File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Allright, what do you have against the Nikon D40? Reviews on the internet say it's a fine camera, but /p/ seems to pretty much unlike it. Not trolling, I'm serious.
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
Lack of a focus motor, that's it.

Elitists would say shit viewfinder and very few AF points but fuck them.
>> SAGE
>>299140
becasue everyone who has a better camera is a elitist?
>> Anonymous
No autofocus motor, which would normally be fine. The best cameras ever made didn't have any technology in them related to autofocus because it wasn't invented yet when they were designed.

The difference is that the viewfinder on the D40 sucks for focusing, so manual focusing is difficult to impossible.

This leaves you with a handful of useful lenses that will work well for it. If you like zooms, that's not really a problem, because Nikon has a shitton of duplicated standard zooms it'll work with; the only problem is lens speed versus cost, since a non-focusing 28/2.8 Nikkor is cheap but a focusing 17-55/2.8 isn't. But as for primes that aren't superteles, there's I think four: two Sigmas, and two Micro-Nikkors.

So if you're loaded and/or don't need/want a fast aperture, and prefer zooms over primes, the issues are no different than with any other entry-level DSLR, i.e. the handling is mediocre and the viewfinder sucks. But if that's not the case, this one design decision gives it a significant system disadvantage over other comparable models from other companies, and if you like the Nikon interface you should just go ahead and buy the best you can find and afford of a used D50/D70/D80.
>> Anonymous
I'd just like to add that the D40 also lacks depth-of-field preview and mirror lockup. Maybe those controls don't matter to everyone, but they matter to some people. And they're such basic things Nikon's exclusion of them makes no sense. I can understand the cheap viewfinder and limited AF points. I can (somewhat) understand the lack of an in-body focusing motor. It makes sense to leave out all the weather sealing, multiple card slots, and reinforced bodywork the mid- and high-end cameras get.

But DoF preview and mirror lockup? The D40 really has no excuse to be lacking them. Even Nikon's super-cheap FM10 film SLR has those functions.

That said, if you don't mind the viewfinder or zoom lenses, and don't use DoF preview or mirror lockup, there really isn't much to complain about.
>> Anonymous
Anyone on here that bashes the D40 is just your typical /p/rick

lack of a focus motor, but frankly if you want to get the cheapest DSLR then you aren't going to be getting expesnive fucking lenses that don't have focus motors in. Shit you don't complain about the D80 not taking pre-AI lenses fuck.

>so manual focusing is difficult to impossible.
fucking idiot. it has an AF confirmation indicator, also anyone with anywhere near good eyesight can manual focus with it, i have a D50 and have no problems.

If they have a D40 they can get a kit lens or the VR version and the 70-300mm and can think about more when they get into photography more and decide they want a used d80.

>Maybe those controls don't matter to everyone, but they matter to some people.
the 'some people' being people who aren't in the market for a D40

>there really isn't much to complain about.
if you are buying a D40 that statement is so correct

The D40 has better dynamic range and high ISO performance than the 'elitists' beloved D80, probably what they are secretly butthurt over.

Also i can't stand that i will look like the troll when it's the rest of /p/ that seems like it's retarded sometimes.

FFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
>> Anonymous
>>299296lack of a focus motor, but frankly if you want to get the cheapest DSLR then you aren't going to be getting expesnive fucking lenses that don't have focus motors in.

no, but if you're getting the cheapest dSLR, you may be getting the cheapest fucking lenses which are cheap, fast, short primes, which the D40 wont autofocus with
>> Anonymous
>>299296
>it has an AF confirmation indicator
1) Yeah, those don't work for shit.
2) That eliminates one of the big advantages manual focusing has over autofocusing: you don't have to worry about the frigging points, you just focus.

>Shit you don't complain about the D80 not taking pre-AI lenses fuck.

That's 'cause you can easily get a lens AI'd and it'll work fine.

>can think about more when they get into photography more and decide they want a used d80.

This attitude- that beginners shouldn't get or don't need good equipment- is just ridiculous. Buy the best of whatever you can afford.

Also, someone who's experienced can work around the flaws of low-end gear just fine, e.g. scale focusing in the absence of good manual or autofocusing options, or knowing to stop down a shit lens, and so on. Beginners with limited knowledge and no mental routines, muscle memory, etc. can't, or will have a harder time of it. Beginners need good gear more than experienced people.

>The D40 has better dynamic range and high ISO performance than the 'elitists' beloved D80

Ergonomics > image quality, every single fucking day, I'm sick of people acting like cameras are just copy machines for what's in front of them. And I don't think anyone here is saying the D80 is a perfect camera or that they own it.

Also see
>>299298
>> Anonymous
why can't we all agree to some copypasta just for the D40? something like

Nikon D40, good for cheap bastards who can only afford a dSLR under $500 (without buying used) and for soccer moms using Ken Rockwell auto mode. pretty much fail for anything else unless you plan on using that saved money for better lenses or a better body later on
>> Anonymous
>>299296

d40 is for people with baby hands.

