Nikon D40x ........ should I pull the trigger

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by SteveB, Jan 12, 2008.

  1. SteveB

    Joel Guest

    Also, the way I am looking at the whole thing, and because we are talking
    about the quality if image, the advantage of the lens etc. so I have to put
    the $$$ aside. Or most of us are not millionare with lot of extra $$$ to
    throw away (I say *most* because depending on what country we live in and
    the value of $$$ has more/less value than other).

    So with good lens

    - We have more chance to get more cleaner and sharper image.

    - It may be expensive, but we do not pay for one time use but we pay for
    many years with tens or hundreds of thousands of good IQ photos.

    - And the problem that it's very hard to lie to ourselves, and even we can
    make one excuse after other, but it's pretty hard not wishing to have the
    best lens (or just better lens).

    - I don't know about other, but I never feel good for spending time waiting
    for the right moment to capture something, then it turn out not worth to
    keep because of the quality. Or, with good camera and lens we can blame on
    our luck and skill, and concentrate on improving photography skill

    - It's much easier to post processing good quality image than trying to
    repair/save poor quality image.

    Me? just those things alone is much more expensive than a better lens, and
    I never like to take my chance. And that's one of the reasons why I never
    suggest to go for cheapie lens
     
    Joel, Jan 13, 2008
    #21
    1. Advertisements



  2. Since to you seem to think the best camera equals best photographer then it
    would appear that I earned this particular award. <bg>



    That's fine with me. If you can't deal with it you can't deal with it.


    That's becaues it *is* about Rebecca and *not* about the Holga camera. She
    sells photographs she has taken with a Holga. And if you don't like them
    then you don't buy them. That's the way the free market works. And it
    works well.

    Holga is a camera. Not a person. It can't put a gun to your head.

    My cameras are all different. And their differences work for me. In a free
    market no one puts a gun to your head and makes you buy anything. Each
    individual is free to make their own choices. It's a wonderful thing.

    You seem to think your grandchildren are merely lucky to sometimes take good
    photographs, but I wouldn't dismiss the possibility they might have some
    creative talent too. But who knows maybe they are just lucky.



    So?

    Do you expect every photograph to be outstanding? If that's the case you
    will forever be needing to purchase a more expensive camera.

    Take a look at this photograph. It looks as if it might have been taken
    with a Holga. In 2002 it was the most expensive photograph to have ever
    been sold at auction.

    http://www.forbes.com/2003/05/30/cx_0530hot.html
     
    Etta Ray Newberry, Jan 13, 2008
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. SteveB

    Joel Guest

    No, I don't think such thing, else I would have saved thousands of dollars
    just to be Holga, years of practicing to earn more experience, years of post
    I agree! that's my problem for not trying to beat Holga, but life is way
    too short for me to gamble with luck.
    ???? you mentioned Holga (I thought Holga is a dead famous photographer
    <bg>).

    Ohhhh Now I figure out Holga is the name of a camera *not* a dead famous
    I got it now! (see above), and I just can't imaging why you make a big
    deal about this specific Rebecca and Holga???

    To me, just like most old Photographers who are still using film or older
    camera etc.. (I am not trying to make another Film vs Digital war) not
    because older film camera is better, *but* because they are too old to learn
    newer technology. So may be same with Rebecca, she may not have time or
    skill for Photoshop so she just stick with whatever she knows best.

    Nothing wrong with Rebecca using Holga, but I don't know how Holga makes
    Rebecca to be a better photographer or the best photographer.
    Remember we are talking about "The Best" photographer, photo, and $20
    camera here.
    Thanks for possitive thought, I agree! they may get the photography talent
    I don't expect anything, but better cemera, better lens capture a better
    image. That's it!
    It may impress you, or it may impress the world decades ago. But I don't
    see anything so special about it for you to point it to me. Yes, if you are
    talking about history, about the best photo or photographer at that time
    then I may have to agree. But I just don't see how you can compare that
    photo (I don't even want to see that poor quality) with a much better
    quality these days.

    And it's sold at high price not because it's the best picture worth more
    than $1-5, *but* because it's part of history. So, no it won't impress me a
    bit, and I may not even care to hang it on my wall.

    Yes, I would pay may be $50-100 (taking chance) then sell for $200,000, or
    I would pay $150,000 with warrante that I will be able to sell for $200,000.
     
