1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

KenRockwell & More

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by InlineSix, Sep 17, 2008.

  1. InlineSix

    InlineSix Guest

    Well I'm almost positive I'll be selling my OLYMPUS soon because I'm getting a good price for it, and I am thinking of buying a
    -Nikon D40 or D40x
    -Nikon D60
    -Nikon D80
    -Canon Rebel XTi


    I found a website from Bimmerforums and here it is:
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/index.htm

    Basically this dude recommends a D40 over basically anything else including the D40x, D80, D200, etc.

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

    Here's some of the stuff he said

    So what do you guys think? Does this guy know what he's talking about when it comes to making a decision between the D40 and and D40x/D60/D80?


    I posted this in another forum also and many people said the guy doesn't know what he is talking about.
     
  2. He has a lot of knowledge but sometimes makes statements that make people wonder .
    I would take the D40 or D60 in that list - I've done some of my best work with a D40 .
    The D40 has the advantage of high flash synch https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=188192
    and good iso , the D60 has dust reduction and in camera RAW editing as a plus .
    Ken tells people to buy the SB600 rather than the SB800 to save money - it depends on your needs rather than his opinion but I usually read his opinions and tests when I make decisions - you just need to seperate the facts from the opinions before deciding .
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2017
  3. InlineSix

    InlineSix Guest

    Well I'm almost positive I'm either going to get a D40 or a D80.

    I'm just not sure that the extra money for the D80 is worth it.
     
  4. I got rid of my D80 because the matrix metering is highly unpredictable and often blows highlights , it favours the focus point so with exactly the same scene , if you move the focus point lets say , to a point 1/3 of the way into the frame to get maximum depth of field for a landscape , and that point is on a dark patch , it almost does a 'spot meter' on that point and blows out everything else .
    I traded it for two brand new D70S bodies and sold them together for more than the price of a new D80 and bought another brand new D70S with very reliable metering .
    I love my D40 though the matrix metering is similar to the D80 but less so with only 3 focus points .
    My D80 also developed a hot pixel that couldn't be remapped for some reason .
     
  5. Some of my favorite pictures were taken with my D40 ...
    [this one has had a slight tweak on saturation ]
    D40Taranaki214m.
    NIKON D40    ---    18mm    f/3.5    1/125s    ISO 320
     
  6. Please be aware that with the 40, 40x, or 60, any used AF lens you find older than AF-S will be a manual focus lens, and I'm not sure if non CPU lenses will meter. Since glass is often the only lasting thing in photo equipment, and often the largest cost, I went with the D80 as my first body when I switched to digital, so I could use my older lenses. Perhaps Ken just doesn't own any D series AF lenses, or prefers manually focusing, or doesn't shop for used glass bargains, or doesn't need resolution of more than 6.1 MP, so the D40 was--to him--on par with the D200.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 17, 2008
  7. Lurker

    Lurker

    Jul 21, 2007
    NJ
    1) The D40 is a good choice. As Mike pointed out: you can only use autofocus with lenses that have a built-in focus motor, or "AF-S" in Nikon lingo. The good news: more and more lenses are AF-S. And only "chipped" lenses (pretty much AF lenses and excluding the manual focus lenses) can meter on the D40. Don't let that stop you from getting the D40 - it's a fantastic little camera - just be aware that not every lens will have 100% functionality with it.

    2) Ken Rockwell is highly controversial. He has a lot of good advice on his website, but also a lot of junk. Some of the advice he gives applies only to his style of photography ("you don't need a tripod") which might or might no apply to yourself.

    3) Welcome!
     
  8. I got my daughter a D40 with the 18-55 kit lens and it's been a great little camera. It's always been in programmed automatic or the happy green mode and has produced great results under various light conditions. As Mike mentioned the lack of an internal focus motor limits lens choices. Depending on your needs the D40 could be meet all your expectations. If not it's a great little camera to develope your skills and a good back up camera if you decide to drop some coin on a more advanced prosumer body .........

    Cheers

    Ted:smile:
     
  9. heydale

    heydale

    121
    Oct 5, 2007
    Maine
    D80

    in a very short while the D80 should drop in price .

    The big advantage of the D80 is a usable viewfinder.
    the second is lens availability.

