# Cameras: Nikon D40X dSLR & Canon EOS DSLR Rebel XT



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

I'm looking (debating) on possibly obtaining a dSLR camera later this year, and currently looking at the above models in the $700.00 range. Any thoughts on either model? The Rebel XT with 18-55mm & 75-300mm lens packages; the D40X with 18-55mm & 70-300mm lens packages. Any input appreciated. I see many ehMacers learn toward the Rebel XT cameras from previous threads on dSLR cameras. * Either camera should be able to take above-average (decent/good) night shots, if possible. (Not absolutely necessary.)


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2008)

Either way you go, I would suggest to avoid the "kit" lenses, they are not great quality. About the only way they can move those lenses is along with a body, because by themselves no one would pay any $$ for them 

I love my Rebel XT and just bought my 4th lens last week


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

mguertin said:


> Either way you go, I would suggest to avoid the "kit" lenses, they are not great quality. About the only way they can move those lenses is along with a body, because by themselves no one would pay any $$ for them
> 
> I love my Rebel XT and just bought my 4th lens last week


Which lenses do you recommend? That being asked, it would be an entry-level camera into the dSLR world that does good quality shots with detail. I don't need a multi-thousand dollar lens attached to the body. I'm no professional photographer.


----------



## Rampant AV (Aug 2, 2005)

I'm a huge Nikon proponent but for you, as a beginner, I would suggest a Canon.


----------



## sadd3j (Aug 24, 2004)

Both camera systems are really capable and suitable for both beginners and professionals alike (hence thousands of beginners and professionals using both Canon and Nikon systems). 

When it comes to DSLRs, it's really about the lenses. If you can't afford to invest in at least some quality lenses (there are some really good lenses which won't break the bank), you're almost better off with a really good prosumer camera.

To start the kit lenses will probably suffice and are cheap, but if you're really into photography, it won't be long until you'll want/need a nicer lens. Avoid the 70-300's though.

Used lenses are all around, easy way to save a buck!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Spend the $300 more on the Nikon D80 and get the new Nikon 18-200mm DX VR lens. It's getting rave reviews as the best "walk around" lens. I'm getting one for my D70/D300 --currently neither Henry's or Vistek has it in stock as of Friday, but both are expecting shipments this week. 

Nikon's advantage in the lower end consumer dSLR market is better glass, faster focusing, better software. At the higher end, Canon is better at low light (perhaps not any more with the introduction of the FX Nikon D3) and a wider variety of lenses. Don't rule out Sigma or Tammron lenses either, but having 'native' glass is better.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Please recommend quality lenses.  I'd like to have some recommendations and a list to consider. Thanks for all the help thus far.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Dude, you just missed out... Futureshop had the Rebel XTi on for $399 with the 18-55 kit lens.

The 18-55 is great for wide angle shots, a pretty versatile lens. I would recommend a Canon 50mm f1.8 as a fast lens (great for low light shots). The next lens you would want is something with some range say a 75-300mm zoom. Again, go for the Canon lens... 

I went for a 28-200mm lens as it had a good combination between wide angle and zoom.


----------



## simon (Nov 2, 2002)

you can get better answers to your questions here:

Canon Digital Photography Forums - Powered by vBulletin

FM Forums

Instead of a new Canon XTi I would highly recommend a used Canon 20D for about the same price. These are easy to find since the arrival of the 40D and are 110% better than the consumer grade Rebel based dSLRs

A good starter lens for this camera is the understated 28-105 USM lens (metal mount not the newer plastic mount), but as others have said the lens makes or breaks the camera. Spend what you can on the best glass you can get, the glass will stay with you as time goes on - some of my lens are 15 years old (or more) and they still work as well as they did when I bought them new. As for myself, I contracted L fever with the purchase of a 70-200L ƒ/4 and that's all that's in my bag at the moment.

you can get a good idea on canon lens reviews here:

Canon Lenses - Canon EF Camera Lens Information


----------



## scootsandludes (Nov 28, 2003)

Walk before you run. Don't worry about the lenses right now, it's not important (yet). There's more to taking good pictures then buying the best gear. A DSLR can be as complicated or as simple as you want it. Understand why the expensive lenses cost so much more than entry level lens, and you'll appreciate it more. But in reality, a expensive lens only gives you maybe 2 extra stops.

