File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
/p/, I'm thinking of getting an SLR. I dunno why, but suddenly I've been hit with this interest in photography. Granted, currently I have pretty much zero knowledge of it, but I'm even thinking of taking a summer class at the local community college.

Anyways, the two SLRs I'm really taking a look at are the Nikon D40 and the Pentax K100D. They're both on the cheaper end of the price spectrum and both have similar specs (6MP). But the Pentax has some sort of shake reduction feature and 11 area AF versus 3 area AF on the D40. Now I don't really know what AF is (well, I know it's the acronym for "auto focus"), so I don't know which to go with. Also, I have no clue how important the shake reduction is.

I am not planning on buying a second lens for a while, so I'm going to be shooting with the kit lens in the meanwhile. Don't know if that makes any difference, but I'm just throwing it out there.

What does /p/ advise?

Pic is of the D40.
>> Anonymous
If you have somewhat shakey hands, I would suggest the Pentax. Vibration reduction is nice for people who don't have steady hands.

I don't know what people think of the kit lenses for both, but you will want to check on that before you pick one. If you get a great camera and a terrible lens for it, you get crap for pictures.

A good place for you to check (with reviews, etc):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=pentax_k100d%2Cnikon_
d40&show=all
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
K100D, no question. It's jam packed with features, is incredibly backwards compatible with all the Pentax lenses (which are optically superb and very plentiful and inexpensive used), and feels much better in your hand. The D40 is much too small for my liking. Also, no AF drive in the camera = fail.

The best aspects of the Nikon system are all priced out of my range, whereas Pentax puts all their advantages into damn near every camera they make. They're fighting for your dollar much harder than Nikon is.

Go Pentax.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Oh, and I've used both kit lenses: the Pentax 18-55 is far better. But pick up a few cheap primes when you get the chance, you'll be amazed at the quality.
>> Anonymous
>>46923
Pentax 18-55 is better than the Nikon 18-55 which is better than the Canon 18-55
But they all suck compared ot the Nikon 18-70

Though for the OP the K10D sounds like a better buy for you, I like nikon's lenses and all but if your not going to buy anymore and you can't use the 50mm f1.8 with AF (on the D40) just get the Pentax
>> Anonymous
Despite the Pentax being a better camera in every other regard, I would still go with the Nikon. What's its flaw?

It's ISO speed (a setting of how sensitive the camera's sensor is) only goes down to 200. Most cameras go down to at least one-hundred-something at the very most; most are about 100, but many have less (usually 80 or 50).

A camera starting at ISO 200 is just unacceptable, IMO.
>> Anonymous
I use its bigger brother, the k10d.
the SR system works very well, hand holding a shot at 55mm and 1/4 second is pretty amazing - the image is "sharpish" - not tripod shrap, but definitly acceptable - depending on how shakey you are, this may not be the case for you.

THe k100d is a very good piece of equipment, imho the d40 or d40x are not much of a match for it.

Yes, it does only do iso 200 ( as far as i know ) however - you probally wont notice the difference between 100 and 200 unless your pushing up shadows in post processing.

the k100d is extreamly good in low light, its iso 1600 is pretty good, and will even do 3200 ( you might want to use this with a program like noise ninja or neat image tho )

The pentax will work with every pentax lens build where as the nikon can only use nikons new AF-S lenes which have a focus moter in the lens.

Pentax have pretty much the best "kit lens" around at the moment.

becouse its a kit lens, it wont be fantastic...but would you rather have

cheap and very crappy?, or cheap and ...not really that crappy at all?

hope this badly written post helps
>> thefamilyman
>>46930
i dont think its as a serious problem as you make it out to be.
i've been living with my ISO200 min with my D70 for years now, i dont feel disadvantaged at all

and as far as i know, the K100D also starts at ISO200 as well.
>> thefamilyman
>>the nikon can only use nikons new AF-S lenes which have a focus moter in the lens *if you want AF*
fixed

people seem to forget that the D40 *can* use any other nikon lens, except without AF, only the AF-S lens can be used with AF on the D40 body, but in this day and age, almost every new lens nikon make now is AF-S.

and as for the kit lenses, you can read and judge for yourself:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/pentax_1855_3556/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_1855_3556_II/index.htm
>> Anonymous
I was in the same situation getting my first SLR. I was trying to decide between the D40, Pentax K100 and the Rebel XT.

I went with the Nikon and its a great camera. Shoots beautiful pictures and it was designed extremely well for people making the transition between point and shoot and SLR. The kit lens isnt bad at all, and if you don't have lots of experience with SLRs, your not really going to notice a difference between all 3 lenses from the different brands.

The only downside is the Pentax and Canon have a better flash than the Nikon does. However if your going to be doing flash photography you might as well get an external flash no matter what camera you choose.

The Nikon has compatibility with all Nikon lenses, it just doesn't have autofocus with lenses without AF-S AF-I. Although its not too hard to focus the camera yourself.

I picked up the $250 AF-S 55-200mm f/4~5.6 lens with the camera. Great lens, thats probably the only other lens your going to need for awhile, you might pick up some lens filters which are only like 10 bucks each.

