Newbie looking for a dSLR

[rogersmj]

Well my D40 should be here Tuesday!

I really think I made the right choice. Money was a big issue and for an amateur I think this camera will be terrific!

I agree, that's a great choice. It's exactly what I went with, because as a complete beginner I wanted to keep the costs low too. Although you might consider keeping that 55-200mm VR, it's a great lens for the money (especially since with the deal you've got you're barely paying over $100 for it). I wound up buying one a couple months after I got my D40 because 55mm from the kit lens just doesn't get you close enough, especially when you're shooting outside.

 

[aaronw1986]

I agree, that's a great choice. It's exactly what I went with, because as a complete beginner I wanted to keep the costs low too. Although you might consider keeping that 55-200mm VR, it's a great lens for the money (especially since with the deal you've got you're barely paying over $100 for it). I wound up buying one a couple months after I got my D40 because 55mm from the kit lens just doesn't get you close enough, especially when you're shooting outside.

So the kit lens and 55-200 VR lens would be great to have for a while, right? I am so close to ordering this. Would you recommend it? Can you still make a good size print with only 6 megapixels?

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Nikon D60 looks nice, but it does not have a built-in focus drive motor. But it looks like it has a nice lens

Canon XTi looks nice, but it is supposed to have a crappy lens..


I am so confused and have no idea what I am talking about!!!!!!!!!

The kit lens may not be the best, but not bad at all considering that it only costs around $70.00. You can buy a body without the kit lens, and then buy a better lens for it. That will cost you a lot more, however.

Look at entry-level cameras from Canon and Nikon, with sensors of around 8MP. For example, an "new" Rebel XT (old model, but unused) should cost around $300.00 with the kit lens. A Nikon D40 should cost around the same.

I use a 3-year old Rebel XT I purchased new from $800.00 back them. I still have the kit lens, although I have taken some of my best photos with it, I now use a Tokina, Tamron, and a couple of Canon L lenses.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

If you like small plastic bodies, there's nothing wrong with the Canon Rebels. However their shutters will only go to 50K actuations before failing. The pro bodies have a longer shutter life of 100K actuations. Plus if you have big hands the pro bodies will be much easier to hand hold. The pro bodies also are made of magnieusm alloy so if do you have a drop, it won't shatter into pieces. If on a budget, check out some used Canon 20D's or 30D's from KEH Camera Brokers. Buying new is a bit pointless unless you feel like paying full freight.

The shooter on mine's still going strong after 50,0000, but i agree with you that a 20D, 30D, and 40D will last much longer.

 

[Phrasikleia]

For example, an "new" Rebel XT (old model, but unused) should cost around $300.00 with the kit lens.

Where are you getting that price? The ones I've spotted are all around $470 with the kit lens.

 

[aaronw1986]

Where are you getting that price? The ones I've spotted are all around $470 with the kit lens.

Cheapest I've seen is $450 from Amazon. No where near 300.

 

[rjp]

D40

Nikon D40. One heck of a great camera for a very reasonable price! I'd buy it again in a second.

Rich

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Where are you getting that price? The ones I've spotted are all around $470 with the kit lens.

Check B&H, and Adorama for a Rebel XT body. I could not find a body only, but one with a lens which brings to price to $469 .00. Found bodies only for a little under $400.00.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/537777-REG/Canon_0209B029_EOS_Digital_Rebel_XT.html

 

[rogersmj]

So the kit lens and 55-200 VR lens would be great to have for a while, right? I am so close to ordering this. Would you recommend it? Can you still make a good size print with only 6 megapixels?

I almost never print my photos, so I can't speak to that. However, others have said (earlier in this thread, I think) that they do 11x14 prints off a D40 and it works out fine. You might want to read Ken Rockwell's take on the Megapixel Myth; he addresses printing from different megapixel ratings.

 

[rjp]

I almost never print my photos, so I can't speak to that. However, others have said (earlier in this thread, I think) that they do 11x14 prints off a D40 and it works out fine. You might want to read Ken Rockwell's take on the Megapixel Myth; he addresses printing from different megapixel ratings.

Believe me, I have tried both the D40 (6MP) and the D40X (10MP). You will not see any difference due to resolution until your final print gets large enough that there are more than 6 MP in it. At this point the 10MP will start to look better, but how big is this? Depends on the dots-per-inch of your printer, but if you read up online I think you will find it is certainly greater than 11x17.

Just fyi, a 15 inch MBP screen (1440x900) is only 1.3MP. The D40 has more than 4 times this many pixels.