I've been a Nikon shooter for 15 years, so you can guess which side I'm leaning towards. But they're both decent cameras, the Nikons have a better lens mount, being metal oppose to plastic. That's probably the only noticeable difference between the two, and maybe SD vs CF, but do the test of which one feels better in your hands, and choose from there. IMHO, entry level <Nikon, Middle - entry level pro <Nikon, High end<Canon. Lenses are split even, but being bias, Nikon.

Get either system, and choose the one that feels most comfortable in your hands, then find a 50mm 1.8 lens for your first quality lens. It's a great little lens, it's fast, sharper than any zoom and most importantly; cheap! I paid $150 for mine brand new, and there are tons of used ones everywhere. The basics of the lens have been made for over 50 years, it's been perfected, and they used to include them with new SLRs. It's a great lens to learn photography with, and it should be in every photographers gadget bag.


----------



## Oakbridge (Mar 8, 2005)

mguertin said:


> Either way you go, I would suggest to avoid the "kit" lenses, they are not great quality. About the only way they can move those lenses is along with a body, because by themselves no one would pay any $$ for them
> 
> I love my Rebel XT and just bought my 4th lens last week


It all depends on the 'kit'. I picked up the D80 with the 18-70mm lens and this is a quality lens. As I understand it, the 18-55mm is an lower level lens. 

I complimented the above purchase with the 70-300mm VR lens so I'm all set with a body and two lens. 

I was seriously considering the D40x but was convinced when I saw the metering/autofocus system on the D80. I also preferred the feel of the body in my hands. 

I've had the camera for about a month now and I've really got back into the photography bug. It's packed for my MacWorld trip, I'll have it with me for the Keynote and for the side-trip the better half and I are making next weekend to Monterey.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2008)

That kit lens might be a bit of a departure from most. Most kit lenses are not great, they have little to no resale value (everyone has them and no one wants them) and they are not sharp. Lars is looking for the ability to take sharp photos in potentially low light situations. None of the Canon kit lenses will cut this.

I'll second the 50mm F/1.8 II lens that someone else suggested earlier in this thread. They go for around $100 cdn or so. Other than that I don't have any affordable lens suggestions, but there were some great resources posted earlier to check out.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

mguertin said:


> That kit lens might be a bit of a departure from most. Most kit lenses are not great, they have little to no resale value (everyone has them and no one wants them) and they are not sharp. Lars is looking for the ability to take sharp photos in potentially low light situations. None of the Canon kit lenses will cut this.
> 
> I'll second the 50mm F/1.8 II lens that someone else suggested earlier in this thread. They go for around $100 cdn or so. Other than that I don't have any affordable lens suggestions, but there were some great resources posted earlier to check out.


Exactly. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll definitely look into the 50mm F/1.8 II kit lens as $149 really isn't on the high side pricing, especially brand-new.

I've more or less decided on the Nikon side of cameras, specifically the D40 and D40x. The D40x has a 10.2MP versus a 6.1MP on the D40, however, am I wrong to assume that most of the quality derives from the lenses used, and not solely from the number of mega-pixels? It may not be worth $169 more for the D40x model.


----------



## Todd (Oct 14, 2002)

You've asked a question that can be debated for a thousand posts.

Both the Nikon and Canon cameras are equal. Don't let anyone tell you one is superior to the other because of X or Y statistic. The other camera will have another attribute that is superior to the first camera's and so the debate will go on and on and on ...

People who do this are called measurbators. They spend all their time looking at specifications instead of looking through the lens and making pictures. Why do you want a camera - to read specifications about it or make pictures with it?

Go to your local camera store. Ask for both a D40 and XTi with equal lenses attached. Try them. Which one most makes you want to run out of the store with it and make thousands of photos? Buy that one.

Go with the 18-55mm kit lens. It's perfectly fine for general purpose photography and when you buy it as part of a kit, it's practically free. Going with a separate camera body & lens combination will cost you more for little benefit. For the low-light pictures you said you want to do, you'll likely be turning up the camera's ISO setting. You can decide if you need a faster aperture lens later.

The 50mm f/1.8 lens you are considering costs about $150 on it's own. It will be an easy separate purchase for you in 6 months if you decide it's for you - after you've put 5,000 images through your camera with the kit lens and really gotten to know your own photographic style. You'll be able to look back through your pictures and see how many you shot at 50mm and needed a faster aperture. Will 50mm turn out to be your preferred focal length or will you discover you like the 18mm end? Or maybe you'll find you need something more telephoto than 50mm for your pictures.