Good luck with your decision. Honestly the D40, K100 and Rebel XT are all really really great cameras, and you'll be happy with whatever camera you choose. Just pick the only that feels comfortable in your hands and one that you think looks good. It'll keep you interested in taking pictures.
>> Anonymous
Appreciate all the feedback to this point. Most people seem to be leaning towards the Pentax. I do have a couple questions though, and i apologize in advance but like I said, I don't really know anything about photography.

The lens that comes with it is 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6. Now I know that it's only 3X as far az zoom is concerned, but I was wondering about other lenses - i.e. 35-100mm or 50-200mm. The zoom on these is pretty zimilar, and I know there are other qualities by which they are different from each other, but I don't know how.

The ISO speed I sorta figured is - the lower the number the more light, the higher the number (i.e.3200), the less, no? I plan on taking 90% if not more of my shooting outside - does that favor the Pentax or the Nikon?

And also, is the kit lens good enough to take decent macro shots? I know they have extra macro lenses that cost a pretty penny, but I'm looking to spend the least amount possible (which is still quite a lot). Thanks in advance.
>> elf_man
>>46950
No, with ISO the lower the number, the less light. ISO 100 requires a longer exposure time than 200. It's aperture where the lower number is more light.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>46950
It's not compatible with ALL Nikon lenses, only AI Nikon lenses. Pentax, on the other hand, can mount everything from screwmount to Pentax 67 lenses (with an adaptor)! Literally, every lens Pentax has ever made can be mounted on this camera. You can't say that about any Nikon.

As far as ISO 200 goes, that's the lowest I've got on my D50, and I don't miss ISO 100. It'd be nice, just so I can get lower shutter speeds outdoors on some days, but a ND filter will let me do the same. There's no discernable noise at ISO 200, it's extremely smooth.

The short answer to your macro question is no, and the longer answer is: well, kinda, but not really. You'll be able to get close, and cropping after the fact will let you get even "closer", but with any system, you'll have to get a macro lens if you want to do the really crazy stuff, like pictures of bugs anuses or whatever.

Honestly, you're going to be thrilled with your purchase no matter what. They all have the capability to take great pictures. I just think the Pentax is a better buy. I'm kicking myself for not getting one. Nikon is great, but just too expensive (I'm not talking about the initial purchase here, but rather the cost over time of buying new lenses and accessories and whatnot. Pentax is far more competitive in this aspect)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Oh, and this might just be subjective, but the Pentax has a hella quiet shutter/mirrorslap compared to the Nikon. It's almost night and day.
>> Anonymous
Thanks for the input again. I'm going to visit a camera shop and try both of them out and see how they feel in my hands.

As far as the macro pictures, I don't really need it to go microscopic or something, just wondering whether it compares favorably (or not) to a top of the line P&S like an H9.

And oh yeah, what are filters used for?

BTW heavyweather, are you from Nor Cal?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>46957
Austin, TX. But I've spent a lot of time in Nor Cal. Was it the hella that tipped you off?

Technically, point and shoots can focus closer just due to the design of their lenses. Optically they're shit though, so you've got to ask yourself if it's even worth it.
>> Anonymous
>>46957

Your probably not going to use any lens filters any time soon. They're tiny lenses that screw or clip onto the end of the camera and pretty much filter out various forms of sunlight. Theres also special effect filters, such as fisheye ones. They range in price starting from about 10 bucks.
>> Anonymous
Get a Nikon D40, just because it feels good to have one ;)
>> Anonymous
Nikon is better.

>>46922
>>46923
>>46936
>>46937
>>46954
>>46955
>>46978
Same person.
>> Anonymous
>>47001
>>47002
same person.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Uh, no, I don't need two tripfags. I -wish- I had some of thefamilyman's work, though. He does great stuff.
>> thefamilyman
     File :-(, x)
>>47004
hehe your making me blush *^_^*

just about non AI lenses, its kinda hard and pointless trying to use/buy or even find them. as there are really bugger all non-AI lenses out there.

but i must say, this thread made me do more research, the K10D actually looks rather attractive, if i wasn't a nikon fanboy lol i would look at a K10D.

as for marco's, p&s does very close macros because of their sensor size, try doing macro medium format upwards, almost impossible. what i use to do many years ago with my F60 was to turn my lens backwards and hold it against the body, works very well.

my *general* advice is:
Honestly there is very little to worry about lens compatibility, as stated the pentax can take pretty much everything, and same goes for the D40 as i am very confident that you wont ever be using a non-AI lens.
both bodies have relatively comparable features, just one does something slightly better than the other bla bla stuff like that.
the *real* acid test is how they feel in *your* hands not our hands.

Photo is taken about 10 years ago with my F60 with lens reversed on E100VS i think, its actually quite a small weed in the cracks of the foot path.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution1 dpiVertical Resolution1 dpiImage Created2004:02:18 19:31:23Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1024Image Height682
>> Anonymous
>>47037
>the *real* acid test is how they feel in *your* hands

Truth.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
     File :-(, x)
>>47037

Beautiful shot, dunno what i'd do without my macro lens.

