#1. "RE: D3000 or D5000" | In response to Reply # 0
Floridian Nikonian since 11th Feb 2007Mon 28-Sep-09 02:58 AM | edited Mon 28-Sep-09 03:04 AM by Floridian
Why do you want to upgrade? That would help answer your question. Nikon makes both cameras because they think one will be better for some people while the other will be better for others.
Both will take better quality photos than your D40 in theory, but in practice you may not be able to see the difference. I have a D50 (6mp, like your D40, but even older design) and a D300, which has the same sensor as the D5000 and should take equivalent photos. I still use my D50 a lot, even though I have a D300 available, because most of the time the quality difference won't be visible in my photos. You have to have a pretty demanding situation in terms of what you're photographing (for example, action photos in low light) or how you're using the photograph (for example, cropping a lot and printing large prints) before any difference would be visible in the results.
If you can't point to some specific reason that your D40 falls short, I'd argue for keeping that. I see the appeal of getting a new camera, but you might find better ways of improving your results (for example, a new lens) than upgrading your camera. If you can hang on another two years, you'll be able to choose between the D4000 and the D6000!
Edited to add: After I posted I looked at your profile (should have done this before) and see you already have a D300. So I should ask you: Do you see a difference in the results you get from the D40 and the D300? If you want to get D300-quality photos from a smaller camera, get the D5000. But as I say, I'm still using my D50, and in most situations I can't tell the results from those of my D300.
#2. "RE: D3000 or D5000" | In response to Reply # 0
MEMcD Nikonian since 24th Dec 2007Mon 28-Sep-09 07:02 AM
The real question should be which camera is a better fit for you!
Consider the difference in features from one body to the other and determine which is the better fit for your requirements. The D5000 is the more capable body but only you can decide if it fills your needs.
Good zluck and Enjoy your Nikons!
#3. "RE: D3000 or D5000" | In response to Reply # 0
William Symonds Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Thu 01-Oct-09 07:15 AM
I'm not sure that the D3000 offers so much more than the D40 - and the sensor may even be noisier. The extra MP are not so important unless you do a lot of cropping.
The D5000 sensor is bang up to date and is a class up in terms of specs - but even then I'd think twice. The D40 is one nice camera...
Life and light wait for no man!
W i l l
Nikonian in Bogor, West Java
#4. "RE: D3000 or D5000" | In response to Reply # 3
bigenuffumbrella Nikonian since 26th Nov 2007Thu 01-Oct-09 10:35 AM
Well I went with the 5000 after reading Rockwell's not so glowing review of the 3000.
I love my D40 and I don't see me selling it, but what I was really looking for was a way to carry around my D300 without all the weight. I'm pretty sure the 5000 can accomplish about 85-90% of that and that's close enough for me.
Thanks all for the advice!
#5. "RE: D3000 or D5000" | In response to Reply # 4
Ramesses Registered since 29th Mar 2007Sat 03-Oct-09 06:27 AM
I believe that you made the right decision. I do not think that there is much difference between the D40x and the D3000.
I had the D40, which I really liked, but upgraded to the D300. This was the main reason for it:
The above photo was taken with the D40 + 18-70. I just could not crop anymore without major loss in resolution. I never had that problem with the D300 and the D5000 has almost the same sensor. I just came full-circle sold the D300 (I have the D700, though) and got the D5000 and could not be happier with it. It is a fantastic camera, small, quiet (on quiet mode) and very powerful. For street shooting, it is tops, imho.