Finally, you are correct that the lens - and the photographer - have much more effect on picture quality than megapixels. A 6 megapixel picture would take up 6 monitor screens running at 1024 x 768 resolution to view at 100%. You decide if you need larger pictures than that.

After you've enjoyed your camera and kit lens for a while, I invite you to visit my company, Lens Lenders, to consider renting a lens to explore your camera and it's capabilities further.

_Disclosure: I am the owner of Lens Lenders._


----------



## scootsandludes (Nov 28, 2003)

If you made a choice and are going to lean towards the Nikon. I would suggest to spend the extra cash and go for the D40X. It's a much newer camera. The difference between them is only a few months before Nikon decided to improve on a already new to the market camera. The D40 series was designed on a price point, and on that note, D40 just took existing equipment (D50 & D70), took out anything that wasn't totally necessary and there was an entry level camera. While the X took much newer technology (D80) and used that technology. 

So I would recommend the D40X just cause it's more future proof. Yes it's true that it's not the megapixels, but having more doesn't hurt either, because you are getting more information. It used to be that if it was a comparison between 6 or 8 mp, there wasn't anything really noticeable, but we're talking about a 4 mp difference here, and that's something worth investing into. 6 can do the job, but for the amount of money, you're better off with the X.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Todd said:


> People who do this are called measurbators. They spend all their time looking at specifications instead of looking through the lens and making pictures. Why do you want a camera - to read specifications about it or make pictures with it?


Oh Todd, you've been reading too much Ken Rockwell. LOL


----------



## Todd (Oct 14, 2002)

kps said:


> Oh Todd, you've been reading too much Ken Rockwell. LOL


You caught me! Ken's words match what I have felt about specification-scrutinators for years. He, however, came up with the perfect word for it.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Ken is a "love him" or "hate him" internet personality, but I always got a kick out of reading some of his off the wall stuff and some of his tutorials (like the Nikon CLS article) are quite good.

Getting back on topic...

Todd, what do you think of the 18-200mm DX VR? It's getting very good reviews on the internet. I've been trying to get one, but it seems to be in short supply.


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*Where did you get your camera??*



Oakbridge said:


> It all depends on the 'kit'. I picked up the D80 with the 18-70mm lens and this is a quality lens. As I understand it, the 18-55mm is an lower level lens.
> 
> I complimented the above purchase with the 70-300mm VR lens so I'm all set with a body and two lens.
> 
> ...


Looking into the Nikon D50x but if I can squeeze a few more bucks I'm thinking of the D80. Oakville is next door to me.


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*I am also looking into a DSLR now...*

...after waiting for many years for DSLR prices to drop. LIke you, I'm looking into the Nikon D40x and the Canon XTi (I would go for the newer "i" model). Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ is a great site for tons of info esp. the reviews which also does comparisions between similar cameras the two of us are looking into. I have used a manual SLR for many years, a NIkon FE with NIkon and clone lenses. I do photography as a hobby and had belong to a club. I deal with photography in my work but not hands on camera work. My first real digital camera was a NIkon Coolpix 5400 which was slow but had a quality wide angle (it has zoom but I never use it much). I paid $800 bucks for it three years ago. Never had regretted it.
Since I'm on a budget I might have to get the kits. Read too much about the Canon lenses being of poor quality where as the Nikon kit lenses a lot better. So "kit" wise I would lean toward the Nikon one. I'm more of a Nikon fan I'll probably get a Nikon for sure. I do see that your in the Mississauga area Lars as I am, what store are you looking into? Henry's seem the best choice but they are on back order for the NIkon D40x. Also I just found out two of my wife's friends bought the D40 but in different kit set up. MIght even consider the D80 but budget is my first consideration now.
Looking around today, keep yah posted.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

JCCanuck said:


> ...after waiting for many years for DSLR prices to drop. LIke you, I'm looking into the Nikon D40x and the Canon XTi (I would go for the newer "i" model). Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ is a great site for tons of info esp. the reviews which also does comparisions between similar cameras the two of us are looking into. I have used a manual SLR for many years, a NIkon FE with NIkon and clone lenses. I do photography as a hobby and had belong to a club. I deal with photography in my work but not hands on camera work. My first real digital camera was a NIkon Coolpix 5400 which was slow but had a quality wide angle (it has zoom but I never use it much). I paid $800 bucks for it three years ago. Never had regretted it.
> Since I'm on a budget I might have to get the kits. Read too much about the Canon lenses being of poor quality where as the Nikon kit lenses a lot better. So "kit" wise I would lean toward the Nikon one. I'm more of a Nikon fan I'll probably get a Nikon for sure. I do see that your in the Mississauga area Lars as I am, what store are you looking into? Henry's seem the best choice but they are on back order for the NIkon D40x. Also I just found out two of my wife's friends bought the D40 but in different kit set up. MIght even consider the D80 but budget is my first consideration now.
> Looking around today, keep yah posted.


I sent you a PM.


----------



## Todd (Oct 14, 2002)

kps said:


> Ken is a "love him" or "hate him" internet personality, but I always got a kick out of reading some of his off the wall stuff and some of his tutorials (like the Nikon CLS article) are quite good.
> 
> Getting back on topic...
> 
> Todd, what do you think of the 18-200mm DX VR? It's getting very good reviews on the internet. I've been trying to get one, but it seems to be in short supply.


I have only about 1/2 an hour experience with the Nikon 18-200mm from when I tried it during one Stan C Reade's Photo Day in London. I enjoyed using the lens and I think it is everything it claims to be - and everything that it is not.

It is a great one-lens solution for general photography when all you want to bring with you is your camera, a lens and a bag. You've read all the reviews that I have; some people love it and some people prefer their f/2.8s.

It is not a 17-55mm f/2.8 nor it is a 70-200mm f/2.8. It does not make these other lenses obsolete. Each lens in the Nikon catalogue has a purpose to meet the needs of different photographers. Personally, I recommend to people that they should own the 18-200mm or the 18-135mm or the 18-55 + 55-200mm classic combo for most of their needs and rent f/2.8 glass for special occassions. But, of course, I have a bias; I run Lens Lenders rentals!


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*So far....*



Oakbridge said:


> It all depends on the 'kit'. I picked up the D80 with the 18-70mm lens and this is a quality lens. As I understand it, the 18-55mm is an lower level lens.
> 
> I complimented the above purchase with the 70-300mm VR lens so I'm all set with a body and two lens.
> 
> ...


...on my shopping for my first DSLR, most stores except for future shop had a D40x with the smaller lens kit. The body itself was small but I liked it. The lens I was not impressed with but I'm sure it'll do the job. Being a more serious photo guy, I looked at the D80 with the 18-135 kit and the 18-70 kit. The D80 is definitely "meatier" and more solid. I could get this pushing my budget a bit, but what kit would I go with? The 135 kit is $135 cheaper and newer (right?). But the 70 kit is faster at 18. I'm more into scenery (wide) and portrait stuff (~100mm) with pets and people. Which kit do you think would be better?
With the D80 at least it's worth investing into for upgrading with new lenses in the future for sure.
**How would a Tamron 2.5/90mm macro and a Tamron 2.5/28 wide work with the D80? Both Tamrons are the old fix manual lense. That macro was awesome with my Nikon FE.


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*No auto-focusing and no metering!*



JCCanuck said:


> ...on my shopping for my first DSLR, most stores except for future shop had a D40x with the smaller lens kit. The body itself was small but I liked it. The lens I was not impressed with but I'm sure it'll do the job. Being a more serious photo guy, I looked at the D80 with the 18-135 kit and the 18-70 kit. The D80 is definitely "meatier" and more solid. I could get this pushing my budget a bit, but what kit would I go with? The 135 kit is $135 cheaper and newer (right?). But the 70 kit is faster at 18. I'm more into scenery (wide) and portrait stuff (~100mm) with pets and people. Which kit do you think would be better?
> With the D80 at least it's worth investing into for upgrading with new lenses in the future for sure.
> **How would a Tamron 2.5/90mm macro and a Tamron 2.5/28 wide work with the D80? Both Tamrons are the old fix manual lense. That macro was awesome with my Nikon FE.


Ugh! Just heard from another source, the old Tamrons it will be manual focus (knew that, for macro, auto is not that important) but NO metering, blah!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Todd said:


> I have only about 1/2 an hour experience with the Nikon 18-200mm from when I tried it during one Stan C Reade's Photo Day in London. I enjoyed using the lens and I think it is everything it claims to be - and everything that it is not.
> 
> [SNIP])


Thanks for the reply. I'd love to get the faster glass, but I can't justify that at the moment. What I can justify is a good all-around lens when I don't want to lug around the D300 w/ the MB-D10, and a pile of lenses (10.5mm, 50mm, 18-70mm, 70-300mm, 60mm macro).

