File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
I have a D40.
I'm very interested in getting into photography.

Is this already fail?

How subjectively good is my camera from a n00bs standpoint.
>> Batmanish
sgood
>> Anonymous
the D40 is a good camera to begin with
>> Anonymous
getting one soon.
>> Anonymous
I'm a beginner too, and I just got me the D40x.

feels good that someone approves of that>>85755
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
     File :-(, x)
I love mine. To some extent that's probably just due to it being my first slr, but even so. Just put the damn thing in manual and learn. The only limitation worth mentioning is the whole lens motor autofocus thing, but really, it's a good camera.
Pic related, kit lens.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D40Camera SoftwareVer.1.10Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.1Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern3456Focal Length (35mm Equiv)45 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:08:14 11:52:06Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/9.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias-1.3 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length30.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3008Image Height2000RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastHardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used200Color ModeCOLORImage QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation1.0 EVISO Speed Requested200Tone CompensationHIGHLens TypeNikon D SeriesLens Range18.0 - 55.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6Auto FocusSingle Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations3607Image OptimizationCUSTOMSaturation 2ENHANCED
>> sage Anonymous
The d40 is a fag camera
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
>>86498
You mean it fucks other cameras in the ass? Without even the common courtesy of a reach-around?
heh, failsage.
>> Anonymous
Nobody who counts (and isn't a photojournalist) gives much of a fuck about bodies anymore. They're all good, ranging from "very good" to "absolutely fucking orgasmically amazing". I remember lugging round $4000 D1 bodies that shot 2.6 megapixels onto 128mb CF cards, they were considered proper pro-level cameras. Five or six years ago, most working pros would have killed for cameras like the 40D and D350. The gear snobs who sneer at entry-level cameras know fuck all. The kind of people who brag about their leicas or wander round the zoo with MkIIIs are looked down upon by professionals just as much as they look down upon people with reasonably priced gear. The camera is just an obstacle in between your brain and the photograph. It's nice to have something with all the bells and whistles, but it doesn't really matter.

What matters are lenses, support and light. Ditch the kit lens and get a decent prime (fixed-focal length) lens or a pro-level zoom - a kit lens takes no better pictures than a good digital compact and is a hell of a lot less convenient. Spend all your money on tripods and lighting - a good flashlight or a solid tripod makes far more difference to your photographs than a couple of megapixels. Get Ansel Adams' books from the library - the techniques you learn will result in sharper, better exposed images.

Most importantly, take lots of photographs and critically examine each one.
>> Anonymous
>>86511
Most professionals (speaking from assisting with photographers who shoot for Cherie magazine) use high level gear such as Nikon D2Xs and Canon 1D's. I agree that a camera is just a tool and its more about the photographer, but the D40 really is a heap of shit. Nikon has basically unloaded them on to the market cheaply and en mass to cater to the growing legions of young emo fags who think they can be photographers. Yes lenses are very important, but so are features such as focus points, metering zones, fps etc, that the D40 fails hard on. It's price reflects its abilities
>> Anonymous
>>86548

>>86511is right. You are wrong.

>focus points

No focus points did people well for quite some time. One is fine. Three is good. 51 is H-Bomb level overkill for everyone except sports and wildlife photographers- and hey, they managed, too.

>metering zones
Because simply spot-metering the highlights, midtones, and shadows and averaging the shutter speeds together is so difficult?

Or because a simple center-weighted average is impossible to interpret, as opposed to a magic algorithim of "zones?"

Meters are supposed to do just that- meter. Not tell you what exposure to use. They give you data; you interpret it and set the exposure.

>fps etc
Again, useless except for sports and wildlife photographers. If you're shooting ten frames a second, you're not composing. You're holding down the shutter button.

The only big advantage to pro bodies is the full coverage viewfinder. And that is a big advantage, really actually an ignored necessity with digital, but other than that, unless someone needs the robustness, a D40 is fine too.
>> Anonymous
>>86553
I'm sorry, but with cameras, you really do get what you pay for.

And I'm fairly sure>>86511
is>>86553
>> Anonymous
>>86557
No, we're not the same.

