going off the sensor, not two a larger buffer (19 raw images vs 6,) a much better shutter (1/8000th instead of 1/4000th max speed, 250th sync vs 200th and a longer lifetime in calculated MTBF and more FPS) and firmware-wise the D80 won't do uncompressed raw files. While Nikon shares a lot more components between bodies now than at any other time in their history they also protect the high price-point models with hardware and firmware features, not just body/frame build quality.

 

[mrgreen4242]

The D40 is great, I personally find the small size and light weight to be a positive, not a negative. It lets me carry it anywhere. That said, the limited lens selection sucks.

If I had to do it over again I think I would have bought a used D80, but even then it would have been more expensive than the new D40 I bought, so there's a good chance I wouldn't have had a DSLR at all if I didn't buy the D40.

Ignore the D60 and D40x, imo, and if you are looking at those, but a D80 or D90 is out of the budget, get the D40 and add an external flash and a slighlty upgraded lens. You should be able to find a "store kit" of the D40 with the 18-135mm Nikkor lens. I find the 18-55mm lens to be just a little short of ideal for a single purpose lens, personally. The external flash is probably the best $100-200 you could spend if you plan to take any indoor photos at all though.

 

[luminosity]

If you haven't already, be sure to hold the D40 and make sure it's to your liking. Some people like a lightweight camera, others (like myself) dislike it.

 

[numbercharm]

Thanks For The Help Guys!!!

THANKS FOR THE HELP GUYS!!! YOU'VE BEEN A GREAT HELP........SO WHAT LIKE MOST PEOPLE SUGGEST HERE.... ILL JUST BUY A D40 SINCE IM JUST STARTING AND BUY SOME DECENT FLASH THAT I CAN USED AS WELL IF I DECIDED TO UPGRADE MY DSLR IN THE FUTURE (and surely will happen).....


so can you guys suggest what flash should i purchase...and what lens should i buy for the meantime.....

 

[peapody]

THANKS FOR THE HELP GUYS!!! YOU'VE BEEN A GREAT HELP........SO WHAT LIKE MOST PEOPLE SUGGEST HERE.... ILL JUST BUY A D40 SINCE IM JUST STARTING AND BUY SOME DECENT FLASH THAT I CAN USED AS WELL IF I DECIDED TO UPGRADE MY DSLR IN THE FUTURE (and surely will happen).....


so can you guys suggest what flash should i purchase...and what lens should i buy for the meantime.....

Haha really? I thought for the most part people recommended you go for the D80...

If you are getting the D40 might as well just stay with the kit lens which is just fine. No need to get another lens because you don't even know what you want to do yet. Like one of the other posters said - just go out and take pictures. I would suggest if you are just testing out photography get an sb400 speedlight which is small and nonobtrusive. The Sb600 is fullsize and the next step up.