Which SLR to buy? Nikon D40 or Canon Rebel (above water)

[RonFrank]

Here is the AF-S lens lineup for Nikon.

AF-S (Silent Wave Motor) Lenses
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR - NEW!
AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED
AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED - NEW!
AF-S Zoom-NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II
AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mmf/2.8G ED - NEW!
AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S Zoom-NIKKOR 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S VR NIKKOR 200mm f/2G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED
AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4D IF-ED
AF-S VR NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8D IF-ED II
AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8G ED VR - NEW!
AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4D IF-ED II
AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4G ED VR - NEW!
AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4D IF-ED II
AF-S NIKKOR 600mmf/4G ED VR - NEW!

Not sure why this is confusing, but it certainly covers a lot of ground.

 

[Matt S.]

I told myself I wouldn't post, wouldn't post...

WRT Nikon vs. Canon: As has been said you can't go wrong with either.

The only bad move, IMHO, is choosing a lesser-known maker like Pentax or Sony. They can make good cameras, but you should also consider the size of the user base, quality of online help you can get, availability of accessories... For those reasons it makes sense to stick with the 'big 2' unless one of the other makers has really nailed the combo of features you want. You're not buying a camera... You're buying into a system.

I'm a Nikon guy though so I will limit my detailed comments to them.

The D80 has much better controls than the D40. For example, two wheels as opposed to one, and buttons for more functions so you don't have to dig though menus. For me, I can't overstate how great that is. If I want to change the flash mode, I hold down the flash button and spin a dial. If I am in manual mode, and I want to change shutter speed, I spin the rear dial. Aperture, the front dial. Literally, it cannot be easier.

It also has more features, like exposure bracketing. That's a pretty useful thing in some instances and the D40 doesn't have it.

The D80 has intelligent, auto-metering wireless flash control built in. Add the SB-600 strobe and you can do some great off-camera flash things. And then add MORE strobes if you want, it can control a bunch! This is super cool and has changed flash photography from something I hated to something that I love.

Nikon Creative Lighting System (CLS) review - OlegNovikov.com

The D40 does not have a built in focus motor which is not a big deal if you are only buying new modern lenses with the motor built in. However there are some old-fashioned lenses available which are still good. Nikon has a $100 F1.8 50mm prime that is a great value for the money. It won't AF on the D40 though.

If you expect to grow as a photographer in any way, get the D80 and grow in to it, as opposed to getting the D40 and growing out of it. It is that simple, IMHO, and I would give the same kind of advice between 2 Canons.

The Nikon 18-200 VR lens is a peach all right. There is a reason they have stayed expensive for so long. I ended up with the 18-135 kit lens + the 70-300 VR + SB-600. The disadvantage: No VR at wide angle. Changing lenses, though I find it's not that bad, usually I need one lens for one trip. Advantage: cheaper, a little more zoom, and I could also afford to add a strobe.

Canon indeed has a quality advantage at high ISO. But check the pictures in reviews and decide if that is a tipping point for you. Once you see the photos, it may not be.

Good luck with whatever you choose.

 

[RonFrank]

I'm glad you brought this up. I'm getting ready to pull the trigger myself and had ruled out the D40x for this very reason. I haven't been able to find a fast (1.2-1.8) AF-S lens in the 50mm range. Do you know of any? I haven't been able to find ANY in the 24-70mm range.

Whoa, that 300mm lens of yours is $1200, and the 105mm macro lens is $900. Does Nikon make any cheaper (but not crappy) lenses?

There are fast zooms in the range you are looking for, but fast on a Zoom is F2.8. If you have the requirement of a f2 or faster, you are going to spend a LOT more than $1200 with one exception, the 50mm f1.8. It's one of Nikon's best lenses, and one of the lowest priced lenses as well. IMO it's not a great UW lens.

If you want to be able to use fast Nikon old school AF lenses, and autofocus, than the D40 is not a good choice.

Sigma, Nikon, Tamron, and Tokina all make fixed aperture lenses at f2.8, and many have motors. In general however do not count on any fast fixed aperture zoom lens as cheap. The Nikon 17~55mm f2.8 is a great lens, and will run over $1000. Sigma makes lenses similar that are in the $500 range.

