 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / April 2007Nikon D40X ?
After a few years of trying to live without my Nikon SLR film camera, I've decided that no digital camera which is not an SLR is going to make me happy or produce the kind of sensitivity and clarity of image to which I'd grown accustomed. I have one particular need: my hands are unusually small and I find several of the DSLRs very uncomfortable to hold and I can't imagine ever becoming nimble with them. I have had a long and happy relationship with Nikons and so that is my first choice. I did also look at the Canon Rebel XT1 since it is my impression that the CCD chip is also quite good. I'm leaning toward the D40X because it is really light and wonderful to hold. I imagine getting it with the standard lens and using my old zoom telephoto when I really need a long lens, which is not that often. I know that my Nikon A telephoto zoom will not autofocus on the D40X but I really don't expect to use it very often. My main concern is about the fact that the auto focus mechanism for the D40x is in the lens rather than in the camera. Will this make it obsolete in a year or two? Is it a new design Nikon came up with which will soon be replaced? My other concern is really a question. When comparing the d40X to the Rebel XT1, is there a significant difference between the two CCDs? Also, I could manage to hold the D80, although not comfortably. Will I wish I'd gotten the D80? Anything else I should take into consideration? TIA Louise >I'm leaning toward the D40X because it is really light and >wonderful to hold. I imagine getting it with the standard [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Anything else I should take into consideration? I have a D70 (bought it when they first came out) but I rarely use it because of the "clunkiness" factor. It's too big and bulky for me. That's precisely why I got the D40. So far, I've found it to be a wonderful camera. Personally, I hate all kinds of zoom lenses (too slow), and I hate autofocus. The D40 is ideal for manual focus, provided you replace the standard focusing screen with a Katz Eye split-image rangefinding screen. The D40 will mount all Nikon F-mount lenses, even the early non-AI ones. It will only meter with lenses having CPU contacts, but you can set exposure with all lenses using the trial-and-error method. The lens I keep on the camera most of the time is the 45mm f/2.8P, which is the only Nikon manual-focus lens with a CPU. This makes a very compact package (the lens gives you the equivalent perspective of a 67mm lens on a film camera). Regarding the difference between the D40 and the D40x, keep in mind that the 6 megapixel sensor (in the D40) produces images of 2000x3000 pixels. That's plenty of resolution for me. You might want to pay the higher price for the D40x if you routinely make enlargements bigger than 8x10. According to Alexander Arnakis <invalid@address.none>: > >I'm leaning toward the D40X because it is really light and > >wonderful to hold. I imagine getting it with the standard > >lens and using my old zoom telephoto when I really need a > >long lens, which is not that often. I know that my Nikon A > >telephoto zoom will not autofocus on the D40X but I really > >don't expect to use it very often. It will also not meter, as well as not autofocusing, assuming that it is not autofocus on earlier cameras as well. Alexander covered that below. > >My main concern is about the fact that the auto focus > >mechanism for the D40x is in the lens rather than in the > >camera. Will this make it obsolete in a year or two? Is it > >a new design Nikon came up with which will soon be replaced? The camera will autofocus with any autofocus lenses, I believe, as they will have CPU contacts as well, which are used to communicate autofocus requirements to the lens' internal motor. If it is missing the sensor for full stop-down on the aperture ring of those lenses which are so equipped, then it will not cause problems with mounting the lenses, but it leaves a possibility of not behaving properly with the aperture ring not stopped down fully on older autofocus lenses, such as my 35-135mm f3.5-4.5, and my 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 lenses. > >Anything else I should take into consideration? > > > I have a D70 (bought it when they first came out) but I rarely use it > because of the "clunkiness" factor. It's too big and bulky for me. While I use mine all the time -- and am considering (actually lusting after) the even larger D200. > That's precisely why I got the D40. So far, I've found it to be a > wonderful camera. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > standard focusing screen with a Katz Eye split-image rangefinding > screen. Depending on your needs. For carefully set up and/or posed shots, "primes", that is, fixed focal length lenses) are usually the better choices, but if you are photographing events as they change, the added flexibility of a zoom is a significant benefit. I have some of each, and tend to have a zoom on the camera most of the time. For me, the slower aperture range of my zoom lenses is made up for by the auto-ISO setting allowing an increase of ISO when the light is low. But you may dislike the noise in high-ISO shots. To me, it is no worse than grain in high ISO film. > The D40 will mount all Nikon F-mount lenses, even the early non-AI > ones. It will only meter with lenses having CPU contacts, but you can > set exposure with all lenses using the trial-and-error method. And -- for cases where you are setting up the shot, this is less of a problem than it may seem, because of the ability to both view the image and the histogram to evaluate the