Seriously, it is the single most uncomfortable camera to handle, especially for extended periods of time.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>299296
If you concede that a D80 is better for someone "more into photography", why not cut out the middle step and just go into something decent to start? Anyone posting on /p/ is more likely to take photography seriously, and they'd probably want to upgrade pretty fast.
>> Anonymous
>>299334
>>299298
last i looked i could get a 70-300 for less than a 50mm f1.8 prime, and so what, as i said manual focus with confirmation isn't the end of the world.

>>299311
that autofocus confirmation is the same as when the autofocus decides to stop focusing you moron.
and dont give me '2) That eliminates one of the big advantages manual focusing has over autofocusing: you don't have to worry about the frigging points, you just focus.' if you would just say can't manual focus on the D40 otherwise.

>This attitude- that beginners shouldn't get or don't need good equipment- is just ridiculous. Buy the best of whatever you can afford.
If a new person came saying they were going to buy a D3 to get into photography everyone would go apeshit. It would be wasted on them.

>Also, someone who's experienced can work around the flaws of low-end gear just fine,
Then stop bawwwing at the D40, what's the problem with it? oh no they are going to learn manual focus the hard way? oh no they are going to have to learn to cope with what lenses are available to them?

>Ergonomics > image quality ... acting like cameras are just copy machines
You are describing it like it's a teddy bear, it's surely a hell of alot more comfortable than an old film slr, and chances are if they are getting a D40 they have moved up from a compact so the D40 is bound to feel substantial in their hands.

fuck someone comes back to /p/ with a logical argument you become more hypocrited than usual.

>Nikon D40, good for cheap bastards who can only afford a dSLR under $500 (without buying used) and for soccer moms using Ken Rockwell auto mode. pretty much fail for anything else unless you plan on using that saved money for better lenses or a better body later on

>>299334
are you just trying to fit in?

And the rest?
I'm just going to leave this because it's like this whole forum is trolling and sitting there with it's fingers in it's ears
>> Anonymous
>>299443last i looked i could get a 70-300 for less than a 50mm f1.8 prime, and so what, as i said manual focus with confirmation isn't the end of the world.

find that 70-300 for under $100 (new) and i'll start reading the other bullshit you posted

not that i would want to use a <$100 70-300
>> Anonymous
>>299443I'm just going to leave this because it's like this whole forum is trolling and sitting there with it's fingers in it's ears

you're the one trolling
>> Anonymous
>>299443and dont give me '2) That eliminates one of the big advantages manual focusing has over autofocusing: you don't have to worry about the frigging points, you just focus.' if you would just say can't manual focus on the D40 otherwise.

Well.. first of all, no it's not the same. There's wiggle room in the focus ring that will engage the AF point or points to confirm AF when it's not in focus.

Now, you're the one who doesn't know how to use manual focus. Let's say I'm composing in my viewfinder and put the subject in a corner, that's the part I want in focus.

Old school manual focus, I just turn the focus ring until my eyes tell me the subject is in focus. I _do not_ have to rely on any AF points. Actually, there is no such thing as AF points because I can place my own anywhere with my eyes.

Now, with your little D40, which has 3 AF points, let's artificially give it fucking 8 more for a total of 11 spread across the frame. What the fuck's going to happen? Well I'll tell you, the AF system will confirm AF lock on the brightest point it sees on the frame (usually the center point). Now your shot is out of focus because your subject was in the corner. You'd have to keep on wiggling shit until finally it decides to use the corner AF points, if it EVENS gets a focus lock at all.
>> Anonymous
well, when troll wins everyone loses

first rule of /p/
1) exif or shut up
>> Anonymous
Ughh I think you're all missing the point. Nikon is a business putting out a product in a market for a clientele. The D40 wouldn't be on the market if it didn't have a clientele. The D40's clientele? ENTRY LEVEL DSLR USERS. The reason /p/ doesn't like the D40? Apparently no one on /p/ is entry level, apparently we are all employed by Nat Geo and must shit all over everything inferior to us.
>> Anonymous
um, it's not about it being entry level or not

it's because there are better choices out there for the same price, there's no reason for it to have less features
>> Anonymous
>>299474

Like what? I didn't read the rest of this thread.
>> Anonymous
used d50, used d70, d70s ???

entry level canon, sony, olympus, pentax ???
>> Anonymous
The hell? comparing new to used doesn't make any damn sense of course it's cheaper IT'S USED for Christ's sake.

And it has everything to do with being entry level. the D40 matched the D80 in performance just not features, features that a beginner wouldn't care or know how to use anyway.
>> Anonymous
um, i didn't say cheaper? i said same price

every other company doesn't gimp their entry level camera on purpose and offer theirs at the same price as the d40
>> Anonymous
OK so then what about buying a used D40 what then aside from your "used" argument being totally invalid?