Some people will argue that the 10MP gives you the freedom to heavily crop your image. I do not think this is true. Though the D40X has 10MP, each pixel is noisier than the D40 because it is so small and can not integrate as much light during exposure, and when you compare images at 100% (pixel level) the added noise in the higher density sensor is pretty obvious. At least that's what I found.

 

[wakerider017]

Believe me, I have tried both the D40 (6MP) and the D40X (10MP). You will not see any difference due to resolution until your final print gets large enough that there are more than 6 MP in it. At this point the 10MP will start to look better, but how big is this? Depends on the dots-per-inch of your printer, but if you read up online I think you will find it is certainly greater than 11x17.

Just fyi, a 15 inch MBP screen (1440x900) is only 1.3MP. The D40 has more than 4 times this many pixels.

Some people will argue that the 10MP gives you the freedom to heavily crop your image. I do not think this is true. Though the D40X has 10MP, each pixel is noisier than the D40 because it is so small and can not integrate as much light during exposure, and when you compare images at 100% (pixel level) the added noise in the higher density sensor is pretty obvious. At least that's what I found.

Awesome post! Thanks!

 

[aaronw1986]

Believe me, I have tried both the D40 (6MP) and the D40X (10MP). You will not see any difference due to resolution until your final print gets large enough that there are more than 6 MP in it. At this point the 10MP will start to look better, but how big is this? Depends on the dots-per-inch of your printer, but if you read up online I think you will find it is certainly greater than 11x17.

Just fyi, a 15 inch MBP screen (1440x900) is only 1.3MP. The D40 has more than 4 times this many pixels.

Some people will argue that the 10MP gives you the freedom to heavily crop your image. I do not think this is true. Though the D40X has 10MP, each pixel is noisier than the D40 because it is so small and can not integrate as much light during exposure, and when you compare images at 100% (pixel level) the added noise in the higher density sensor is pretty obvious. At least that's what I found.

I agree, thanks for this. Makes me more confident to pull the trigger right now.

 

[alleycat]

Not necessarily, the consumer bodies tend to get rev'ed about two to three times as often as the professional ones, so you're generally looking at one to two generations of sensor and associated parts development. You also get the full manufacturer's warranty and the ability to gain an extended manufacturer's warranty for those manufacturers who offer it.

I disagree. Most professionals like myself want to take care our equipment. Not having a working camera means you can't make money. Unless you're million dollar portfolio guy, I think most of us do not have money to waste. Consumers are a lot harder on their equipment and I would be dubious of buying a used Rebel. Also in my 15 years I've never needed an extended warranty or work done on a Canon body.

I've printed 10" x 15" from a 6 MP DSLR quite a few times, and it has never been a problem (although a bit of an odd size). I think I could even print these particular photos at a size like 16" x 20", and they probablywouldn't look bad from 3 feet or so. One of them is uncropped, but the other was cropped slightly. If you don't need to crop a lot, then you don't need to worry. If you have a sharp photo, you'll be able to print large. They even look good from 1 foot away, although I'm usually (at least) 5 feet away when viewing them (they're above my bed).

6MP I've found is perfect for 11x14. My old Canon F-1 was good for 11x14's and I never printed beyond that size in my darkroom. So 6MP is just about what you truly need to replace a 35mm camera. However if you really want crystal clear 16x20's, my advice is get a view camera. Digital is slowly catching up, but still when it comes to cost and quality, nothing beats 4x5 sheet film.

 

[compuwar]

I disagree. Most professionals like myself want to take care our equipment. Not having a working camera means you can't make money. Unless you're million dollar portfolio guy, I think most of us do not have money to waste. Consumers are a lot harder on their equipment and I would be dubious of buying a used Rebel. Also in my 15 years I've never needed an extended warranty or work done on a Canon body.

You disagree with what? That consumer bodies get rev'd more often? That's an easily verifiable fact. The fact that those revs come with sensor and associated gains (generally amplifiers as far as IQ gains go after sensor changes?) That's easily verifiable as well. Surely you're not disagreeing with the fact that you get a manufacturer's warranty on a new camera body?

As far as "a lot harder," I know at least two D40 owners who take way better care of their D40's than I do my "Pro" bodies- because I may have to shoot in an environment they'd never bring their camera to, and in conditions they'd keep their cameras inside for.

I've never needed equipment or liability insurance, but that doesn't mean I don't carry it. I highly doubt that Canon has zero warranty claims.

