Nikon D40x replacement

lam396

Adventurer
I know, another one of those threads! I currently have a d40x that we have had for 4 years now and it has had a rough year. To start, if was on a tripod and somehow fell over directly on the lens. Luckily, I had an extra 18-55 kit lens we could use. Then, out of nowhere that lens actually just fell off the camera body and landed on it's side in the rocks. It was the wierdest thing ever, we had been shooting pictures all day and when we were just stading there the camera was around my wifes neck and the lens just fell off. Popped it back on it seemed to function ok. It still takes good pictures but the autofocus is painstakingly slow and occasionally it won't focus at all. One other factor that it driving replacing it is the fact that my second child is due any day now and we seem to have lost our video camera in the bustle of pregnancy, graduating grad school and rehabing a house! This is where my questions come in. I have a 75-200 Nikkor lens that has not hit the dirt and is still a good lens. The 18-55 kit lens I have works but needs to be replaced with something else.

From my research, I see my options as: getting the D3100 with kit lens, D5100 with kit or just the body and get either a primary lens or a nicer 18-55 type lens to go with it. I briefly considered the 7000 due to the nicer features and the introduction of weather sealing but not sure it's worth twice the cost of the 5100. I should also note that 90% of our photos are shot in the auto setting. I know how to manually set the camera but lack of practice makes me slow and I end up missing the shots so it typically stays in auto. My wife shots exclusivly in auto but has a desire to learn how to manually set the camera and I can see her picking that up now that she is no longer in school. As she learns I would also most likely increase my manual usage. The camera gets used for general family photos, travelling, occasional portrait "photo shoots" and if I could find the time I would really like to make more landscape shots.

Basically we have been pretty happy with the results from the d40x but at times found it slow to focus and we have had issues with low light photos on occasion too. The low light would probably be fixed with manual settings but those instances were actually pretty rare. So; 3100 kit, 5100 kit, 5100 body with different lens, or other option I'm not seeing?

I appreciate any thoughts. Researching these things blows my mind sometimes...
 

mtnbike28

Expedition Leader
I am not sure but I think the 3100 and 5100 both do not have the AF motor in the camera (why they are cheaper) so the lenses have to have the AF motor, ie, less choices, harder to find, more expensive. fwiw -
 

lam396

Adventurer
Thanks for the review links. I am leaning towards the 5100 but the kenrockwell site has me wondering about the video capabilities. I have not heard that they take poor video and that the AF doesnt really work. can anyone speak to that?

Also, as to lenses, i am really thinking that i would like a primary rather than a zoom. is the quality much better than the kit lens?
 

Sirocco

Explorer
I am not sure but I think the 3100 and 5100 both do not have the AF motor in the camera (why they are cheaper) so the lenses have to have the AF motor, ie, less choices, harder to find, more expensive. fwiw -

Correct.

The non-prosumer bodies do not AF, the lenses do. your slow AF may be down to dropping and damaging the lenses! Be worth taking it to a store and trying a new kit or prime lens on your D40 1st before spending big $$$ on new stuff.

With regards to quality it depends which kit lens and which prime. Its generally accepted that prime lenses are faster/better, however it depends on your usage. I hear good things about the 18-55 and the older 18-70. If your shooting in 'auto' I doubt 1-3 stops faster will make a lot of difference to you.

G
 

lam396

Adventurer
I have always thought it was slow to focus but i can have a local shop check it out before making any purchases. that doesnt really solve my problem of needing a video camera. that is what is primarily driving replacing the 40x. i thought i would solve two problems at once but the reviews of the video function have me second guessing.
 

mtnbike28

Expedition Leader
As far as I know, all the Nikon (and Canon 5d mkII) all have really bad or no AF in video. The 5d will slowly AF in Live View/Video but will not track. Again if you are thinking prime lens, I do not think they will AF at all with the 3100/5100 series... better research that. I have the d7000 and have been real happy with video and image quality. I was more used to the controls on the D1 and D2 series cameras, so I am still not pleased with the ergonomics and the d7000 in my hands, but I am having better luck with the d7000 ergonomics than I did with the Canon 5d and 1d series.... (20 plus year Nikon shooter) fwiw
 

Forum statistics

Threads
186,095
Messages
2,881,937
Members
225,874
Latest member
Mitch Bears
Top