>>46979
Actually, i'd recommend that they start using filters as soon as possible. They're god sends, and help to keep a picture from overexposing. Also helps make the colors richer and "pop" more.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution500 dpiVertical Resolution500 dpiImage Created2007:05:12 18:26:14Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width943Image Height626
>> elf_man
>>47045
*picks up jaw* That's just stunning. Damn, I need to get a good camera.
>> elf_man
>>47037
Oh and familyman, that's a wicked shot too. Took me a while to figure out which parts were plant and which weren't.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>47047

when you're ready to go camera shopping let me know and i'll help you out.
>> Anonymous
>>47002

Obvious troll is oooooooooobvious.
>> Anonymous
imho, The k10d is definitly the way to go - unless you plan on spending Serious dollors.....then sure....your canon 1dsmk2 or 1dmk3 or 5d or nikon d2h/d2x/d200 are better.....

but again.....if you dont feel like spending a few thousand bucks.....the k10d is probally the best you can do.
>> Anonymous
I was going to add, which i've seen that no one has, that the nikon D40 is probably the tiniest DSLR i have ever seen and held. However, I just did a quick dimension check with good ol google, and the k100d is not much bigger.
124 x 94 x 64 mm (4.9 x 3.7 x 2.5 in) D40
129 x 93 x 70 mm (5.1 x 3.7 x 2.8 in) K100d.

So, basically, that's one more thing that is very similar with these two cameras. I'd say to just go with the pentax. For the money, it will be a much better first camera. It has advance features for an entry level model, much like you would find in Nikon's own D80. The 6MP might be a hangup, but for me, 5MP is enough, so 6 is only a cherry on top. I might be an exception though.
>> Anonymous
this is from Digital Review:

"The Pentax K110D and the Nikon D50 digital SLR are both very good cameras although if you prefer to simply concentrate on getting the shot and having the camera control the settings automatically for you, we feel the Nikon D40 delivers the most consistent results out of the three models we tested."

i personally like the d40.
>> Anonymous
>>47115
>simply concentrate on getting the shot and having the camera control the settings automatically for you

AHH! False dichotomy!

Seriously, if someone knows anything about exposure (something that takes a read through a few Wikipedia articles to learn) then using manual will not get in the way of "getting the shot.

I'll probably get some disagreement here, but it strikes me as if (if one is used to the controls on his camera and can adjust it quickly) automation (auto, aperture priority, shutter priority) would get in the way of getting shots more.

Shooting automatic, you run the risk of having too much or too little depth of field, too slow a shutter speed to hand-hold or stop motion, and the exposure being botched or not how one wants it.

Shooting shutter priority, one runs the risk of having too much or too little depth of field, and the exposrue being botched or not how one wants it.

Shooting aperture priority, one runs the risk of too slow a shutter speed to hand-hold or stop motion, and the exposure being botched or not how one wants it.

I'm not saying I don't use automation when appropriate. If light values are flickering, if I'm having to shoot without looking at the meter reading, and so on, I'll use one of the priorities. But I wouldn't trust it for general shooting, only as a backup tool.
>> Anonymous
>>47119
Go away, bitch! Don't fucking start a completely unrelated and unnecessary flamewar.
>> Anonymous
OP here. Just came back from testing out both of the cameras and the D40 just felt so much better in my hands - it's smaller, lighter and just fits better. I know most people here recommended the Pentax, but it just didn't feel as comfortable.

But unfortunately, it's quite a bit more expensive than the Pentax (which actually has a $50 mail in rebate right now), so I don't know what I'm going to do...
>> Anonymous
>>47169

Mail in rebates are made of FAIL. Instant discounts only. Get the camera thats comfortable to you, the one you like. The quality of the cameras is about the same.
>> Anonymous
>>47169
Then get the D40, but PLEASE don't get the 18-55, Get the 18-70, It will cost you a BIT more, but its a MUCH MUCH MUCH better lens than the craptacular 18-55
>> Anonymous
>>47191
Now now, not that "MUCH" better, but yes. Primary the build quality is a lot nicer and CAs are under a better control.
>> Anonymous
>>47171
>Mail in rebates are made of FAIL

Why's that? Free money is free money.
>> Anonymous
I swear by Nikon.

Also I totally recommend the class at the college. You'll gain mastery of your new baby real quick and be more ready in the field.

Go develop that eye!
>> Anonymous
>>47202

Are you fucking retarded? Yeah mail in rebates aren't bad. As long as you don't mind making a copy of the receipt, cutting out the original UPC, filling out the shipping info, adding in the serial of the item, mailing it, and waiting 6 weeks to 2 years for your check in the mail.
>> Anonymous
>>47237

You forgot having to re-mail the copies several times after they've lost them. Mail-in rebates are great.
>> Anonymous
>>47237
That's not too much work at all, and I've never had a mail-in rebate take an excessive amount of time to process. Sure, it's not instant, but considering what it has to go through (post office, big corporate bureaucracy, post office again) it's reasonably quick.