    Joel, Jan 13, 2008
    #23

  4. Joel.......it has become increasingly clear to me that your primary
    photographic interest is in "better camera, better lens capture a better
    image. That's it!" Fortunately or unfortunately, however you view it,
    there will always be a better camera and lens out there somewhere. So spend
    the money, if you have it, and buy the "better" camera and lens if it makes
    you happy. It will surely make your
    camera dealer happy. And then hopefully you will be able
    to obtain that illusive "better image".
     
    Etta Ray Newberry, Jan 13, 2008
    #24
  5. SteveB

    Joel Guest

    No, and *again* I am more interest in QUALITY *not* historical,
    collection, or imaging etc..

    Or I just couldn't understand how you can compare an expensive collectable
    photo was taken around 200 years ago (? sorry I don't remember the exact
    date but somewhere around 18xx) with current much better technology.

    And the small low-rez photo (on the web) is so ugly (I am talking about
    the quality of the JPG or GIF they have on the web) that I don't even care
    to look for more detail.
     
    Joel, Jan 13, 2008
    #25
  6. SteveB

    Jimmy Mac Guest

    Joel. Listen up. If anyone ever offers you a warrantee like that for
    anything walk away.


    Ok, in your own words: your primary
    photographic interest is in "better camera, better lens capture a better
    image. That's it!" Plus we now add "QUALITY *not* historical, collection,
    or imaging etc..".

    At this point I would not even think of suggesting to you that there could
    be more to photography than that.

    That's fine - I understand why you didn't bid on it.
     
    Jimmy Mac, Jan 13, 2008
    #26
  7. SteveB

    Lillput Guest

    Got a couple of friends with D40's. It's a perfectly good camera.
    IMHO it's not quite as good as the D50 model that it replaced
    but...it's got better firmware and even at 1600 ISO, the noise
    reduction is a hell of a lot better than either my Nikon D50 or D70s.

    That said (and contrary to the usual Nikon/Canon divide), I've just
    recommended that a friend buy a Canon 400D in preference to the
    D40...I believe he'd grow out of the D40 too soon and, overall I
    reckon that the 400D was better value for money.

    Don't be swayed just because lenses are bundled...make sure you want
    the focal length of the lenses and that they are at least reasonably
    good glass.
    One thing to say about both the D40 and 400D is that neither have a
    camera-top LCD screen with the settings on...you have to fire up the
    back LCD screen. Also, both cameras are very small in the hand. If
    you've got large hands, you might find them very fiddly. If you've
    got small hands, like me...then that might be a selling feature in its
    own right.

    The best advice has already been posted...go into a real shop, pick up
    the camera (any decent shop will allow you sniff and feel) and see how
    they feel in the hands...that'll be the most important thing.

    Hope this helps
     
    Lillput, Jan 13, 2008
    #27
  8. Sorry for the confusion, but the above post went in under my husband's user
    name.
     
    Etta Ray Newberry, Jan 14, 2008
    #28
  9. SteveB

    Peter Guest

    Most of us married guys understand.
    Our wives often do things things under their husband's name. :)
     
    Peter, Jan 14, 2008
    #29
  10. SteveB

    Joel Guest

    Bad girl! <bg> you caused me to kill-file your husbee because I thought
    some auctioneer popping out of a Holga camera to scare me <bg>
     
    Joel, Jan 14, 2008
    #30
  11. SteveB

    jrblack10 Guest

    My only problem with the D40 is the limitation on lenses. Rather the
    limitation on lenses with AutoFocus that will work with that camera.
    I you think you may want to purchase other older lenses (used and
    such) or have another Nikon 35mm camera, the auto focus will not work
    on the D40. I rushed to get a D50 just before all stores sold out of
    them just after the D40 came out.

    I would also shop the online deals, B&H, Beach Camera, etc...
     
    jrblack10, Jan 15, 2008
    #31
  12. SteveB

    Bob Guest

    I don't think anyone noted it yet, but the OP was referring to the
    40X, not the 40 - there are substantial differences between the 2.
     
    Bob, Jan 15, 2008
    #32
  13. Which lenses are included? That seems very high to me for a D40x deal.
    The D40x is a good starter camera. I have a D80 and like it very much, but
    I also realize that both the D40x and the D80 are next on the "to be
    replaced chopping block" so both have recently seen drops in price. I
    fully expect Nikon to announce new cameras this fall and have them out in
    later November. So I'd say D40x and D80 deals are going to get very sweet
    quite soon.
     