    If your looking for a grab and go camera the D40 is an excellent choice. if you want to work on your craft the D80 is a much better choice.

    dale
     
  10. That is the way to go - 40 or 80 - skip the middle models

    I really liked the D40 - but sold it for the D80, so that I could buy some used / cheaper AF only lenses

    It has more features as well - check and see if those are necessary for YOU
     
  11. InlineSix

    InlineSix Guest

    Thanks for all the replies guys! I appreciate it.

    And I don't think I'm gonna use cheaper, older lens so i think i should be fine with the D40 autofocus since im going to buy newer lens

    And If it helps, I'm mostly gonna shoot nature, cars and sometimes people.

    I'm gonna go to best buy and test the D80 since i already tested the D40. check back with you guys later.
    Thanks again.
     
  12. latazyo

    latazyo

    Apr 23, 2008
    STL
    I have both

    I LOVE my D40, but I use the D80 about 85%+ of the time b/c I prefer the bigger size (I also have a vertical grip on it)

    you should definitely hold them both, the D40 seems tiny to me now after using the D80 w/ grip
     
  13. The older primes aren't attractive just because they're cheaper. They're faster. For example, the inexpensive Nikon 35mm f/2 lens is twice as efficient at gathering light than the most expensive f/2.8 pro zoom lenses, and almost 4 times more efficient at gathering light as the typical f/3.5-5.6 kit lens.

    The d40 is 6MP... which is fine if your only interest is making pictures for web presentation. But if you're thinking of cropping pictures and then making 8x10 or larger prints, the 40x, 60, and 80 might be better choices.

    Ken Rockwell's comments on flash sync are totally misleading. A sync speed of 1/250 on a camera with a base sensitivity of iso100 is exactly the same as a sync speed of 1/500 on a camera with a base sensitivity of iso200.

    If you buy a d40 and like the hobby, the odds are you'll be upgrading within 12 months. But that's perfectly reasonable, as you'll get a lot of use out of the camera in the interim.
     
  14. Zachs

    Zachs

    884
    Feb 25, 2006
    NC
    My God Frank, please please please don't go around and spew this garbage to people who are new to photography. I guess you forgot, what, 5,6 years ago when 10mpx, 12 mpx were ONLY for professionals and everyone cropped just fine with 6mpx.

    Honestly, stating that 6mpx is ONLY for web presentations just really really irks me.
    Standard web size is: 640x480 @ 72 dpi.

    Large web size would be around 800x600 @ 72dpi

    D40 Resolution size is~: 3000x2000 @300 dpi

    I've printed 2'x3' photos with my D1H. Thats 2mpx - crystal clear and sharp.

    Again, please don't spew garbage out to newbies. You should definitely know better.
     
  15. LRogers

    LRogers

    770
    Sep 3, 2008
    Delaware, US
    I too saw Ken's recommendation, but ultimately ended up starting with the D80 instead for a number of reasons (those mentioned above) but also given the progress and the price dropping I wanted to stay closer to the latest stuff rather than buy old and then want to upgrade quickly. I love the D80. So much so, I'm already considering what the next body would be for upgrade. As Heydale mentioned the price is dropping, I see it at Adorama for 675. I see TigerDirect has it for 600.00. The D40 with kit is down to around 450 now, so if price is your driver, they are not that far apart.

    If I might hijack the thread a little, for those of you that have been doing this for some time, what would be your next step after a D40 or D80 and why? I see the D90 is out for around $1300, but the D200 is down to $1000. Without jumping up to D3 or D700, that just leaves the D300 at around $1500. Or would you stay with the D40/D80 for a while... My thinking on going with the D80 instead of the D40 was that I would be fine with software and everything else until I was ready to upgrade as opposed to maybe being pushed to upgrade early....
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 17, 2008
  16. Zachs

    Zachs

    884
    Feb 25, 2006
    NC
    ^ Hell, there is a D200 in the FS right NOW for 600$ !! I would love to have that camera back in my hands!
     
  17. Lurker

    Lurker

    Jul 21, 2007
    NJ
    Zach, I agree with your position, although I think you can write it slightly friendlier. Frank writes a lot of good advice and I think that Frank deserves that you refer his post as "misinformation" instead of "garbage".

    Frank: there's usually no need for high megapixel counts. Marketing departments of the camera manufacturers have done an excellent job in making us believe that everything always needs to be printed at 300 DPI and that is, quite frankly, not really needed.