Every company does this just in different ways and apparently your not a huge fan of the way Nikon does it. Like I said Nikon has decided to keep the performance and dumb down the features, instead of the competitions way of dumbing everything down equally, which of course overall ends up gimping things less than Nikon as their cameras are balanced. I suppose its what your into. I don't speak for every DSLR newb but I'm sure being able to take great quality pictures fast and learning the ropes while sacrificing some features isn't too bad of a deal for that price.
>> Anonymous
um, then you get a cheaper camera that's still missing features?

stop trolling now, man. i didn't use "used" as an argument, i said used because you can't buy new d50 and d70 anymore, so naturally you can only find them in the used market. they both have the features missing on the d40 and are the same price as it

>> Like I said Nikon has decided to keep the performance and dumb down the features, instead of the competitions way of dumbing everything down equally

um, it's Nikon who is taking out the most features out of their entry level cameras just because it's entry level. no one else does this

stop trolling now, lol
>> Anonymous
>>299481

As others have said in the thread, why not let someone new to the field spend money on a good camera instead of a shitty one first? If he has the means, he might as well get one he'll be happy with for a long time to come and learn how that camera works, however long that may take him to do.

AF can be important sometimes, such as with sports, fast shooting, or other instances when it would just make things easier. I'd rather pay money for a good camera once than purchase a shit camera first and then upgrade to that good camera not too long after. It's a waste of money to do the latter.

tl;dr If he has the money, get the non "entry level" camera, regardless of whether his skills will outgrow a starter dSLR any time soon.
>> lobstercake !pJDFbJZtxk
I love my d40.
>> Anonymous
The Nikon undercutting strategy didn't pan out that well.

The D40 was supposed to sell for $500 which WAS, keyword WAS, cheaper by like.. $200? than the competitors. Which sort of, SORT OF, made sense, it was cheaper.

Now every other company has a sub $500 entry level model which is full featured. Oops? What now? D60X with AF motor? Update the entire AF lens lineup?
>> Anonymous
>Let's say I'm composing in my viewfinder and put the subject in a corner

What DSLRs have an AF point in the corner? enjoy your crap photo.

Focus and recompose only is a problem with really narrow depths of field, and if you are going for flower macro then it's not going to be in the far corner is it?....
>> Anonymous
Did you just ignore the entire post?

That's some amazing shit.
>> Anonymous
>>299501

Would you recommend the EOS Rebel XS over the D40
>> Anonymous
So what this thread boils down to is:
If you want a new, entry level nikon DSLR; then get a D40

rite?
>> Anonymous
>>299520

Or a Canon Rebel (300D, 350D, 400D, 450D...)
>> Anonymous
Hey, non OP here but interested in buying Nikon D40 IN BRAZIL.
Basically.
Should I buy it or not?
i'm completly newb on dSRL cameras, will be coming out of those highMP low quality digital cameras.
I already know i'l need to do focusing manually and etc, but, thing is, does /p/ know a better camera that may fit this characterists in Brazil?
Does the Canon EOS Rebel does a much better job for something like the same price?
Thank you a lot.
>> Anonymous
>>299524

Holy shit nikon make canon DSLRs now????
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>299529

No you dumb fuck. Canon puts the D after the numbers, Nikon before them.
>> Anonymous
>>299550
i'm going to assume you are a troll because this is /p/ but this also means all trolls are fed:

>>299520
stated that if you want a .....NIKON....
>>299524
replied with CANON options which weren't in 299520s specification UNLESS nikon were now making the mentioned canon models.
>> Anonymous
>>299556
Is a perfect showcase of why /p/ sucks. When you actually have to explain something like that, it's time for somebody to get a good smack upside the head
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
>>Allright, what do you have against the Nikon D40?
Lack of dedicated settings buttons is one. Change ISO? Go to this and that Menu. Change WB? Menu. Etc? Menu.
>> Anonymous
This anon uses a D40x since Feb. The biggest problem that bothers me is not the fact that my lense choices are limited.

It's the limited autofocusing ability. I basically only get to use the centre autofucus point. The other two are shit!

MOST of my photos, unless I'm very careful, are just a bit out of focus. This shit sucks! On both my kit lenses.
>> Anonymous
OP here
I'm not a total beginner, have been shooting on film (with manual focus) for half a year now, wouldn't even want to stop, it's just kinda expensive (film and processing) so that's why I want a digital. I don't think (at least not now) I'd want to upgrade in the next few years, I guess I'll just buy a tele lens and maybe a x0.42 converter (are they any good?) beside the kit lens and camera, and maybe shoot 1-2 rolls of Ilford films per month with the filmcamera.
Thanks for the responses though.
>> Anonymous
>>299711
Bitches don't know about my controlled Auto ISO and RAW.

>>299772
Excellent choice sir