File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Canon EOS 350D vs Nikon D40

I'm a bit undecided between these two to be honest.

Give me some pros/cons of both of them and/or why I should by a canon instead of a Nikon and vice-versa.

To be honest I'm leaning more towards the Canon.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
Canon 350D:
Dedicated status LCD
Smaller LCD screen
Takes all(?) EOS lenses
8 megapixels

Nikon D40:
No dedicated status LCD (status displayed on main screen)
Larger LCD screen
Restricted lens selection (if you want autofocus)
6 megapixels

Go do a comparison on dpreview.com or something if you want to know more
>> Anonymous
>>40698
nice one sherlock, that's where I took the pictures from to begin with, I just wanted opinions from people with experience to compare them both.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
i don't think it's fair to compare the 350D and the D40

D70s against the 350D is a much better comparison.
>> Anonymous
>>40707
Don't be a sarcastic ass if you want help, at least he was trying.
>> Anonymous
Go with 350... D40 is terrible. Absolutely hate the image quality and its lack of a motor in the body.
>> thefamilyman
>>40806
"Excellent image quality, great resolution and detail, who needs eight megapixels?"
"Image quality was probably the best of any current six megapixel digital SLR and good enough to question any advantage touted by an eight megapixel." - dpreview
>> ac
>>40806
Yeah, I'm a Canon fanboy myself, but I've gotta say--if you think the image quality of the D40 is terrible, you're probably doing something wrong.
>> Anonymous
>>40806
(op) I don't think the image quality of the D40 is anywhere close to terrible to be honest. I've seen numerous amazing shots taken by it which I was quite impressed.

>>40734
D70 surpasses 350D in terms of quality. Don't judge by the quantity of MP.
>> Anonymous
>>40806
Canon Troll is Canooooooooooooooooon!
>> Anonymous
Image Quality of all these cameras mentioned is going to be pretty much exactly the same given the same lens. Ultimately it's the lens that gives you really nice image quality. So buy whatever camera makes you feel good and then make sure you get something besides the kit lens for it.
>> thefamilyman
>>40902
"Kit lens is better quality than many others"
"...and ships with a fairly decent kit lens too."
"All of this and a pretty decent kit lens for $600, I'd say it's a bit of a bargain." - dpreview.

just because its a 'kit' lens, doesn't automatically mean its a crap lens. So dont feel obliged to be forced to buy another (better) lens, the kit lens on the D40 is plenty good. i could go on bla bla bla, but im sure you know what i mean, and i dont want ppl to start think i'm trolling. i'm just clearing out assumptions. Because assumptions make ppl ignorant, thus narrow minded.
>> Anonymous
if you're gonna get the d40, spend a little extra and go for the d50, better range of lenses
>> Anonymous
>>40903
I didn't mean to say the kit lens is useless. Most people are perfectly fine with the kit lens and rightly so. But I bugs me when people start comparing image quality of two nearly identical cameras when their assessments are most likely based on images taken with more expensive lenses.
>> des
>>40906
I'm not certain, because I haven't been paying attention, but if you don't see yourself using non-DX/AFS lenses regularly, the D40 is a better choice. Newer body, better image processing firmware, lower noise at higher iso.
Eh, just googled a bit. Looks like a situation of different not better. D40 lets you kill the NR for less shmearing. That'd be a plus for me, personally.
http://equipment.dearingfilm.com/Nikon_D40_vs_D50_High_ISO.php
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>40909
Holy shit that dude loves asians. Oh my GOD. Have you seen his website? Nice comparison review, but G-zus, he's got a worse case of yellow fever than I do.
>> Anonymous
>>40909
Pretty great comparison.