Going from Prosumer to DSLR, D40 or D50? Earnest Advice Needed!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by carbonmotion, Jan 14, 2007.

  1. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #1
    Hi, I'm going from a Canon S2 IS to a D40 or D50, but I'm not sure which one. I really appreciate the D40's 2.5 inch lcd and size... but maybe there's something in the d50 that just makes it better? Otherwise why would Nikon still keep it around? I'm torn, please help!

    Sincerely,
    CM
     
  2. SpookTheHamster macrumors 65816

    SpookTheHamster

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Location:
    London
    #2
    The d50 has support for older lenses without an AF motor inside. The d40 also has less AF areas (but is apparently just as good at AF) and there's no second display.

    On the plus side; It's really small, it has less shutter lag, it's faster (up to ISO 3200), nicer UI, unlimited continuous shooting, and it supports SDHC cards, it's also cheaper, so it's not too shabby.
     
  3. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #3
    It's easier to change settings on the D50. It also supports autofocus on all Nikon AF D and G lenses, whereas the D40 doesn't support autofocus on AF lenses (weird, I know) unless the lens is an AF-S lens. In other words, the D40 only supports lenses with the newer, faster, quieter AF. The D50 can support AF and AF-S, and changing settings is quicker because it's on the body.

    I spent a total of around 30 minutes with the D40 in Japan (there were around 4 on display, each with a different lens), and while I found it easy to change settings on the D40, it's also slower because of the menu system it uses.

    However, if you plan on buying the Nikon D40 with the kit lens, and maybe only 1 (possibly 2) lenses down the road, all of which have AF-S, then the D40 isn't bad at all.

    The D40's viewfinder and LCD are much better than the one on the D50, including the brightness and viewing angle of the LCD. All of this, plus support for SDHC are the only decent reasons to consider the D40 over the D50.


    I'd buy the D50, but it really depends on how you plan on using the D40. The D40 has a market, but you may not be a part of the target market if you plan on getting really into it and buying a lot of the AF lenses that are still in Nikon's lineup, such as the 50 mm f/1.8 that people here keep recommending. Well that, and many of the 3rd party lenses from Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina.
     
  4. carbonmotion thread starter macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #4
    i'd probably buy a max of 2 lenses
    1 is the kit
    another is a prime no zoom lens
    and a telephoto late in the future
     
  5. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #5
    If you're thinking about buying in the future, then maybe the D40 not being compatible with AF lenses won't be a huge factor. All updates to current Nikon lenses will likely introduce AF-S, including the 50 mm f/1.8, or any cheaper zoom lens. Most of the semi-expensive and expensive lenses already have AF-S.

    Being able to control settings very quickly is still more important for me, though. I've already outgrown my D50's body and really want a Nikon D80 because of the extra control that it offers.
     
  6. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #6
    You've already gotten good answers, I'd just like to point out that it seems that Nikon isn't keeping the D50 around- I'm pretty sure the D40 is going to be the low-end body from now on.
     
  7. carbonmotion thread starter macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #7
    thanks alot guys!
     
  8. raptor96 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Location:
    RI
    #8
    With all this said I just bought a D50 and love it. I do know that they're clearing stock and great deals for the D50 can be had if you act quickly ($400 body only or $560 w/ the 18-55 lens). Good luck with whichever you get!
     
  9. carbonmotion thread starter macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #9
    the choice is hard, precisely because they cost about the same.
     
  10. Plymouthbreezer macrumors 601

    Plymouthbreezer

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #10
    The D40 lacks a secondary LCD, which is surprisingly helpful, believe it or not... When shopping for my SLR, I looked at the Nikon range from the D40 up to the D80. The D40 would only seem like a backup DSLR, the D50 being the minimum entry model.

    Nonetheless, I think you'll be happy with either Nikon, they are awesome cameras!
     
  11. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #11
    For the same money, I'd go with the D50. There are *lots* and *lots* of good used AF-D lenses out there at great prices.
     
  12. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #12
    You don't really use the LCD screen on a DSLR for much. Just to access to the setup menu and maybe check the histogram display to check the exposure. So LCD size is not an important feature.

    The D40 lacks a focus motor in the body. So it can only use AF-S lenses. This limits you. One VERY nice lens is the 50mm and the 85mm. Neither is AF-S. Get the D50. The "40" is not meant for serious photographers.

    I use Nikon D50 but that's because I bought Nikon 20+ years ago and had a pile of Nikon lenses. It you are just starting out you have to decide Nikon Vs. Canon but think carefully as it's expensive to switch.

    My opinion on this is if you are going to be buying high end gear (The Canon 5D)Go Canon. Nikon doesn't make a full frame DSLR. If you have a $4K budget canon is good but if you are at the other end (sub $1k) go with Nikon because their lower end camera are butter built
     
  13. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #13
    Yet. Thom Hogan seems to think the D3H will be full-frame when announced this year. Not sure what'll happen with the D3x when it hits though.
     