I'm quite content with some of these so called "kit" lenses. Personally I don't know where this came from as I found that with Nikon all it means that it's more of a consumer lens, but still of high quality.

Below is a 100% crop taken with the 18-70mm, so called kit lens which came with my old D70. Camera was D300, 400 ISO, SB800 flash. Following that is the full image.

I find it to be quite acceptable.


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*That nice..*



kps said:


> Thanks for the reply. I'd love to get the faster glass, but I can't justify that at the moment. What I can justify is a good all-around lens when I don't want to lug around the D300 w/ the MB-D10, and a pile of lenses (10.5mm, 50mm, 18-70mm, 70-300mm, 60mm macro).
> 
> I'm quite content with some of these so called "kit" lenses. Personally I don't know where this came from as I found that with Nikon all it means that it's more of a consumer lens, but still of high quality.
> 
> Below is a 100% crop taken with the 18-70mm, so called kit lens which came with my old D70. Camera was D300, 400 ISO, SB800 flash. Following that is the full image.


...I find it to be quite acceptable and at 400 ISO too! I have to get out of that mindset and believe that all Nikon's will perform well if not better. This will be my first DSLR purchase to be and I want to have a great all around start up lens to make me (and my wife) happy for the time being.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

When i saw this thread, I instantly thought of you Lars.

If the OP didn't live in the US, I would have thought you posted it. 

Please Advise: Starter Packages - FM Forums


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

The 18-55 kit lenses aren't that nearly as bad as the rep they tend to get...and with the body they are basically given away. The 70-300 lenses are trypically junk though and should be avoided as there are much better alternatives from Sigma/Tamron that are similar priced but optically superior. I'm a Canon guy but either will do you just fine. I have more fiends shooting Canon so its easier for me to swap lenses and with the Canon forums aplenty finding used glass is easy and an affordable way to grow your collection.


----------



## Oakbridge (Mar 8, 2005)

Andrew Pratt said:


> The 18-55 kit lenses aren't that nearly as bad as the rep they tend to get...and with the body they are basically given away. The 70-300 lenses are trypically junk though and should be avoided as there are much better alternatives from Sigma/Tamron that are similar priced but optically superior. I'm a Canon guy but either will do you just fine. I have more fiends shooting Canon so its easier for me to swap lenses and with the Canon forums aplenty finding used glass is easy and an affordable way to grow your collection.


It depends on the level of 70-300 you purchase. I went for the VR version of the Nikon lens which cost me $529. There is another version which I believe is half the price but I wouldn't touch it. 

After a week in San Francisco and Monterey I have had my first real experience with the camera and lenses. If you don't need the high end 300 mm I would suggest getting the 18-200 and sticking with one lens. I found myself changing lenses too often but when I did, the results were pretty impressive. Remember that focal lengths for most digitial SLRs should be multiplied by 1.5 to get a 35mm equivilent. For example, my 70-300 would be a 105 to 450 if it was on a 35mm SLR.

Hope this helps,


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

If I wanted a flower lens hood for the D40, which specification(s) do I look for? 52 mm in size? (Assuming the 18-55 mm lens kit.)


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*Are you getting the D40 or D40x...*



Lars said:


> If I wanted a flower lens hood for the D40, which specification(s) do I look for? 52 mm in size? (Assuming the 18-55 mm lens kit.)


...I know that doesn't answer your question but what the heck?
Back to your original question, with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens, then you'll need a 52mm lens hood. (I just googled it). I am still undecided between the Nikon D40x and the D80. Money is the only factor. If I get the D40x or D80 I want the kit with the 18-70mm lens. Save my money again and get a wide zoom or macro. My only delay is I'm waiting for the back orders for the D40x from Henry's where I also will get credit for a few old lenses to help my budget. Supposedly that March and then I'll decide between the two cameras.
Over and out!


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

JCCanuck said:


> Are you getting the D40 or D40x......I know that doesn't answer your question but what the heck?


I haven't yet decided between the D40 and D40X, but both come equipped with the same lens kit, which is the 18-55mm lens kit. (I have, however, decided that it _will_ be one or the other.)



