very few SLR's have LCD preview. And I dont know of any that can do video clips. If some of you cant pull the trigger because of these lack of features, then perhaps you should stick to a P&S.

crxvtec said:very few SLR's have LCD preview. And I dont know of any that can do video clips. If some of you cant pull the trigger because of these lack of features, then perhaps you should stick to a P&S.

That's disappointing. I thought I wanted to move up to a digital SLR, but I do like having video. Darn. I'm also used to using the LCD after all these years with my nice Fuji s602. I still love it but I wanted one where I can change the lens.

elizard said:crxvtec said:very few SLR's have LCD preview. And I dont know of any that can do video clips. If some of you cant pull the trigger because of these lack of features, then perhaps you should stick to a P&S.

That's disappointing. I thought I wanted to move up to a digital SLR, but I do like having video. Darn. I'm also used to using the LCD after all these years with my nice Fuji s602. I still love it but I wanted one where I can change the lens.

With my D50 I missed it at first coming from Sony P&s'S. Now I actually prefer it. I get more accurate pictures. The framing is better. Also, I can fine tune the focus better. I feel a little more in control and like it's real photography, not just snap and go. Besides, you can view the pic in the LCD right after you shoot it.

I'm hitting the Artic Circle on 3/21 (-40 degrees. burrrrrrrrr) Plan to get some really cool pictures of the Northern Lights. Had to buy a remote to leave the shutter open beyond 30 seconds. If the D40 is remote capable I highly suggest. They're only $20. I use it for eBay pics and timer pics too.

To me the MAJOR downside to the D50 and I assume the D40 is the screen on the top of the camera that shows you all of your settings and lets you see the setting changes you make, HAS NO BACKLIGHT! Rendering it useless at night. So I'm gonna have to hold a little telescope red light on it while changing settings. A hassle and from what I hear the biggest complaint about the camera.

I've never owned a digital SLR until now. Have had about 5 P&S's. It is definately a big step up. I still keep a P&S in the bag for those 'who cares' shots though.

where is the -42.00 savings?

isnt it -20.00?

so its 579.99?

ChiefBrody said:To me the MAJOR downside to the D50 and I assume the D40 is the screen on the top of the camera that shows you all of your settings and lets you see the setting changes you make, HAS NO BACKLIGHT! Rendering it useless at night. So I'm gonna have to hold a little telescope red light on it while changing settings. A hassle and from what I hear the biggest complaint about the camera.

The D40 does not have a status LCD screen on top. The rear LCD screen is the only status screen you'll find.

slutsky said:D40 is not good, I do rather go for the canon D30

That is an apples to oranges comparison. The D40 is almost half the price of the Canon 30D (not D30) which I assume you're referring to. The 30D is aimed at the intermediate user whereas the Nikon D40 is aimed at the beginning DSLR user. Your statement is fairly useless especially since you don't backup your claims with any useful information. All D40 reviews up to date have been quite positive.

aprilbear said:if you are going to buy a semi or pro digital camera, it's about the control and that expensive piece of glass...
if you want video clip, you will have to buy a point and shoot...

Agreed. If bigfoot showed up and I needed a camera real fast and the only two available were the D80 w/a cheap f4.5 lens VS. a D40 w/an F1.4 Nikon lens. I'd take the D40 in a heartbeat. The camera is the reciever and the lens is the speakers.

If you're going the Nikon route, I would definitely recommend getting the D50 over the D40. As others have said, the D40 is crippled in many ways and has a limited lens selection. If you want to buy used or third party (non-Nikkor) lenses, you should avoid the D40. A high end point and shoot would make more sense to the audience that the D40 is aimed at.

humangenomics said:MarshallM said:kimdani1 said:slutsky said:D40 is not good, I do rather go for the canon D30

That is an apples to oranges comparison. The D40 is almost half the price of the Canon 30D (not D30) which I assume you're referring to. The 30D is aimed at the intermediate user whereas the Nikon D40 is aimed at the beginning DSLR user. Your statement is fairly useless especially since you don't backup your claims with any useful information. All D40 reviews up to date have been quite positive.

There is a thread floating around for the Canon XT for $279 on clearance somewhere, that is a killer deal, and even at $450 the XT IMO is a superior camera. The d40 has a very dated sensor, at least with the Canon line you know you are getting top notch image quality from the sensor (b/c Canon actually makes their own sensors). Even though the XTi is out with 10mp, I know a good many users who still prefer the extremely clean and near-noiseless 8mp sensors (XT, 20d, 30d). Not to mention the issues with the d40 and the some cheaper Nikon lenses (which are the lenses d40 buyers would probably want anyways!). And the fact that the d40 has a giant "aperture blade graphic" on its menu is just cheesy and Fischer Price'esque. The focussing abilities on the d40 is very limited also. For the same money, go for a new XT if you can find one, or for a tad more, get the Canon XTi (it has the Canon 30d focussing mechanism, 10mp, giant screen, sensor cleaning, and compatible with every EF and EF-S lens). My $.02.

As the post above you said, The camera is the reciever and the lens is the speakers. 6 MP vs 10 MP is not that a big difference unless you want to crop a lot. However, the D40 kit lens is better than the canon kit lens for xt or xti. That been said, either these entry level DSLR is a fine choice for someone who just want to step into the SLR field. You have to go and feel it.

I did not mean to imply that one should choose the Canon XT or XTi over the Nikon d40 because they have more megapixels, but because the stated Canon sensors are newer technology and will give the user less noise wile giving more data to work with (mp). Typically, assuming the same sensor size, going from 6mp -> 10mp would increase the noise. However, in this instance, if one is choosing between the Nikon d40, and either the Canon XT or XTi, the entry level Canon offerings will give more megapixels to resolve, or to crop with, with the added benefit of having MUCH LESS high iso noise compared to the d40. IMO, the d40 makes sense as a backup camera for someone highly invested in Nikon glass, or flash system, but with the Canons just a tad more $$, the sensor advantage is well worth it.

ou812ec said:I get a lot of information from this site!

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/rebel-xti.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/d200-d80-d70-d50-d40-5d-xti.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2006-camera-guide.htm

Seems like the same deal is going for the d40 again this week at CC.

ha ha, oh my. Just FYI, Ken Rockwell's tests aren't worth the ones and zeros they occupy. They are widely discredited and respected by very few. For real professional comparisons that aren't cloaked in bias, visit www.dpreview.com or perhaps www.photozone.de for the BEST lens reviews. Ken Rockwell really is a joke... please don't take my word for it, google his name.