    Years ago the German computer magazine C'T stated, after doing some research, that basically any size picture could be created from a 2MP image and be just fine. Why? Because the larger the image, the larger the viewing distance. Our eyes have limited resolution - at a distance of 10ft you really cannot tell the difference between a 300dpi image and a 75dpi image for instance. Get real close and you will of course, but for practical purposes 2MP would be good enough.

    Sidenote: C'T ("Computer Technic") are no nimcumpoops. They really know their stuff - compared to them, Phil's camera tests at dpreview almost look chaotic and ad hoc instead of standardized. I mean, these are the guys that see how many "Dr. Grauert" letters a printer can print on a cartridge to calculate the real price per page - and their hard drive tests have included sound measurements for eons. It's always nice to see a magazine measure things that do matter for the reader and not just stuff that looks good on marketing material :smile:

    Of course we're IQ freaks and want to see something better than "this will do from a distance" - but the need to have 12 MP for a 20"x30" is really not there.

    Anecdote number 1: when my father-in-law was in the hospital (doing the banging on heaven's door thing) I gave him a portrait of my son. Printed at 8x10, it was a crop of a picture that I shot with a 3MP camera. All the nurses said they were impressed by how great the image was, not just subject and composition, but also "so sharp, great colors", etc. This was effectively maybe a 1.8MP image that apparently printed great 8x10.

    Anecdote number 2: another image shot with my 5D (6.1MP) with some light cropping (just to get the portrait cropped tighter) printed out just fine at 20"x30". I did have to pump up the image size - Adorama didn't accept it otherwise, but given the "OMG you can even see the bread crumbs on his chin" kind of comments it wasn't really fuzzy...
     
  18. You're overly agitated, Zachs. I have the right to an opinion, as do you. Why not tell the OP what you believe rather than attacking me?

    Heck, I have trouble remembering what happened 5-6 days ago - lol.

    Then get over it. But you're misquoting me. Read carefully this time. I did not say that 6MP is only for web presentations.

    "The d40 is 6MP... which is fine if your only interest is making pictures for web presentation. But if you're thinking of cropping pictures and then making 8x10 or larger prints, the 40x, 60, and 80 might be better choices.
    "


    That's nice, but your standards may differ from mine. Typically, the figure cited for high quality prints is an image file of 300 ppi. Let's play with that for a minute.

    Here's a uncropped picture from my beloved old d70. It's pixel dimensions (before resizing) were 3008x2000, which means it could make a 300ppi print of 10.027 by 6.667 inches.

    original.

    If I cropped it for the aspect ratio of a 10x8 print, the pixel density would drop to 250ppi.

    View attachment 253935

    But if I decided I'd prefer to present the image as a vertical, the 8x10 crop would only result in a pixel density of 200ppi.

    View attachment 253936

    But let's say that I didn't want so much headroom over the flower, and did a custom 8x10 crop like this...

    View attachment 253937

    The pixel density would only be a measured 158ppi, which, to meet my standards, would require upsizing to produce a quality print.

    That's where I was coming from, Zachs, and I'll stand behind that position. Since the price premium is minimal, a 10MP camera is a better choice. Sorry we don't agree, but...

    you're way out of line, sir.
     
  19. Commodorefirst

    Commodorefirst Admin/Moderator Administrator

    May 1, 2005
    Missouri
    This statement I do disagree with.

    It infers that you cannot print large prints from a 6 MP camera even if they are cropped somewhat.

    Wrong, based upon my actual prints I have done.

    I have many many many many many prints that dissaprove this statement with my D70, and even with my CP5000

    You might have to have the lab upsize or upres the file but it is easily accomplished and they turn out fine. Cropping and printing large without upsize, that can create some problems as Frank demonstrates in his photos.

    I have 10x20 prints with small file sizes and 50% crops, lots of 11x14 images with moderate crops, and a 5 MP camera pic that is pretty good even at 18x24 size on my living room wall right now. from a 1.5 MB jpg image from the CP5000.

    Now are my files better with my higher MP cameras, generally yes if I do my part, I can crop more and maintain my dpi so Frank is correct on that aspect of his post.

    And as an aside, terms like spewing Garbage, are a bit harsh in my moderator opinion.

    Can we just say, disagree and post our thoughts politely.
     
  20. Then you missed the qualifier, too, Wade, which was...

    Do you disagree with that statement? And notice that I wasn't adamant. I said "might". It was a suggestion... something I felt the OP should consider... not a decree.

    At any rate, each of us should be allowed to express an opinion without being subject to hostile repsonses.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.