    No Person known, Jan 16, 2008
    #33
  14. Yeah, my father is one of those photographers, though he will never admit
    it. It is amazing the kind of pictures he would take my a $250 instant
    load 35mm camera. Back in the day, my brother and I both cut our teeth on
    our father's Pentax Spotmatic, but we never shot medium format (2" x 2")
    like he did.
     
    No Person known, Jan 16, 2008
    #34
  15. SteveB

    Joel Guest

    I read Nikon just released D300 shortly after Canon released 40D, and I
    read it's better than the D200. I am not Nikon user so don't pay much
    attention to D300, except few people comparing Nikon D300 against Canon 40D
    and it seems like Nikon D300 does better than its older sister. Or Nikon
    D300 is not beating Canon 40D or losing to 40D, but it has more respect from
    some Canon users than D200 and older (which most comparing to Canon 20D).
     
    Joel, Jan 16, 2008
    #35
  16. SteveB

    Chris Guest

    The D40 you mention and the D40X that the OP asked about are two *different*
    cameras. The D40X is more expensive because it has a 10.2 MP sensor
    (instead of 6.1 MP), a 3 fps burst rate (instead of 2.5 fps), starts at 100
    ISO (instead of 200), a flash sync speed of 1/500 (instead of 1/200), better
    battery, etc. So, it is *more* expensive than the D40, at the prices you
    quoted.

    Having said that, I would not go with either of them because neither has the
    auto-focusing motor as part of the camera, so they can only auto-focus when
    using lens that have the auto-focus mechanism built-in. I think that
    significantly limits one's choices, so I'd move at least to the D80.

    My 2 cents ;-)
     
    Chris, Jan 16, 2008
    #36
  17. SteveB

    Chris Guest

    The D40 you mention and the D40X that the OP asked about are two *different*
    cameras. The D40X is more expensive because it has a 10.2 MP sensor
    (instead of 6.1 MP), a 3 fps burst rate (instead of 2.5 fps), starts at 100
    ISO (instead of 200), a flash sync speed of 1/500 (instead of 1/200), better
    battery, etc. So, it is *more* expensive than the D40, at the prices you
    quoted.

    Having said that, I would not go with either of them because neither has the
    auto-focusing motor as part of the camera, so they can only auto-focus when
    using lens that have the auto-focus mechanism built-in. I think that
    significantly limits one's choices, so I'd move at least to the D80.

    My 2 cents ;-)
     
    Chris, Jan 16, 2008
    #37
  18. SteveB

    SteveB Guest

    Thank you for the true words.

    Last year, I was in a quandary after seeing some good hummingbird photos
    from a friend who has a Nikon. I own a Sony DSC H1, which I consider a step
    up from a point and shoot. I was ready to get a better camera back then,
    but after discussions, purposely kept it with the intent of learning to use
    that one correctly. Well, after a few weeks, I started getting remarkably
    clear hummingbird photos.

    I was thinking just what you said, and that a better camera wouldn't help me
    take better photos if I didn't understand it and know how it works and how
    to make it do what I want. But now, I have reached the limit of the optics
    of my zoom, a 12x optical, and can't go any further. There's a magnifier
    lens for the camera, but I don't want to spend money on optics for the Sony.
    I have missed some pretty good shots of eagles and red tailed hawks now
    because I can't zoom in any further. I will go and sit in a blind and try
    go get them that way, but at times, this is just not possible for the time
    it takes. The hummingbirds are not here yet this year, so I do not have my
    blind and "stuff" set up.

    I have been taking photos for over fifty years now, and know you can take
    outstanding photos with a crappy camera. I remember some very good photos
    from my youth I took with a Kodak Instamatic. We had a camera very similar
    to a "Brownie" as a family camera. You looked through the top and pressed
    down a grey button. But, every camera has its purpose and its limits.
    Stay within those, and everything's fine. Try to go outside them, and you
    just don't get AS good a picture. You simply hit the limits of your
    equipment, good photographer or not.

    Steve
     
    SteveB, Jan 17, 2008
    #38
  19. SteveB

    Joel Guest

    I read both of yours and none is near the true. Excuse and blaming yes,
    but not the true.
     
    Joel, Jan 17, 2008
    #39
  20. SteveB

    Peter Guest

    Which is why when asked about any particular camera I usually say:
    "What are your going to use it for?"
     
    Peter, Jan 17, 2008
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.