Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising
glbrum


4 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
glbrum Registered since 28th May 2007
Mon 28-May-07 04:33 AM

I'm new to the DSLR realm and I've been doing a lot of looking through the threads concerning the D40 and reading some reviews and I guess I'm still stuck. The main differences between the 2 are the megapixel range and the ISO. Is there anything other differences that the D40x offers over the D40? Also, would these differences make a difference in my photography? Meaning, is the extra money for the 40x worth it in what it offers?


I would be using the camera for landscape and street/urban photography. Not much, if any, sports/action, wedding, or commercial stuff.

blw

Richmond, US
28561 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

#1. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 0

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004
Mon 28-May-07 08:13 AM

I think it really boils down to "how often will you print larger than 10x15 inches"? If it's not often, save your money. One can make a very nice 13x19 from 2.7mp, if glass, technique and conditions are on your side, so it's not as if 10x15 is a hard limit. You can, of course, make a BETTER 13x19 from 6mp or 10mp, given the same glass, technique and conditions, but how often will you do that?

You might have a look at Thom Hogan's D40/40x review here.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

Ginseng

US
142 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#2. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 0

Ginseng Registered since 01st Apr 2007
Mon 28-May-07 01:52 PM

>I'm new to the DSLR realm and I've been doing a lot of
>looking through the threads concerning the D40 and
>reading some reviews and I guess I'm still stuck. The main
>differences between the 2 are the megapixel range and the
>ISO. Is there anything other differences that the D40x
>offers over the D40? Also, would these differences make a
>difference in my photography? Meaning, is the extra money
>for the 40x worth it in what it offers?
>
>
>I would be using the camera for landscape and street/urban
>photography. Not much, if any, sports/action, wedding, or
>commercial stuff.

I went with the D40 and pocketed the better than $200 difference. I applied that to filters and the SB-400 flash. I am a casual shooter (mainly family and social gatherings). I never blow up beyond 8x10 and rarely beyond 5x7.

On the MP difference:
For my usage, not a meaningful difference worth paying for.

On the ISO difference:
When shooting inside, I used bounce flash. ISO200 is not a limitation.
When shooting outside, it's typically bright enough even with the kit lens to access handholdable shutter speeds at ISO200. In bright sun, the ISO200 minimum is not even close to being an issue.
As far as the quality difference between ISO100 and ISO200, I don't know that anyone has presented a meaningful comparison on a pixel and real image basis of the D40x at ISO100 and the D40 at ISO200, all things being equal. IMO, that would be the critical comparison.

On the FPS difference:
If you're not shooting sports/action, the 3FPS of the D40x versus the 2.5FPS of the D40 will make no difference.

On the max flash sync speed:
I have made many good shots outdoors with flash sync at 1/300s and higher. The D40 tops out at 1/500s. The D40x tops out at "only" 1/200s. For some insight as to what this might practically mean, see Ken Rockwell's article on the D40 http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm> and on the D40x http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40x.htm>.

On the image file size difference:
You'll get more shots onto a given SD card so in effect, your storage costs are lower with the D40.

So the sum of my experience is that the D40 does all of what I need an entry-level dSLR to do and the D40x does nothing else beyond that to justify the additional cost. Your mileage may vary.

Wilkey

skacala

US
718 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#3. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 0

skacala Registered since 10th Apr 2002
Mon 28-May-07 07:11 PM

I went to Best Buy and found a Nikon boxed set. The D40 + 18-55mm lens + 55-200mm lens for the same price as the D40x + 19-55mm lens.

sak

"Metal detectors don't talk" T.W. 2003.
Reference the Tinman "If I only had a heart."

glbrum


4 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#4. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 0

glbrum Registered since 28th May 2007
Mon 28-May-07 07:59 PM

great...thanks for the replies.

that seems to answer my questions. the 40x is appealing because of the extra features, but from what you guys have said those features don't seem to have a huge affect on my picture taking.

And, I won't be doing many enlargements and definitely not anything 8X10 or larger.

It's seems all that's left to do is buy the thing.

amugica


17 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#5. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 4

amugica Registered since 31st May 2006
Mon 28-May-07 10:09 PM

What will make a difference is your lens. Remember that the lens is the one that takes the picture, the camera just records it. So....better glass will always (ALMOST) grant you better images.
SO...congratulations!

glbrum


4 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#6. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 5

glbrum Registered since 28th May 2007
Mon 28-May-07 10:51 PM

"Remember that the lens is the one that takes the picture, the camera just records it. "

I ran across this statement a couple days ago and now again from you and I feel you are right. On that front, I'm probably going to invest in a Nikon 50mm f/1.8. In fact, I think I have access to it so I may not need to even buy it. thanks for your comments.

edmun

eugene, US
8618 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#7. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 6

edmun Registered since 16th Sep 2003
Tue 29-May-07 04:55 AM

On the d40 the 50 mm lens is manual focus only.

ledmun

glbrum


4 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#8. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 7

glbrum Registered since 28th May 2007
Tue 29-May-07 03:52 PM

touché.

you are correct, sir.

I do plan on using manual focus most of the time .

grtmcfarlane

UK
11 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#9. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 0

grtmcfarlane Registered since 08th May 2007
Tue 29-May-07 08:52 AM

The D40 is a great camera. I got the kit pack with the 18-55mm and 55-200mm lenses, and for the same sort of money as the D40x, I think the extra lens will be way more use to you than the extra resolution and slightly better spec.

Graham McFarlane

Alba an Aigh

scpanel


1 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#10. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 9

scpanel Registered since 31st May 2007
Thu 31-May-07 06:01 PM

I just found this sight and was refered here by Nikon Tech Support. I just made the same decision, and picked the D40 and found one of the 18-200mm VR lenses to pair w/it yesterday as Unique had 1 left in stock. So now what to do w/my old Minolta 35m equip!

Cant wait to get it all put together this weekend.

Ginseng

US
142 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#11. "RE: D40 vs. D40x" | In response to Reply # 10

Ginseng Registered since 01st Apr 2007
Thu 31-May-07 09:36 PM


>So now what to do w/my old Minolta 35m equip!

I sold my Canon film gear to B&H...then turned around and spent it on more gear for my D40.

Wilkey

G