  14. carbonmotion thread starter macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #14
    ok let me rephrase the question then.... Nikon 40d, Nikon 50d, or Canon 350D

    I can't spend more than $575
     
  15. Plymouthbreezer macrumors 601

    Plymouthbreezer

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #15
    D50.
     
  16. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #16
    Definitely D50, but a D40 wouldn't be bad for you. I just think that since the purpose of the D40 was to make an even cheaper camera than the D50, and yet they're priced around the same right now, I think people are paying too much for the D40. It's not the inability of using Nikon AF lenses that bothers me. It's actually the inability of the D40 to use most 3rd party lenses that bothers me. Lots of good 3rd party lenses cost 1/2 or 1/3 of what Nikon charges, with equal optical quality in many cases (and the ones that aren't as good are still 98% as good). :eek:

    I hope there is one just so that Nikon offers one. However, there isn't a huge difference in noise like some people say. The only benefit is to be able to move beyond the 12 MP mark. If Nikon ever used an APS-C sensor with more than 12 MP, they'd be screwed in terms of camera noise. They've hit their limit for now with APS-C sized sensors.
     
  17. sjl macrumors 6502

    sjl

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #17
    Then I'd suggest the Nikon lineup, rather than the 350D. AIUI (and please bear in mind that I'm only really familiar with Canon, being a Canon shooter myself), if you compare the rock bottom lens lineup of the two companies, Nikon does a better job than Canon. Canon's cheap lenses are just that - cheap; in comparison, Nikon's cheap lenses are actually reasonable quality. Not top, pro grade quality, of course, but decent for the price, although you pay a bit more for them than you do for Canon's.

    At the top end, there's not much between them, enough that if you want to spend the money on the glass, I'd not seriously recommend one over the other.

    As for the 350D, it's not a particularly well constructed body. Any heavy lens (like the 70-200mm f/2.8, or the 100-400) feels like it's about to snap off when mounted on that body. The smaller lenses are fine, but it's not as solid as I believe a DSLR should be. The 400D seems to be a massive improvement in that regard, at least.
     
  18. wwooden macrumors 68000

    wwooden

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Location:
    Burlington, VT
    #18
    I was in the same position as you a few weeks ago, I wanted to get a DSLR but I couldn't decide between those 3 cameras you mentioned. I did a lot of looking on here and on many other websites and also talked to a friend who has the D50 and he said he would choose the D50 over the D40 anyday. I choose to get the D50 because of a few reasons. 1) I have quite a few SD cards of 512mb or greater size, so buying the Canon would have required me to get a compactflash card and increasing my initial value. 2) Ritz camera was having an end-of-year sale on the D50 and I got it with the kit lens for $550. 3) I tried out both the D40 and the D50 and the size of the D50 felt better in my hands. 4) I don't plan on ever being a professional photographer, so I wanted to leave my options open to older/cheaper lenses to buy.

    I am very happy with the D50 and would definitely recommend it. Also, the supplied Nikon battery lasts much longer than the Canons. I think mine can take 1000 shots where the Canon can only do 300 in a charge. I don't think I have charged my camera in 2 weeks and I have used it almost everyday.
     
  19. Plymouthbreezer macrumors 601

    Plymouthbreezer

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #20
    Clearly you missed:
     
  20. Phatpat macrumors 6502a

    Phatpat

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #21
    They're pretty comparable cameras. I got the D50 because it was cheaper.
     
  21. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #22
    Overstock.com has the body only for $419.99 and KEH has a used 18-55 lens in EX+ for $109.00. Things tend to roll off of Overstock pretty quickly though.
     
  22. wmmk macrumors 68020

    wmmk

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Location:
    The Library.
    #23
    Don't you mean D40, D50, 350D, or K100D/K110D or Evolt E-500?
    Listen, a lot of people on this board will convince you that the buck stops with olympus and canon, but that's really not true. Pentax and Olympus both have unique strengths, and are currently innovating at a faster rate than their more well known competitors. If you do a lot of work without a tripod, take a lot of night shots, or use a telephoto often, you'll want shake reduction, which is available in only one consumer level DSLR-the K100D. Also, it should be mentioned that the K100D can be used with any K-Mount lens ever made (and that's 50 years of lenses right there) and all of those will work as an IS lens.
    If you have any questions about pentax DSLRs, feel free to PM me.
     
  23. carbonmotion thread starter macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #24
    Ahh now I'm all confused. I just want a good camera. I was about to settle in and buy the D50 and now I'm not sure.

    K100D/K110D and Evolt E-500... ?! Can you guys please help me some more and give me some of your expert opinions on those cameras compared with the D50? Thanks!
     
  24. davidjearly macrumors 68020

    davidjearly

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    #25
    Just get the D50, it has better features than the D40. The 350D is less well built and has a much poorer kit lens. The D50's 18-55 kit lens is amazing for the price.

    The E-500 has considerable noise beyond ISO 400 compared to the D50 or 350D, has no second LCD (same as D40), and has only USB 1.1 for very very slow transfers. Many people will say use a card reader, but that is just a cop-out. With USB 2.2, there is no need for a card reader.

    The Pentax offereings are good, with great resolution but I would still go for the D50 first.
     

Share This Page