exposure of your trial shots. (Besides, you can get a close starting point by using the kit lens which came with the camera to give you an approximate exposure.) This is a *lot* better than guessing with film, and having to come back and set up the shoot again after processing. :-) > The > lens I keep on the camera most of the time is the 45mm f/2.8P, which > is the only Nikon manual-focus lens with a CPU. This makes a very > compact package (the lens gives you the equivalent perspective of a > 67mm lens on a film camera). Yes -- you want to bear in mind the effect of the 1.5x crop factor on your existing lenses. Every lens will behave as though it were 1.5 times longer than it is -- at least in terms of coverage. > Regarding the difference between the D40 and the D40x, keep in mind > that the 6 megapixel sensor (in the D40) produces images of 2000x3000 > pixels. That's plenty of resolution for me. You might want to pay the > higher price for the D40x if you routinely make enlargements bigger > than 8x10. Agreed! My primary reason for wanting the D200 is the ability to meter with the AI lenses at least, if not the really old ones which are pure Nikon F mount instead of for the later cameras. Enjoy, DoN.  SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- >The camera will autofocus with any autofocus lenses, I believe, >as they will have CPU contacts as well, which are used to communicate >autofocus requirements to the lens' internal motor. The D40X will operate the internal motors in AF-S and AF-I Nikkors, the latter being very rare now. However, the D40X will not operatethe internal motors in any other AF Nikkors, for the simple reason that they don't have motors. They rely instead on the "screwdriver" drive shaft that runs through the lens mount on every Nikon AF camera body except the D40X. >The D40X will operate the internal motors in AF-S and AF-I Nikkors, >the latter being very rare now. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >instead on the "screwdriver" drive shaft that runs through the lens >mount on every Nikon AF camera body except the D40X. Yes, and bear in mind that all the AF-S lenses so far are zooms. If you want to use any type of prime lens on the D40, it will have to be in manual-focus mode. (For me that's no problem, since I *prefer* manual focus.) > Yes, and bear in mind that all the AF-S lenses so far are zooms. If > you want to use any type of prime lens on the D40, it will have to be > in manual-focus mode. (For me that's no problem, since I *prefer* > manual focus. false. nikon: 105mm/2.8 vr 200mm/2 vr 300mm/2.8 vr 300mm/4 400mm/2.8 500mm/4 600mm/4 sigma: 14mm/2.8 30mm/1.4 150mm/2.8 180mm/3.5 300mm/2.8 500mm/4.5 800mm/5.6 there are currently about 40 afs/hsm lenses that will autofocus on the d40/d40x. >> Yes, and bear in mind that all the AF-S lenses so far are zooms. If >> you want to use any type of prime lens on the D40, it will have to be >> in manual-focus mode. (For me that's no problem, since I *prefer* >> manual focus. > >false. Well, if you eliminate the aftermarket lenses, all the AF-S lenses that Nikon makes are either zooms or bulky and expensive telephotos. Let's just say that there are no "normal" Nikon primes that are AF-S. > >> Yes, and bear in mind that all the AF-S lenses so far are zooms. If > >> you want to use any type of prime lens on the D40, it will have to be [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Well, if you eliminate the aftermarket lenses, all the AF-S lenses > that Nikon makes are either zooms or bulky and expensive telephotos. your original statement was 'all the afs lenses so far are zooms.' that's false. there are non-zoom afs lenses and from not just nikon. you may not be interested in any of them, but they *do* exist. > Let's just say that there are no "normal" Nikon primes that are AF-S. at the moment, there's nothing from nikon under 105mm that is afs. rumour has it that may change. >>The D40X will operate the internal motors in AF-S and AF-I Nikkors, >>the latter being very rare now. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >in manual-focus mode. (For me that's no problem, since I *prefer* >manual focus.) If you enjoy manual focusing, don't buy a D40(X) unless you intend to install an aftermarket focusing screen. The standard screen is *useless* for manual focusing. >If you enjoy manual focusing, don't buy a D40(X) unless you intend to >install an aftermarket focusing screen. > >The standard screen is *useless* for manual focusing. Yes, that's almost correct. I would say that manual focusing is very difficult with the standard screen, but it can be done. But that's why I got the Katz screen. That really "makes" the camera, for me. I would also add that the electronic rangefinder built into the camera (the little light that comes on at the bottom of the viewfinder when you are in focus) is *not* of much help. In fact, the blinking of that thing as you try to focus will drive you crazy, if you pay attention to it. >>If you enjoy manual focusing, don't buy a D40(X) unless you intend to >>install an aftermarket focusing screen. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Yes, that's almost correct. I would say that manual focusing is very >difficult with the standard screen, but it can be done. I don't think we are so far apart. ;-) >But that's why I got the Katz screen. That really "makes" the camera, >for me. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >thing as you try to focus will drive you crazy, if you pay attention >to it. I agree. I use Contax (Carl Zeiss) lenses on my Canon 5D with adapters, one for each lens. The guy who sold me the first two adapters contacted me and told me that he had a new version which allowed the AF confirmation light to operate with the Contax lenses - with the previous version of the adapter, the light did not work. He could not understand why I was not in the least interested ... However, when I bought some more Contax glass and went back to him for adapters, the only type he had by then was the type that operated the light. They drive me mad! Next time I have the camera serviced I will have the light disabled if at all possible. >> If you enjoy manual focusing, don't buy a D40(X) unless you intend to >> install an aftermarket focusing screen. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > thing as you try to focus will drive you crazy, if you pay attention > to it. >>>The D40X will operate the internal motors in AF-S and AF-I Nikkors, >>>the latter being very rare now. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > The standard screen is *useless* for manual focusing. Couldn't be more untrue. I bought a D40 three weeks ago for a "niche" camera... street photography with my 24 or 50mm Nikon primes. I've had no problem at all focusing with the oem screen, quickly and accurately (of course, I make my living with a state of the art video camera (currently P2) where auto focus is non-existent, shooting in uncontrolled environments, so maybe I've had more practice at manual focus that some others might have had), but even so. Even for those eyeball challenged, all you need do is jack up the f stop a bit and let dof take care of any slack. Of course, I don't use long lenses on my D40, but I'd say, don't sweat the lack of auto focus on the D40 unless that's all you know. DP > It will also not meter, as well as not autofocusing, assuming > that it is not autofocus on earlier cameras as well. Alexander covered [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > as they will have CPU contacts as well, which are used to communicate > autofocus requirements to the lens' internal motor. Don: The D40/40X will only auto-focus with AF-S lenses (those having the in-lens focus motor) regardless as to the CPU contacts being present. AF-D lenses have the CPU contacts but use the in-camera motor to drive the auto-focus screw in the lens, thus will not auto-focus with the D40/40X. Bob According to Robert Brace <rlbrace@shaw.ca>: > > It will also not meter, as well as not autofocusing, assuming > > that it is not autofocus on earlier cameras as well. Alexander covered [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > lenses have the CPU contacts but use the in-camera motor to drive the > auto-focus screw in the lens, thus will not auto-focus with the D40/40X. O.K. I have not handled a D40, and obviously should have prior to answering. So -- they left out yet another thing to make it cheaper and lighter. Thanks, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > According to Robert Brace <rlbrace@shaw.ca>: >> The D40/40X will only auto-focus with AF-S lenses (those having [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > to answering. So -- they left out yet another thing to make it > cheaper and lighter. Right. However, Nikon is strongly pushing the DX line of lenses for digital cameras and is adding new lenses to that line almost every month. Those lenses are not even backward compatible with film SLRs any longer. Unless you want to dig into the pool of existing used lenses you should be fine without the focus motor in the camera body. jue According to Jürgen Exner <jurgenex@hotmail.com>: > > According to Robert Brace <rlbrace@shaw.ca>: > >> The D40/40X will only auto-focus with AF-S lenses (those having [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Unless you want to dig into the pool of existing used lenses you should be > fine without the focus motor in the camera body. Which is exactly what I *do*. (With a D70, and hopefully a D200 later). Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > After a few years of trying to live without my Nikon SLR > film camera, I've decided that no digital camera which is [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Anything else I should take into consideration? Ther's a whole thread concerning this over im rec.photo.digital right now, rather than rehash it all here. SignatureYou need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. -- Charles A. Beard > After a few years of trying to live without my Nikon SLR > film camera, I've decided that no digital camera which is [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Louise More cameras for midgets are on the horizon? Olympus's E-410 gets released this month. >> After a few years of trying to live without my Nikon SLR >> film camera, I've decided that no digital camera which is [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > More cameras for midgets are on the horizon? Olympus's E-410 gets > released this month. I think you'll find the D40 will meet your needs. While the resolution is higher on the D40x, the D40 has more than enough resolution for the majority of uses. Its image quality is excellent and you'll find it's a little less noise prone than the "x" is. I have D200 but bought two D40s as Christmas presents for my son and daughter and naturally, had to "test" them out before giving them. I was very pleased with the overall handling and image quality from the D40 and am now considering getting one myself for those times I don't want to carry around the much heavier D200. While the D40 will restrict you to SF-S lenses if you want auto-focus, and it won't meter with non-CPU lenses the way the D200 will, it will still deliver excellent performance at a great price point and remember, it's not the camera that makes great images, it's the photographer.... >I think you'll