JCCanuck said:


> Back to your original question, with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens, then you'll need a 52mm lens hood. (I just googled it).


Thanks, that's what I had figured. Just wanted some confirmation.


----------



## wooglin (Mar 26, 2005)

mguertin said:


> Either way you go, I would suggest to avoid the "kit" lenses, they are not great quality. About the only way they can move those lenses is along with a body, because by themselves no one would pay any $$ for them
> 
> I love my Rebel XT and just bought my 4th lens last week


I'd tend to disagree - the Nikon kit lense in particular performs very well optically, even though it might be on the slow side. It's enough to get you started, while you save up for better glass.

Hit a camera store and try both out. Spec-wise, they're both very close. It all comes down to personal preference. I went through the same thing last summer and chose the Nikon, simply because it felt more at home in my hands.

Happy with my purchase and haven't looked back.


----------



## Oakbridge (Mar 8, 2005)

JCCanuck said:


> ...on my shopping for my first DSLR, most stores except for future shop had a D40x with the smaller lens kit. The body itself was small but I liked it. The lens I was not impressed with but I'm sure it'll do the job. Being a more serious photo guy, I looked at the D80 with the 18-135 kit and the 18-70 kit. The D80 is definitely "meatier" and more solid. I could get this pushing my budget a bit, but what kit would I go with? The 135 kit is $135 cheaper and newer (right?). But the 70 kit is faster at 18. I'm more into scenery (wide) and portrait stuff (~100mm) with pets and people. Which kit do you think would be better?
> With the D80 at least it's worth investing into for upgrading with new lenses in the future for sure.
> **How would a Tamron 2.5/90mm macro and a Tamron 2.5/28 wide work with the D80? Both Tamrons are the old fix manual lense. That macro was awesome with my Nikon FE.


Stay away from the Future Shops and Best Buys. You're in Mississauga, I'd stick with Vistek (new location on Mavis just south of Britannia on the west side) or Henry's. Also look at Black's larger stores (like Square One) which carry it in stock. They've got a 60 day price protection which I've already used when the D80 went to $1099 on Boxing Day.


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*Probably go with Henry's...*



Oakbridge said:


> Stay away from the Future Shops and Best Buys. You're in Mississauga, I'd stick with Vistek (new location on Mavis just south of Britannia on the west side) or Henry's. Also look at Black's larger stores (like Square One) which carry it in stock. They've got a 60 day price protection which I've already used when the D80 went to $1099 on Boxing Day.


...since I can get about $200+ on credit from some lens I won't use with the new cameras. I went in the the new Vistek store recently and didn't like it at all. The store looked more like a jewelry store including the prices. Future and Best Buy are quite limited with there selection anyway so they weren't my choices. Never liked Blacks for many reasons. I'm in no hurry so I can wait for Henry's.


----------



## imobile (Oct 6, 2007)

Lars said:


> I haven't yet decided between the D40 and D40X, but both come equipped with the same lens kit, which is the 18-55mm lens kit. (I have, however, decided that it _will_ be one or the other.)
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, that's what I had figured. Just wanted some confirmation.


Lars,

If you go with Nikon D40X, do consider upgrading to the Nikkor D 18-70mm.
It is a little more expensive but worth it. You get extra reach, going from wide angle ( 27mm at 35mm equivalent) to portait/telephoto ( 70mm = 105mm 35 mm equiv).
Then in future if you upgrade, you can still use a good quality lens!

For three years I used this lens with D70.
I have a few pics on here with the lens...

and a few on here... better quality!
.Mac Web Gallery

or on webshots ...link below! 
Victoria , BC. Canada ~ Photos by EssenceVictoria pictures from canada photos on webshots

The thing I LOVE about Nikon is they DO NOT obsolete.
The oldest Nikkor will 'work' on a DSLR!

Try that with a Canon FD lens ..I have seven pristine Canons which are useless unless I go back to film photography pre auto focus ( ie 1980 ). And on eBay worth peanuts!

Current;y. I splurged an bought a new Nikon D300 with the fantastic 18-200 VR lens. Serious money, but like my Macs or old Mercedes 560 , worth every cent!
I'll post an un processed night pic, handheld in photo section. Remember, the shutter speed is one tenth of a second, hand held. 