What is the big advantage of, say, a D2X over a D40, weatherproof body and full coverage viewfinder included? What does the D2X have on it that, outside of a few selected niches, actually has any impact on reasonable, real-world shooting?
>> Anonymous
>>86558
>What is the big advantage of, say, a D2X over a D40

oh, I await the replies to this with glee
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
>>86558
From what I've read, all kinds of stuff for off-camera lighting. Which can make a big difference for real shooting situations.
I love my d40, but I make no assumption that it's anywhere near a professional camera.
>> Anonymous
I say that the D40 is pretty good. I also got one and I'm still learning how to use mine. But I just hate it when someone who handles those retangluar digital cameras and does the same with the D40 or D80 or w/e. So as long as you get a good grip with your camera...the camera will do its part to get good pics...just look pro
>> Anonymous
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm
>> Anonymous
I have one and I like it.
>> Anonymous
>>86587
fuck off
>> Anonymous
>>86587
Yeah, I'll bet Ken Rockwell is shooting with a D40 and an 18-55mm kit lens.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>86604
he does actually lol
" I don't use my D80 anymore. When I want a fun, light camera, I grab my D40. I only grab my big D200 when I've got something more serious to photograph."
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I've had a D50 and a D40. I'm crap at photography. Someone broke the autofocus on my lens. Not really sure where I'm going with this. The D40 basically suits my needs as a beginner to photography. It's got clear, useful instructions as to what all the buttons and functions do built into the camera's firmware, and it also has a nice auto mode so even my parents can use it fine when they just need a camera. I dunno dude.
>> Anonymous
>>86608
>When I want a fun, light camera, I grab my D40. I only grab my big D200 when I've got something more serious to photograph

OH NOES TEH HEAVY CAMERA IS TOO HEAVY FOR MISTER ROCKWELL!

TEH D200 IS TOO BIG AND NOT FUN ENOUGH FOR OLD KENNY BOY

What a fucking moron.
>> Anonymous
>>86619

haha, are you honestly making fun of him because he said he liked taking pictures with a lighter camera?

haha, wow.
>> Anonymous
>>86614
any book on photography published in the last 25 years will give you clear instructions on every funtion of an SLR
>> Anonymous
>>86620
Pretty much. I really don't see how much lighter a D40 is compared to a D80 or 100. What is he, a limp wristed girl?

Another indicator the D40 is aimed at pussies. An SLR is meant to be heavy and large in your hands. Get a point and shoot if you're too much of a weakling to carry around a big camera.
>> Anonymous
>>86622

jesus, could you even TRY to make it seem like you're compensating more?
>> Anonymous
>>86623
Haha, no. It's a pretty well documented fact that professionals prefer heavier cameras to cut down on shaking, compose their shots better etc. Part of the reason for optional battery grips is to make the camera body larger and easier to hold.

But yeah, I mean the D40 is nice to carry around in your fanny pack and maybe your little sister can have an easy time using it if you need someone to snap a photo of you.

Anyway, I'm tired of this thread.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>86624
Maybe at first, but over time, heavier bodies get to you. Fatigue of the hands, neck, etc. is not an ingredient of good hand-holding.

I know a few professionals, and none of them employs a professional body or a battery grip for weight; they prefer the square shape, not the big size. One of them does own some 1Ds series bodies, but he shoots even in the studio primarily with a 5D; the other just owns a 5D and a 40D. Both of them use the battery grip, but again, not for the weight. In fact, just the opposite: they actively dislike the weight.

Also, see attached pic.

>>86566

The concept of a "professional camera" is just a marketing label for an expensive camera with features needed by a few types of professionals: some photojournalists need the rugged body, sports photographers need the insane number of autofocus sensors and FPS, etc. There's nothing inherently professional about them or unprofessional about a D40. It just has a few less features.

As for lighting control, I've heard some stuff about that, but got the impression it was across the Nikon range. Maybe just the D40 doesn't have it. But I'm sure you can still manage with the old shoe-mount controller and so on.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2004:12:12 09:26:05Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width296Image Height207
>> Anonymous
At least he saged correctly...
I'm just getting into photography and in all likelihood I'm not going to go off and make a career out of this. I'll probably just be messing around with it and increasing my knowledge of photography for that sake alone, which is all I really want. I'm not going to go to Africa and take photos of cheetahs running at top speed or taking pictures of the world from a jet. I'll just be taking pictures of still life things, MAYBE simple motion like water or people playing around, but again, no track and field or football athletes running at top speed. In regard to low shutter speeds, I'll probably employ the use of a moderate to cheap tripod and a remote control to avoid shaking the camera upon clicking the button.

That said, is a D40 a good investment, or is it literally SO bad that it's not even entry level, as some people here are saying?
>> Anonymous
>>86649

c'mon, don't be an idiot.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S A FINE FUCKING CAMERA.