find the D40 will meet your needs. While the resolution >is higher on the D40x, the D40 has more than enough resolution for the >majority of uses. Its image quality is excellent and you'll find it's a >little less noise prone than the "x" is. What is the basis for that statement about noise? Have you compared the results from a D40 and a D40X? I ask because I have seen results from tests on the D40X, and the noise is remarkably well controlled. I would not describe it as any more "noise prone" than any of Nikon's 6.1 MP DSLRs. >>I think you'll find the D40 will meet your needs. While the resolution >>is higher on the D40x, the D40 has more than enough resolution for the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > noise is remarkably well controlled. I would not describe it as any > more "noise prone" than any of Nikon's 6.1 MP DSLRs. In fact the Pop Photo test of the D40x (March issue, online at http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3896/camera-test-nikon-d40x.html) agrees with you, says "Noise suppression was generally better than the D80's and much better than the Rebel's." They don't compare it to the D40, however. Somewhere else (don't recall where) I did read that the D40x had more noise than the D40, but I presume that difference, if it really exists at all, is very small. Certainly nothing to suggest it is "noise prone" in the least. Neil > After a few years of trying to live without my Nikon SLR film camera, I've > decided that no digital camera which is not an SLR is going to make me [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > that my Nikon A telephoto zoom will not autofocus on the D40X but I really > don't expect to use it very often. You might want to consider the original D40 rather than the D40x, as it is virtually identical in all respects except for being 6 megapixels instead of 10, having somewhat less noise as a result, and about $200 cheaper the last time I checked. I have the D40 myself, and love it. I bought it as a more compact, lightweight second camera after my D70s, which is a great camera but bulkier and heavier than I care to carry around all the time. The D40 fills the bill perfectly. > My main concern is about the fact that the auto focus mechanism for the > D40x is in the lens rather than in the camera. Will this make it obsolete > in a year or two? Is it a new design Nikon came up with which will soon > be replaced? No, on the contrary, the probability is that most or all Nikon lenses for the foreseeable future will be SWM (autofocus motor in the lens). SWM lenses are generally quieter and faster autofocusing. You only need the AF motor in the camera body for the older type lenses which have the screwdriver-style mechanical coupling. You can still use those older lenses on the D40 focusing manually. I do and it works well, using the focus indicator in the bottom of the viewfinder display. That's not as convenient as a split-image rangefinder in the center of course, but it does work well. > My other concern is really a question. When comparing the d40X to the > Rebel XT1, is there a significant difference between the two CCDs? Also, > I could manage to hold the D80, although not comfortably. Will I wish I'd > gotten the D80? I think you've just answered your own question. If you can't hold the D80 comfortably, why would you ever wish you'd gotten one? I find my D70s (which is slightly larger than the D80) perfectly comfortable to hold; I just don't like lugging it around so much. The D40 is not only light and compact itself, but the 18-55mm lens it comes with is also very light and compact, as is the 55-200mm companion lens. Together they make a really neat little system. Neil >I find my D70s (which is slightly larger than the D80) perfectly comfortable >to hold; I just don't like lugging it around so much. The D40 is not only >light and compact itself, but the 18-55mm lens it comes with is also very >light and compact, as is the 55-200mm companion lens. Together they make a >really neat little system. I'm used to the traditional Nikon lenses with metal construction, and I found the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my D40 to have a "cheap" feel about it. (Even the mounting flange is made of plastic.) That, plus the fact that I don't like zooms in general, made me decide to just leave it in the box unused. Probably the optics are decent, but I'm not particularly interested in finding out. My D40 is now mated with the superb 45mm f/2.8P lens (unfortunately now discontinued by Nikon). >>I find my D70s (which is slightly larger than the D80) perfectly >>comfortable [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > with the superb 45mm f/2.8P lens (unfortunately now discontinued by > Nikon). The 45mm was my plan too, but I can't find one... Very happy with the 24 and 500 mm on my D40, though, and like you, I've yet to take the "kit" lens outa the box... probably will at some point, to play with it though. DP >The 45mm was my plan too, but I can't find one... Very happy with the 24 and >500 mm on my D40, though, and like you, I've yet to take the "kit" lens outa >the box... probably will at some point, to play with it though. I think ebay is the only option for finding a 45mm, unless you get really lucky and find one locally. You can usually find one on ebay, albeit at an astronomical "buy it now" price. Be patient and wait until one appears on a real auction, but don't overbid. I ended up getting an absolutely like-new black one for $328, including the dedicated lens hood and shipping from Canada. The problems with the kit lens, besides the cheap construction, are slowness and bulkiness. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.