The more i read the bigger nightmares i get..

Discussion in 'Nikon DX DSLR' started by headstand, May 1, 2007.

  1. Hi,
    I want to buy a DSLR camera, and because i loved my old nikkon coolpix (yeah i know it hurts her, buts its time for a new one), i kinde drawn toward the nikkon DSLR, but now i'm reading more forums about the stuff, my nightmare about choosing the "right one" is getting worse every day.
    In the end of this year i want to make a trip to india (to practice yoga) and i also like to make some nice picuters there.

    For the body, i'm thinking between the D40 D40x D80.
    (i know the difference between the lens zoom options between them)
    the choise between the d40-D40x is about being able to blow up a picture on poster format, i'm not sure if i'm gonne use it but i know its frustrating if you can't, but could annybody tell me from experiance how big you can print with the D40 and the D40x and how much better the d40x is with that part. (if you do please refere to the A0 format)

    I personaly think the body of the d40's are a bit to small for me and specially if you gonne use a big lens.
    also people told me that you can set more things manual in the D80 and offcourse the lens engine in the body is a pro. But i don't know how deeply i will go in to it but i'm drawn more towards the D80 at this time.

    But that between the body's now my 2nd nightmare came alive, the lens i shoudl choose..
    This is a small list what i want my lens to be able to do... (or multiple lenses)

    i want to be able to make like portrait style of yoga positons
    i would like to make also landscape or building pictures
    i would love to zoom in on flowers or other nature things.
    (yeah i know it almost covers everything...)

    But i want them to be sharp, i seen pictures of zoom of a temple from a friend made with a 70-200 but what you see is that the zooming part is sharp and the rest in the background is more a blur, and that is something i don't like.
    So ik want to make pictures that are completely sharp all the way, specially with buildings or landscape's.
    I don't know if that is possible and i don't know what kind of lenses you need for that. I can imagine when you zoom and take a macro shot from a flower that only the flower is sharp and not the rest, but in landscapes or buldings, or portraits like pictures i want all to be sharp. (but maybe i want to much)

    Oh yeah at last, i'm a bit on a budget, i can't buy those 1500$ lenses you find on the internet, i am hoping to keep my entire set below that amount, or maybe its just mission impossible....

    Is there anny body who can give me some good advice?

  2. Samer


    Sep 19, 2006
    Jupiter, FL
    Well, I can answer some of your questions, I'm sure others can fill the gaps.

    First of all, just to make sure you already know this. One difference between both the D40 bodies and the D80 is that the D80 has a motor in the body and the D40 and D40x do not.

    This means that a bunch of Nikon prime lenses (fixed focal length) will only work as manual focus lenses on the D40 bodies. The way to know this is if the name of the lens does not have AFS in it, that means the lens has no motor.

    The concept about how much of your image appears in focus is called "Depth of Field". I suggest you look this up with Google and or Wikipedia to get more info. But this is controlled by a few things, mainly aperture (how big the opening is to let light through the lens) and distance from the subject.

    To answer your question, almost any lens will let you keep everything in focus, you would just close the opening (small aperture, big F-number) like f/8 or f/11 and all will appear in focus. As you suggested about the macro shots, because the focus is so close, the depth of field (how much is acceptably in focus) goes way down. The opposite is true, the further away you are to something the larger the depth of field for a given aperture.

    Good luck.
  3. Namaste Aernout... is there any chance you can rent a camera and a lens so you can try it out?

    I personally vote for the D80 but the D40 series is a great system, too.
  4. Gale


    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Look at Zacks post ,
    He is selling his gear.
    Maybe you can work out something with him:>)))
    Drop him a pm perhaps
  5. Ghunger


    Apr 2, 2007
    Seattle, WA
    One option for you might be the D40x with an 18-200 VR lens. You'll have that wide range you want and it's an AFS lens (has the internal focus motor). The major downside the the lens that I've found is stopping motion due to it's smaller aperature. Since it sounds like you want to photograph more stationary or slower moving subjects, with a large DOF (entire image in focus), it may work out perfect for you. If you can find the 18-200 for retail price the combo would run you just about $1500.

    As for the D40 vs. D40x, I like the D40x with the extra resolution. Even if you don't decide to print poster sized images it still gives you the flexibility to do more cropping without losing too much quality.
  6. AirTimid


    Feb 17, 2006
    Nova Scotia
    Don't forget, more resolution means bigger files and more system resources to deal with them.
  7. I'm with Ghunger on this, D40x with the 18-200 VR lens. Should be a great combination.

    But before you take the plunge, go into a store and hold the D40x and D80 to see which one suits you best.
  8. eisbaer

    eisbaer Guest

    I'm with Ghunger except that I would choose (and I did) the D40 over the D40x because the D40x squeezes 10mpx on the sensor where the D40 does 6mpx. This means the D40x will have (some) more noise.

    If you're going to print in posterformat I would choose the D80 because of the 10mpx but are you really gonna print that size?
    I would choose the D80 over the D40x because the D40x is only 60 euro cheaper than the D80 and the D80 doesn't limit your choice in lenses (nikkor af-s, af-i,sigma hsm).

    The choice would then be a D40 with the 18-200VR lens.
    (Hope this doesn't complicate things for you).
  9. My choice would be the D80 with a couple of lenses: the 18-200mm VR for all-around versatility and the 35mm f/2 prime lens for low-light shooting and getting closer to subjects. For genuine macro, the 60mm micro-Nikkor would be a fairly inexpensive way to start out.