You aren't a pro. MOST ENTRY LEVEL DSLR'S ARE MORE THAN GOOD ENOUGH THESE DAYS.
>> Anonymous
>>86649
Yes, it is, OP. Get it and a fast normal F-mount prime and go to town.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
battery grips are heaven when you have a massive flash on top and you want to do potraits.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>86658
i thought you cant get one for your A100 hehe
>> Anonymous
Good glass = sharp, contrasty, colourful images.
Good lights = dynamic, richly textured images.
Good technique = properly exposed and composed images.
Good camera = slightly bigger enlargements, a few seconds saved.

The camera is the least important link in the chain in terms of image quality. Going from 6mp to 12mp only gives you a few more diagonal inches of enlargement. All DSLR sensors are much of a muchness in terms of color, contrast and dynamic range. All those extra features do is make up for lack of technical skill or lack of time to use them (sports photographers, paparazzi). The difference between a kit lens and L-glass is absolutely striking, even on a small, screen-resolution JPEG. Good lights can make the difference between a good image and an unusable one. Technique is what ultimately makes the difference between the front cover of Time magazine and a snapshot in a shoebox. It's not about the camera.
>> Anonymous
my film camera that cost me 200 bucks is superior to a D40
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>86659
I cant (well sony dont make one there are some 3rd party chinese ones that i might look at tho) but ive used them before and i really want one.
>> street-pirate
>>86663

It didn't cost you 200$ if you take the film into account.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
The D40 is more than fine. I use a D50 for most of my stuff, which is by anyone's account NOT a pro camera. If it has full manual controls and will mount an F-mount lens, -you're in business-. It's not the fucking camera.

The features of higher end cameras are really nice, but sometimes they can slow you down, and even worse, sometimes they can speed you up to the point that your pictures degrade from lack of thought.
>> Anonymous
EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP.


The d40 is a good camera. It's not fucking wundercamera 8000, but it's also not a p&s everyday camera. It takes great pictures, it's light, and the kit lens doesn't suck complete sac. If you're a beginner that wants a camera that delivers a bit more freedom than a p&s, then this is a fantastic camera. Maybe it's not necessarily an entry level camera, but it sure as hell gets the job done, for cheap at that. And if you're retarded and concerned about the 6mp, get the d40x.

If you're going pro, step it up a bit to a better body, if you're getting into it as a hobby, get this fucking camera.
>> Anonymous
>>86682
Professor owns a D40
>> sage Anonymous
>>86682
Truth spoken
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
>>86622
But for some reason we don't have people making these same accusations of the digital rebel, which weighs about the same and, from what I've heard, feels more plasticky.
>> street-pirate
>>86699

The rebel feels like a toy. The pictures are just as good as from my D80.

About weight; most of your gear's weight is from the lenses anyway, so saving 200 grams on the camera body isn't that much of an improvement.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
For me, since image quality is largely a result of your lens and particular method of post-processing, the real value of a camera body is in its ergonomics and overall usability. For this, I'll take a Nikon D200 any day of the week. It's simply perfect. With the MB-200 vertical grip attached, it's even better.
>> street-pirate
>>86701

I feel this is true only in a given class of cameras. 1,6x (or 1,5x) crop cameras are pretty much all the same, but full frame is better. Medium format cameras are even better.

The new generation of 1,6x cameras looks heaps better at higher isos, though. Which is a huge improvement, don't anybody give me lip about tripods.
>> Anonymous
>>86682
This isn't OP, but thanks for the comment. It swayed me into buying the d40 as my first DSLR.
Anything else a noob like myself should know ?
>> Anonymous
>>86701b
QFT, though I'm not a fan of vertical grips.

>>86699
>But for some reason we don't have people making these same accusations of the digital rebel

I think that the idiot railing against the D40 would probably say all the same things about the Rebel.
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
>>86709
Maybe so, but in general I hear people bitching about the d40 but not the rebel, when many of the same complaints apply.
>> Anonymous
>>86714
This thread is the first time I've ever heard any major anti-D40 bitching. But oh well.
>> Anonymous
>>86717
People bitch about it almost every time it's brought up on /p/, how could you miss it?
>> Anonymous
check out this guys photo blog, all taken with a D40, many with the kit lens.

http://theflyspot.blogspot.com/
>> Anonymous
It does the trick.
>> Meatbread !gFRG2WW112
Learn2shoot. If you learn how to SHOOT GOOD PICTURES using GOOD COMPOSITION then your tool will only enhance your ability. People can take good photos with disposable 35mm film camera. the d40 is fine.