which one?

[jatibb]

gotta birthday coming up, trying to decide on a camera. 2 close friends have the nikons so id like to stay with that since sharing,familiarity are gonna play a part (lenses,pointers,...)
d40, d40x or d60
all seem to be priced about 450-550-650 respectively. main question is ,is the d40x worth the extra 100. seems the difference between the d40x and the d60 is the motor drive for lense auto fucus instead of powered lenses. (dunno,correct?)
total novice,nee to stay around 500-600 complete pkg

 

[Stealth 4x4]

I'd say that depends on your intended use. If you're into landscapes, general snapshots, architectural stuff, etc. which don't generally require fast action shooting situations with moving subjects and fast focusing like sports photography or action nature stuff go with the cheaper one. If you are going to ask the camera to focus quickly, especially in low-light situations on fast moving subjects, you'll want the one with the best fastest autofocusing motor you can afford and big, heavy, fast lenses that let in lots of light. I am currently shooting the N-80, D-70s and D-200 and sometimes borrow a buddie's D2X with a variety of lenses and love them all. Any of the ones you mentioned are great cameras.

The lenses themselves don't have their own power source (still use battery power coming from your camera body to power the focusing mechanism), but some of the better ones do have camera-body-powered focusing motors inside the lens to help move those larger lens parts and make them focus faster and/or quieter. Nikon calls this SWM or silent wave motor. Basically the lens focuses faster and quieter with it. With Nikon lenses if you see "ED" or "Nikkor" it generally means good glass, if you see "AF-S" it generally means the lens has a motor in it so it should focus faster and quieter than a comparable lens without one.

But again, unless you're using it to stop action, the faster focusing is not needed. Nothing in a landscape is gonna "get away" before you can focus on it. So no need to have fast body/lens for that, just get good glass so the images are sharp and free of chromatic abberation. Having owned several different camera bodies from Nikon I think the single biggest difference between each (for my uses-fast action nature) is the focusing motor in the camera body itself. Yeah AF-S lenses are faster. But the same AF-S lens on a D-70 focuses slower than it does on a D2x. The better ones perform better, faster, truer with all of my lenses, and the slower ones make my fast 2.8 lenses seem a little slow because the motor in the camera is a limiting factor. There... more than you ever wanted to know when you posted this thread. :Wow1:

 

[jatibb]

thanks, just trying to get a good idea on whats what. ive used my buddies d50, and his d80. for me (a beginner) they both were better than me. use will include lots of stills, but also some bike races, and living near road atlanta, cars also. we went to the tour of ga. last year and a week later to the walter mity at rd. atl. and the d40 did well for me both times, like i said, better than i was ( friend told me to just "spray and pray" until i got used to it) basically dont want to get a d40 then as i get a grip on it wish i had more speed and versatility or is the difference so small that the d40 would serve me well till i could afford something much better (if i even got that into the hobby)

 

[SMD]

... then as i get a grip on it wish i had more speed and versatility...(if i even got that into the hobby)

LOL, but isn't that how these things tend to go? Trucks, cameras, computers, you name it!

I've had my D40 about 18 mos as my first foray into the world of SLRs. I'm learning a lot and trying to avoid the temptation to upgrade until I feel like I've reached a point that the camera can't do what I want it to do. My upgrades have all been to glass/filters. So... sounds like you might be in a similar situation. D40 would get my vote so that you could save cash for more/better glass. For example, with the standard kit lens you aren't going to get a wide angle to shoot landscapes like the cool OJ Latitude pics.

You might think about talking to a local camera specialty store. A local store helped me avoid a mistake when buying a wide angle - not that the lens was bad, but wasn't going to perform with the D40 the way I thought it would, so I bought a different lens. Yes, I had read the manual and many other camera specific help guides, but something just didn't sink in until a person talked to me about it face to face. You're friends can probably help, though.

Of course, I have started dreaming of a D300 or a D90 though...

 

[opie]

IIRC, the D60 does not have a focus motor in the body. You will have to get lenses that have a motor in them, just like with the 40 and the 40X. This means Nikkor AF-s or Sigma HSM. (Or Tamron, Tokina equivalent)

If you are planning on running third party lenses, grab a body and then buy the lens. I got a D80 body for $535 from Adorama and you can pick up third party lenses quite inexpensivley.

I did buy a D40 originally, and after using it for a month or so realized I wanted more control over the camera without having to dive into a menu. The AF system on the D80 is also far superior to that of the 40, which for me hunted quite a bit and since it only had three areas the chance to have something in the frame I wanted in focus, not be, was much larger. The shutter lag time on the D80 is lower than the 40 or 60 and the ability to run any nikkor lens (or third party Nikon mount) was a definte plus.

A good lens, IMO to start with would be the Sigma 28mm 1.8. EX Its new and I love it. $269 and the pictures are excellent. Heres a shot I took on the tripod, 13 second exposure at f22 I believe. No flash and the lighting in the room sucks. I can zoom into the writing on the paper and still read it.

EDIT: I removed the pic cause I realized it had some sensitive info on it.

Im also new to the DSLR. I would highly recommend picking up and reading front to back, Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson.

 

[opie]

Something else to keep in mind..Right now the price difference between the D40 and the D80 isnt that much. I would imagine the price, or resale value of the D40 is going to keep going down.

It doesnt hurt to buy more camera than you need, It will save you money in the long run. I learned that the expensive way.

Heres a D40 for $446

http://www.adorama.com/INKD40K.html?searchinfo=d40&item_no=1

The 18-55 lens is quite capable...heres one I took with the D40 and the kit lens...

Heres a D80....

http://www.adorama.com/INKD80K2.html?searchinfo=d80&item_no=1

Looks like the D60 is going for a little more than a D40 goes for....

http://www.adorama.com/INKD60K.html?searchinfo=d60&item_no=1

IMO..not much of a price difference for the large jump in features for the 80 over the 40 or 60.