    I have used the D40 and the D80 and each has its own merits. I have not used the D40x, but it is essentially the same camera as the D40 -- Nikon has just added more megapixels. This can be both a positive and a negative aspect. The D40 is known for its excellent image quality at high ISOs; the D40x is not going to be able to achieve quite the same thing.

    The D80 is a little larger, a little more robust and of course has the internal autofocus motor so that you would not have the concerns about only being able to use AF-S lenses. More importantly (to me, anyway): the D80 also has an LCD on top, providing essential camera information, it has two command dials and it has a few more functions, both on the body and in the menu system, than does the D40 (or D40x). The D80 also has more focus points than the D40 or D40x and is slightly quicker to focus.

    Go to a camera shop and handle each of the camera bodies, putting the same lens on each, and see how they feel to you. Look at samples of images shot with each camera. Evaluate your priorities and your needs and how you think you'll be using the camera. Buy a book on basic photography or on digital photography specifically in order to learn more about techniques, as this will help you to decide which lenses will work best for you.

    Good luck in the decision!
  10. Thanks for your advice, i went to a photoshop yesterday, and i'm still in doubt, but i have still some months to decide what i'm gonne buy, but the shop keeper, asked me some good questions he said i was well informed so my readings on the internet are oke, but one of his questions was why i wanned a nikon, he him self is a nikon user but he said that there are also good other models for stepping in the dslr market, he said that the sony alpha 100 with its steady shot is also a good starters option.
    But still my love goes to nikon, but i am thinking of the alpha, its much cheaper with some lenses (there is a combo of 18-70 and 75-300 for 900 euro) and because of the steady shot its easyer to get good result from cheaper lenses without the vr etc.. but then reading the cons and the pro's í'm not sure... haha and we have so much choises....

    still one question for all of you,
    How did you got started in the dslr sigment?

  11. Cope


    Apr 5, 2007
    Houston, Texas
    I owned nothing but Minolta for 30+ years, and was extremely satisfied with my 7D, but I was concerned with Sony's next DSLR. The A100 is a good camera, but at this time, I feel Nikon is the best place to go for future upgardeability. Sony's new models are advanced amateur and pro bodies, and cost for either will be higher than the D200. Another thing, Nikon's AF speed and flash exposure are the best, anotherreason to go Nikon. If the old Mind of Minolta was still working, I would not be here typing this, but times are changing. My advice would be the D80 to begin, with an eye on a D200 or it's replacement down the road. Even if you never changed from the D80, you would be in good shape.
  12. I'd go with Connie's advice and get the D80 and the 18-200VR. The lens is wonderful. After a bit you can beging to experiment with other lenses. When you move up I'd get the 28-70 next and then the 70-200VR. After that you could get the D200 and still have the D80 as a backup.

  13. Aernout,

    Connie's suggestion regarding the D80 is a valid one. For the type of photography you wish to accomplish, the D80 would fit the spec.

    The SONY Alpha is certainly a nice camera, but we do no really know where Sony is taking it. Always keep in mind that you buy into a camera system and not a specific camera.

    PS: What does "namaste" mean, is it a new Dutch word that came about after I left Holland?
  14. A traditional greeting from the Indian sub-continent.

  15. Rich,

    Thanks for the info. Strangely enough, I worked closely over the years with a number of colleagues, all immigrants from the indian sub continent, and that word never came up! We were all too intent on forgetting where we came from, I guess...
  16. Compulsion


    May 1, 2007
    Sterling, VA
    lit. I bow to you
  17. Ron,

    Now I am curious. Is it custom to use this word upon meeting someone or is it used in the sense of "regards" or "sincerely" ? In person is it accompanied by an actual bowing of the head?

    <While I have had valid visas for India in my passport at least five times, unfortunately, scheduled meetings were always canceled. So never had the chance to personally experience it.>
  18. namaste

    Namaste comes from sanscript and old language used to write knowledge down in the region of india, The words can often be translated in multiple things, thats why lots of translations are differend for the same tekst.

    Namaste is used for greeting, i like it because i am teaching yoga and it can mean multiple things, you can use it just like you say hello and bye to somebody i am told some parts of india they use it like that but it also can mean something deeper with more respect for the other person,
    "The Divine in me recognizes and honors, the Divine in you."
    There are also some deeper translations like
    "The light (spirit, soul, higher self) within me recognizes, bows, and honors the light within you; and together we are one with this light.
    (connected by a soul recognition with/to God and/or power of the universe and beyond)."
    i think it is how you feel it for your self what it means to sombody els.
    allthough i do come from holland, the word isn't used much in holland, because i teach yoga and practice it a lot the word is used by me and friends who also love yoga.


    by the way thanks for telling me that when you go into a camera you go into a system for later also.
  19. Aernout,

    Dank voor de uitleg! <Thanks for the explanation!>

  20. Namaste to you too.

    Here is a slightly different option.

    If you can still find a new or sparsely used D50 it will be a nice intermediate option between a D40 with no in camera motor and a D80 that is a bit expensive. The D50 is 6.1 megapixel and has an inbuilt motor.

    For your needs an 18-70 should be good unless you are too far away from the practitioners performing the yoga exercises. It is much less expensive than an 18-200. You can use the extra money on a 50 mm 1.8 lens that gives good light and also a SB 600 flashlight. I am not sure about the locations in India that you going to take photographs but many places, especially homes and yoga halls, may not be well lit. A flash or a large aperture will come in handy.

    Best of luck.