d40x or d80
- Thread starter littlejt
- Start date
- Status
chanjyj
New Member
Actually, D80 is not a bad camera, the only thing is whethr you are willing to paythe extra cash for it, which I find pontless as the D200 outclasses the D80 and is only a tad more expensive.
All my posts on this thread were not on "how good is the camera" but "is the camera feature worth the price"
All my posts on this thread were not on "how good is the camera" but "is the camera feature worth the price"
Why not D40?
D40x has ISO100 which D40 doesn't have, but the noise level of ISO100 on D40x is as bad as ISO200 on D40, so it doesn't help at all. That's due to the higher sensor density (same CCD size, more pixels).
The FPS is faster, 3 vs 2.7, but seldom would one need to shoot at a 10% faster FPS. And go for D200 if you need to shoot sports.
10 Megapixel? Other than filling up your memory card and hard drive faster, and takes longer time to process, I don't see any possitive side for now. Most people shoot photos to print 4R or upload online, and 6 Megapixel is good enough even for A4 printing. (Tried A3 before, but that's a studio shot so image quality is much better)
To me, D40x doesn't worth the extra 200 dollors, unless you really want the 'x' on the logo.:bsmilie:
D40x has ISO100 which D40 doesn't have, but the noise level of ISO100 on D40x is as bad as ISO200 on D40, so it doesn't help at all. That's due to the higher sensor density (same CCD size, more pixels).
The FPS is faster, 3 vs 2.7, but seldom would one need to shoot at a 10% faster FPS. And go for D200 if you need to shoot sports.
10 Megapixel? Other than filling up your memory card and hard drive faster, and takes longer time to process, I don't see any possitive side for now. Most people shoot photos to print 4R or upload online, and 6 Megapixel is good enough even for A4 printing. (Tried A3 before, but that's a studio shot so image quality is much better)
To me, D40x doesn't worth the extra 200 dollors, unless you really want the 'x' on the logo.:bsmilie:
Now let's compare D40 and D80.
For half the price (almost half), you can get 80% the function, why not?
Even if you want to upgrade one year later, selling a 2nd hand D40 won't lose much, and maybe by then a D85/D90 is out?
I used D2H and D70 before, but for now, I really like my little sweet D40.
For half the price (almost half), you can get 80% the function, why not?
Even if you want to upgrade one year later, selling a 2nd hand D40 won't lose much, and maybe by then a D85/D90 is out?
I used D2H and D70 before, but for now, I really like my little sweet D40.
zac08
Senior Member
But you lose one important function for the newbies (AF for non-AFS lenses) :sweat:
zac08
Senior Member
True, just hope Nikon will release more AF-S lenses in the near future..
They will... at a higher price. Is it worth it then?
chanjyj
New Member
If you are talking about true newbie, he will probably only use the kit lens which comes free.
And to be frank, I (I dunno what to call myself, up to you to decide ;p) I only use AF-S lenses nowadays anyway. (But have to admit my AF-S lens are the cheapest ones, Kit Lens, 55mm-200mm VR)
My friend who just "converted" himself from film SLR to digital is also using the same configuration as me. Not to mention his tripod is a $40 piece of garbage (One leg always falls out when he takes it out. He "plugs" the leg back in after unfolding the tripod). To be honest, his pictures are great, and has no diff to me when I using my more expensive tripod and my professional lenses.
chanjyj
New Member
Afterthough (referring to my post above)
Maybe his pictures are so great because he has used film for so long that he still has the habit of making sure everything is perfect before he takes a shot. Also have to salute him for his intuition in lighting.
I guess this came from the era when you cannot delete you film, and when film camera flashguns didn't have i-TTL (He used a Canon EOS 500N for most things)
Maybe his pictures are so great because he has used film for so long that he still has the habit of making sure everything is perfect before he takes a shot. Also have to salute him for his intuition in lighting.
I guess this came from the era when you cannot delete you film, and when film camera flashguns didn't have i-TTL (He used a Canon EOS 500N for most things)
zac08
Senior Member
Mebbe... but you lose the AF for loads of prime lenses, like the cheap and good 50 f1.8, the solid 85 f1.4, etc...
Not too much of a bother in most cases when using the non AFS lenses cos when you manual focus, there is a "in focus" light in the view finder that lights up when your subject is in focus.
For creativity, sometimes I manual focus even when using the AF-S lenses.
Only loose out when you want to shoot fast and furious (eg sports events) and you can only manual focus.
For creativity, sometimes I manual focus even when using the AF-S lenses.
Only loose out when you want to shoot fast and furious (eg sports events) and you can only manual focus.
chanjyj
New Member
there is a "in focus" light? That's real interesting. Is there an in-focus light on AF-S lenses when you are doing focusing manually? I haven't noticed any.
psychobiologist
Senior Member
its a cuteeee green dot.
- Status
Similar threads