Here is a tip! I spent a few years, and many photographers a few decades shooting with ...... NO AutoFocus!

Just because that 50mm f1.8 won't autofocus does not make it useless. It has this strange device still found on ALL Lenses.... A focus Ring!

 

[vondo]

I'm glad you brought this up. I'm getting ready to pull the trigger myself and had ruled out the D40x for this very reason. I haven't been able to find a fast (1.2-1.8) AF-S lens in the 50mm range. Do you know of any? I haven't been able to find ANY in the 24-70mm range.

Whoa, that 300mm lens of yours is $1200, and the 105mm macro lens is $900. Does Nikon make any cheaper (but not crappy) lenses?

You'll find similar things in the Canon line. Just because you can find a $5000 50mm f/1.2 does not make the $300 50mm f/1.4 or even the $80 50mm f/1.8 lens "crappy."

While I'm not as familiar with the Nikon lens line as I am with the Canon, I assume it's similar: you have slower, less well built, less optically "pure" lenses that are accessible to most any budget and increasingly faster and better lenses that cost more and more. $1200 is also about what Canon charges for their 300mm f/4 with Image Stabilization.

 

[mike_s]

Mike: I love that combo. It just works for such a wide range of conditions and I don't have to swap to get the shot.

Does using the 18mm-200mm most of the time get 'too heavy" for carrying around on vacation shooting, etc? I was just wondering if that bigger lens as the primary lens would get heavy after carrying it for a while.

What are your Canon lenses? They certainly will work with a new Canon DSLR, but they may be good quality or they may not be.

I've got to get my camera bag and check which lens they are. I don't use them much anymore since the Rebel Body I've got is film.

 

[RonFrank]

Does using the 18mm-200mm most of the time get 'too heavy" for carrying around on vacation shooting, etc? I was just wondering if that bigger lens as the primary lens would get heavy after carrying it for a while.

The 18~200mm lens has become my go to carry around lens.

As for bigger, I've been carrying around fixed zoom lenses (17~35mm f2.8, 28~70mm f2.8, 80~200mm f2.8) along with a 50mm f1.8 or 60mm macro, and a pro (read heavy) body for decades. I now generally carry the 12~24mm f4, and the 18~200mm VR for most situations.

So is the 18~200mm VR a small lens, no. But it's not bigger than any of the lenses I often used to carry, so from my perspective carrying around that lens on a D200 is a breath of fresh air!

 

[jeckyll]

Mike: I've actually really like shooting with the 18-200. I find it a nice stable platform. The only time I find the weight to be a bit of an issue is when I want to only use my UltrapodII to get some real low angle shots.

I find myself simply carrying the d40 in my right hand at times. The weight isn't an issue. Size wise, I use a very small Lowepro case that is just big enough for the camera and lens. So for traveling, carrying the 18-55 and the 18-200 is no different from a case perspective.

Now, if you really do want to use the AF style Nikon lenses, I'd pick up a D50 used.

Edit: I place a huge premium on size when traveling as I travel via motorcycle I have one saddlebag that consists of nothing but bubblewrap, camera, ultrapod and small binoculars (lots of bubble wrap!).
Picasa Web Albums - Björn - WAORTripAug07

 

[JackConnick]

Sigma has a great lineup of HSM lenses that will work fine with the D40x.

 

[Larry C]

Don't own a DSLR yet, but based on the research I've been doing and the camera store play time, I have to agree with Matt. Spend the extra $200 and get the D80 instead of the D40, which has no in camera AF, limiting the lenses you can use. I'll second the 18-200 VR lens. I played with it on a D300 this afternoon and it kicks butt. My only complaint was the focal length is a little long for portraits. At $749, it's a bargain, though. In the store, I took a full 200 f5.6 shot of a poster on their wall. Without the VR it was blurry, with the VR turned on it was crisp and sharp. If you can't swing the $749, the 18-135 VR is cheap, but won't give you 10:1 zoom.

 

[mike_s]

So when places selling the D40 say "USA WARRANTY", how long is that warranty? 5 years? 1 year?

(example Adorama uses the phrase USA Warranty and then in the specs it says Nikon Warranty (as opposed to grey market overseas store only warranty)