Cheers


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*Dumb question on old Nikkor lens...*



imobile said:


> Lars,
> 
> If you go with Nikon D40X, do consider upgrading to the Nikkor D 18-70mm.
> It is a little more expensive but worth it. You get extra reach, going from wide angle ( 27mm at 35mm equivalent) to portait/telephoto ( 70mm = 105mm 35 mm equiv).
> ...


I have an old manual Nikon zoom, 70-210. If I use a D80 with the built in motor can I auto focus with that lens? I know I can get the correct exposure readings.
I'm glad you liked the 18-70 lens. My definite favourite range wide angle to 105 which is ideal for portraits. How did you find the 18 (27mm) angle? I will get a true wide angle lens in the future but for starters this seems good.


----------



## imobile (Oct 6, 2007)

JCCanuck said:


> I have an old manual Nikon zoom, 70-210. If I use a D80 with the built in motor can I auto focus with that lens? I know I can get the correct exposure readings.
> I'm glad you liked the 18-70 lens. My definite favourite range wide angle to 105 which is ideal for portraits. How did you find the 18 (27mm) angle? I will get a true wide angle lens in the future but for starters this seems good.



YES you can..... any old Nikkor AF will work just fine.
I have same 70-210mm, f4-5.6D lens, bought in 1992.
Used it all the time on my D70, despite being told it was not very good!
CORRECTION ~ the lens I have is AF.
I'm not sure if manual will focus with D80?
Guess you have to try it out to see if it does!
.Mac Web Gallery

Just a quick selection from thousands I have in iPhoto.
All taken with NikonD70.

I only bought the new 18-200 as wanted to carry less 'glass;' as I carry around a flash ( SB600) and a trusty Sony Digital 8 Camcorder both on foot or on the water. Also less dust into camera if reduce lens swapping!


----------



## imobile (Oct 6, 2007)

JCCanuck said:


> ...since I can get about $200+ on credit from some lens I won't use with the new cameras. I went in the the new Vistek store recently and didn't like it at all. The store looked more like a jewelry store including the prices. Future and Best Buy are quite limited with there selection anyway so they weren't my choices. Never liked Blacks for many reasons. I'm in no hurry so I can wait for Henry's.


The Camera Store in Calgary is excellent.
I bought my Xmas present ( Nikon D300 , 18-200 VR Zoom) for self from there.
Good prices/Great service ... 
Write to Sheena Christo re online buying.
( no PST either)
The Camera Store, Best camera prices in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Digital Cameras, Film, Video, Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad and more!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Today Nikon announced the new D60 SLR, a few new Coolpix cameras and a few lens updates.

New Nikon D60

Rest of the offerings.

Saw this D40 deal for $760 on Vistek's site. Includes the 18-55mm AND the 55-200mm

D40 deal


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*Thanks for the info!*



kps said:


> Today Nikon announced the new D60 SLR, a few new Coolpix cameras and a few lens updates.
> 
> New Nikon D60
> 
> ...


That confirms the rumours! Now did some of those camera sales people lie saying their is definitely no D60 coming out?
Ooooooo! The AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II, one of the new lens out, looks awesome and my first choice. Nikon Canada
No prices announced yet and now I suspect a new D80 will come out but that will be out of my price range.
D60 with the 16-85mm would suit me if the price is right.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

kps said:


> Today Nikon announced the new D60 SLR, a few new Coolpix cameras and a few lens updates.
> 
> New Nikon D60.


Mmm, me wants some pricing!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

There are also rumors of a D300FX (full frame) floating around. This is a distinct possibility as it would fit well to compete with the 5D.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Lars said:


> Mmm, me wants some pricing!


One would think they would have at least updated their site with MSR pricing. Nikon.ca has the camera listed, but no picture or price yet.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Lars said:


> Mmm, me wants some pricing!


Nikon Announced D60 Pricing - SlashGear

The D60 will sell for $750 (U.S) bundled with AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G Vibration Reduction lens, according to Nikon.

For my own and anyone else's information.


----------



## JCCanuck (Apr 17, 2005)

*Thanks!*



Lars said:


> Nikon Announced D60 Pricing - SlashGear
> 
> The D60 will sell for $750 (U.S) bundled with AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G Vibration Reduction lens, according to Nikon.
> 
> For my own and anyone else's information.


Looks like that would work for me. Would have liked to get the D60 body only and get the AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens but it might be around $800 plus so that not feasible now.


----------