 

[rogersmj]

As far as "a lot harder," I know at least two D40 owners who take way better care of their D40's than I do my "Pro" bodies- because I may have to shoot in an environment they'd never bring their camera to, and in conditions they'd keep their cameras inside for.

Yeah I freaking baby my D40, I'm super-careful with it compared to the real photographers at my company. They have to take photos to matter what the situation, so those things get used in just about every condition imaginable. Pretty much everyone at the company shoots either a D300 or 5D (I think...I'm not as quick with the Canon identification).

 

[SLC Flyfishing]

I disagree. Most professionals like myself want to take care our equipment. Not having a working camera means you can't make money. Unless you're million dollar portfolio guy, I think most of us do not have money to waste. Consumers are a lot harder on their equipment and I would be dubious of buying a used Rebel. Also in my 15 years I've never needed an extended warranty or work done on a Canon body.

My wife and I aren't professionals or anything, but we use our camera a lot and we're not exactly nice to it either. The higher end bodies are built to stand up to that kind of use. That's what magnesium casing or steel frames are for, as well as things like weather and dust seals. Our K10D has seen heavy rain, mud, a fall or two from my wife's shoulder, and high humidity. And it's still going just as strong as the day we got it, it's got a few scratches on the body, but it's held up to some severe abuse and I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one because I've seen the kind of punishment it can take. I suspect cameras like the Nikon D300 and Canon 40D and 1 D series cameras as well as the Oly E3 are just as tough, they're built with extreme conditions in mind, not because everyone will use them like that, but because some will.

SLC

 

[wakerider017]

My D40 came yesterday!

I really like it so far. Trying to do as much reading as I can to figure out how to use it properly. I have already taken a few photos. You can follow the link in my signature if you would like to see them.

Please keep in mind this is my first SLR, so please be gentle. Advice is welcome though.

 

[aaronw1986]

My D40 came yesterday!

I really like it so far. Trying to do as much reading as I can to figure out how to use it properly. I have already taken a few photos. You can follow the link in my signature if you would like to see them.

Please keep in mind this is my first SLR, so please be gentle. Advice is welcome though.

Lucky, mine had a delivery attempt today, but no one to sign for it.

 

[rjp]

My D40 came yesterday!

I really like it so far. Trying to do as much reading as I can to figure out how to use it properly. I have already taken a few photos. You can follow the link in my signature if you would like to see them.

Please keep in mind this is my first SLR, so please be gentle. Advice is welcome though.

Congrats! The Nikon Digital Field Guide by David Busch is a great book to learn about this camera btw. Look on Amazon. Also, you may like Ken Rockwell's free online guide, which you can easily google and print to get started. But he sure puts a lot of himself into the writing ;-) It's kind of fun actually to read something written by someone so obviously thrilled with the product, and you'll learn a lot along the way... Just don't take everything as gospel. There's a lot of opinion mixed in. Enjoy!

 

[wakerider017]

Congrats! The Nikon Digital Field Guide by David Busch is a great book to learn about this camera btw. Look on Amazon. Also, you may like Ken Rockwell's free online guide, which you can easily google and print to get started. But he sure puts a lot of himself into the writing ;-) It's kind of fun actually to read something written by someone so obviously thrilled with the product, and you'll learn a lot along the way... Just don't take everything as gospel. There's a lot of opinion mixed in. Enjoy!

Already started the Ken Rockwell guide. Ya you are right.. There is some stuff in there I agree with and other things I am not so keen on.

I am hoping I can learn how to use this camera in a month or two. Seems so complicated. Then again if it was easy it would be no fun.

 

[ftaok]

Already started the Ken Rockwell guide. Ya you are right.. There is some stuff in there I agree with and other things I am not so keen on.

I am hoping I can learn how to use this camera in a month or two. Seems so complicated. Then again if it was easy it would be no fun.

This forum is a great asset in learning how to shoot great photos. If you see a particular photo that you like/love, ask the poster what he/she did to get that shot. Most folks here are nice enough to tell you what settings and stuff they used.

Have fun.

ft

 

[rjp]

Already started the Ken Rockwell guide. Ya you are right.. There is some stuff in there I agree with and other things I am not so keen on.

I am hoping I can learn how to use this camera in a month or two. Seems so complicated. Then again if it was easy it would be no fun.

The nice thing about the D40 is that you can always just flip the camera to full auto mode if you get confused and have to make a shoot in a hurry.

This is nice to have while learning.

Pretty much the only modes I shoot in now are "P" and "A". And I always use auto ISO except when using a slow/rear flash.