Comments on: Nikon D40 tips the scales in Canon vs Nikon fight

By: Omnimodis78

Omnimodis78 — Wed, 20 May 2009 18:12:13 +0000

I also own a Nikon D40 – and I really do love it! I use the stock lens which is great, but invested into the 55-200mm VR lens, which I use quite frequently, also with great results. I won’t comment on any technical issues but I can say that from a user perspective, I have never regretted getting this camera – it is light, small(er), inexpensive and it enables me to take beautiful pictures…that is, if I have a certain shot in mind, the camera doesn’t let me down with the result. I said this before, and I say it again, it’s not the really the camera that matters but the person using it. of course, it has to be a quality machine, which is always the case with a Nikon, Canon, Olympus, some Sony DSLRs but it all boils down to the user. Put a Stradivarius into the hands of a noob and it will sound like crap, or give a generic made violin to a pro and it will sound amazing…that’s the main point. Cheers!

By: In the dark

In the dark — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:12:48 +0000

I have been a great proponent of the D40 in this thread the past couple of years and still am. Great camera. Love the 18-200mm VR lens. Save up and get it. They work great together.

Let me introduce another camera into the mix which costs more (1.5-2x) – the Nikon D90. The D40 is still the best buy on the market, but the D90 is a great camera. Is it worth the extra $450 or so? Depends on your budget. If you can save the extra dough in a reasonable amount of time and it won’t be a hardship, I’d go with the D90. If not, go with the D40.

By: john mactavish

john mactavish — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:37:12 +0000

I have to say the d40 is better. I have been looking at all the flickr photos taken both with nikon d40 and rebel xsi. almost all photos of the d40 looked amazing, they make it appear as if the subject in focus is three-dimensional. the longer you look at the subject the more it seems to pop out. I have seen good pics taken with the canon but they are so few and don’t have the same or enough of the 3d effect i notice with the nikon, and looking at the exif details the settings were never on auto for the canon, pics taken with the canon only look good when exif settings show a manual change in the camera options. This is the opposite for the nikon…all photos that looked amazing were surprisingly all set to auto in the exif details.

It seems the d40 was made for the newbies. Every shot is an amazing shot. While the canon and other expensive dslr cameras are made for students and professionals who really know what they are doing (which requires years of experience and schooling).

But from what I have seen on flickr…even the d40 pics beat the amazing shots of the higher end cameras. i guess education and experience still cant beat a computer.

check it out for yourself – google “nikon d40 flickr”, click the flickr camera finder search result. for the canon google “canon xsi flickr”

I agree with the posts that say to get the inexpensive nikon d40 and purchase a better lens.

By: Melvin

Melvin — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 09:54:55 +0000

Any tips on cleaning sensors?

Melvin

By: JR

JR — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:51:04 +0000

I have no complaint with this little Nikon

I am a fast sports buff – I shoot, Astro-turf hockey, rugby and baseball (sometimes under light) and all I
have is 2 d40 bodies, one has a fast mid-range 18-70 DX attached and the other a AFS 70-200vr 2.8

With this combo… I have twice the flexibility, on a shoot, (with instant access to two great lenses) and on bodies that are not only cost effective but also produce results as good as any other Nikon I have ever used, with exception to the D700 with FX sensor.

And as for the FPS, I practice close cropping and fire, selectively, on ’single shot mode’ and this has never let me down. I have.. very few miss focus shots and never have to BIN tons of wasted ones after a shoot.

By: in the dark

in the dark — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:52:02 +0000

I hadn’t heard any news that the D40 has been discontinued. The D40 is still widely available. It’s a better alternative than the next camera up, the D60. It’s much cheaper and provides better performance.

By: Melvin

Melvin — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 09:53:57 +0000

Query from a starter in digital photography

Great comments on the d40, as I understand from the local Nikon rep d40 are out of production. any suggestion to an alternates to the d40

By: In the dark

In the dark — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:47:17 +0000

Hey, xisman:
If you’re looking for a digital SLR, the D40 is the best value on the market, great pricing, easy to use and good pics as well. I’ve had mine for almost a year and love it.

If you have the $$$, spring for the Nikon 18-200mm VRII lens. It’s pricey (at least for what I can afford) but well worth it. For an all in one lens it cannot be beat. I was saving to get the 55-200mm VR but my son convinced me otherwise (’It’s too much of a bother switching out lenses and you have the chance dust collecting on the sensor”). He should know since he uses the 18-55mm and 55-200mm, so I took his advice and saved and saved and saved and bought the lens. He was so right about the convenience – the flexiibility of being able to go wide or zooming in at anytime is priceless . You’ll want to have it if you’re going to take shots on vacation -trust me.

Buy the D40 and use the money you save on the 18-200mm VR.

By: Michael van Staveren

Michael van Staveren — Wed, 21 May 2008 20:34:49 +0000

Hey!
Im going on a holiday to cyprus next month and I am looking for a good affordable camera, I want to take nice shots of ruins , nature and everything else really.
If been swaying towards nikon for a while now, it was either the 400d or the d40, but the nikon seems like the best buy hehe, sorry “Canon Representative”
I need to look into the lenses a bit more cause I dont really know much about them yet.

I read that 18-55 is better then 18-200 because of the wider angle? Why is that 18-200 seems wider? hehe I must be such an amateur.

And I read that the Nikon doenst have a dus cleaning program or thing inside as compared to the 400d, is that a big deal? I mean what is the chance of getting a hair or nice dust particle inside your lens?
And finally how does the dus removing work? Does it just send air true the lens or…?

Any insight will be greatly appreciated!

Mike

By: xisman

xisman — Wed, 21 May 2008 14:12:12 +0000

nikon, no dought. I had the same dought, even against 400d, I wouldn’t change my d40 for a 400d, I have friends with 400d, no way… it’s like a little porche against a huge american car, the porche can seem to have less, but it will win in any race. nikon d40 is a new generation camera, if u are starting in fotography, you’ll loose lot’s of months to start getting the photo u want with canon. nikon is love from the first time. I would prefer a thousand times d40 and spend the extra in better lens. there’s no owner of d40 that won’t talk with u pationately, the reverse is not true. belive me. anyway, both are good cameras. good luck. =)