* 6.1 Megapixels * Compressed 12-bit NEF, JPEG * 3 AF points * 2.5″ 230K pixel LCD * Up to 19x magnification? (Thanks Erik37!) * TTL (ISO 200 - 1600, HI1) * 3 metering modes (420px meter): o 3D Color Matrix Metering II o Center-weighted metering (75% of center field) o 8mm spot * Program modes including flash… (Portrait, Landscape, Night, Spot, Child, Night Portrait) * i-TTL compatible * 1/500 Flash Sync * USB 2.0 * SD, SD-HC * Lithium-Ion EN-EL9 * 94×126x64 mm * 475 grams without battery, memory card, LCD cover or body cap (Thanks Rogier Janssen!)
If comments are right then the D40 is only compatible with AF-S lenses. From a manufacturing and marketing standpoint this makes perfect sense, allowing Nikon to skip the in-body focus-motor with its associated weight and cost.
If the photos are accurate, it looks too small. The primary reason I picked the D50 over the Canon offerings was that the Canon bodies were too small and didn't feel right in my hands. Let's just hope this new size doesn't become a Nikon trend.
I think it is the same approach with Canon EOS mount. No in-camera AF motor but in the lens only.
I think 3rd party are fine. Sigma has a bunch of HSM and slower motor in their lens. Like the 80-400OS. If any 3rd party lens can make compatible with Canon EOS mount, they should be able to make it compatible with this new D40.
or else, this would be a good manual body
> > >D40 is only compatible with AF-S lenses >If true, an owner won't be able to use existing third party >lenses that do not have an AFS like arrangement. Not good >IMHO.
I love this new D40! It makes my D50 look soooooo much better that I'm absolutely rapt. The one problem I have with the new camera is that this forum is probably going to be flooded with people wondering why this or that lens won't work and all sorts of unhappy stories like that. I wish that there was a specific D40 forum.
>I love this new D40! >It makes my D50 look soooooo much better that I'm absolutely >rapt.
Great point K1W1!
>The one problem I have with the new camera is that this >forum is probably going to be flooded with people wondering >why this or that lens won't work and all sorts of unhappy >stories like that. I wish that there was a specific D40 >forum.
I agree. I can see why D70/D70s would share a forum, but the D80 wasn't lumped in with them, nor was the D50. I suspect that what we see today is a temporary setup until Nikon officially announces the camera, which they haven't done (yet).
The D40 and D50 address a similar market. I think unless the D40 generates overwhelming traffic in this forum, the pairing is appropriate. Folks are bound to have some of the same first DSLR questions.
I just Googled some Nikon D40 pics it loosk really small compared to the D50.. and extremely small compared to what i have and am used to (D80 with Vertical GRip) but i think its gonna be a great lil camera... Ill probably end up picking on up as a back up to what i allready have... The only thing i dont really like is 6 mp i would have like it to be 8 but hey 6 is more then enough if you really think about it
i am a happy man today.....finally there will be a forum of users who have a lower spec camera than mine.....wow.....the only hitch i have is that it shud have had a diff forum.....or may be we shud have been clubbed with the d70 forum....anyways....all the worries about the new cam have been put to a rest.....
one very obvious thing which i noticed on the pics of the d40 is the absence of the top pannel....which i am not sure is a good thing.....with the size also coming down.....has nikon got some sort of a thing that they need to copy canon.....and if so why the hell....the size os all nikon bodies is just perfect.....why make them small.....
if i was a person new to photography and would not want too much out of my camera i would buy a point and shoot with a powerfull zoom range.....why an SLR with so less features etc etc....
JustMyHobby I prefer them straight out of the camera.
Looks like the D40 is not a D50 replacement after all. The D50 will carry on for maybe another year (more likely 9 months), and will then be replaced by a D55 or D60, to give the new, large band of D40 users a sensible upgrade path rather than the huge leap to D80. Hell, it might be cheaper to scrap your D40 & get a "D60" to utilise non-AF-S lenses than buying a load of AF-S lenses to go with the D40!
To me, this move by Nikon is either very dumb or very smart. Only time will tell. All depends on the price point. This camera has to be substantially cheaper than Canon 400. The main idea looks to lure consumers into buying into dSLR system, with a safe assumption that they will soon get tired of lack of features in D40 and would upgrade to D80. As they will be new comers to SLR world, compatibility of old lenses will not be an issue with them. Most probably they will start with kit lens and soon move to D80 even before thinking of much expansion of the lens collection.
Its all speculation. The worst that can happen is that newcomers find Canon 400 (or Pentax 100K) as the better start up option. As I said earlier, it all depends on the price. If they don't get the price right it can be a major disaster for Nikon as they are replacing a sure winner (D50) with a loser.
For me, I would advise any potential new comers to SLR to drop everything and run to a store nearby and buy a D50 while the stocks last.
D50's and the surplus market at this point. This is good for large scale e-tailers with inventory to spare, and can be equally good for consumers that do not wish to see their equipment devalued so quickly. It's only bad for those just now wanting to buy a D50, but then those of us that paid $800+ over a year ago, will finally be able to feel a bit better about our purchases.
I may be wrong, but I've seen it before... The Minolta 9000-Pro (while 20+ years old) still holds close to it's original retail value, if you can find one in mint condition!
I think I can see what Nikon is trying to do with the D40. But, it seems to leave a big gap in their lineup between the D40 and the D80. If they do not have a camera in between the two, they are basically giving customers to Canon.
For me, there is no way in hell that I would consider buying the D40. Too small, too few features and just not what I need. But, now I am sort of stuck because I really want to replace my D50 (I cannot stand the tilted horizon problem anymore)but I dont have the funds to jump up to the D80 yet. Who knows, maybe Nikon has another body up their sleeve.
With the obvious NEWLY CREATED need for a D50 "black market", you could always sell yours at a premium value and upgrade to the D80, for less than what you would have otherwise expected to have to shell out... Remember, every cloud has a silver lining!
lambert, why not sell your d50 and get a d1h? might sound a little silly to some as you lose the pixels...but as far as speed, handling, and build, you can't beat it. I've seen them on sportsshooter going for $500 with 5+ batteries. Just a thought...
It also appears that with only 3 AF system that VR will not be supported. When the N55 came out it had only 3 spot AF and VR was not supported. Plus not having an internal AF motor the wonderful cheap 50 1.8D is useless. This seems like a lower model than the D50 and a D55 or D60 might be coming out. This seems like a replacement for high end coolpix users that want a simple DSLR.
As far as combining the two it seems the D50 has more in common with the D80 than the D40. Jim
You know the more I look at the pictures they seem they may have been doctored then again maybe not oh well. Jim
if nikon really wanted to get sales from point and shooters who want to upgrade to an slr, they really should have upped the mp count of the camera. working at best buy, it is very hard to try to sell a 6mp d50 when there is a 8mp rebel xt or an 10mp xti right next to it. the question every customer asks when buying a digital camera is, "how many megapixels does it have?", most consumers believe the more megapixels the better. seeing as how this d40 is a watered down d50, i imagine it being near impossible to sell. only good thing i see to this is the bigger screen
Disgruntled D2X owner. Very happy with my D2X (12-24,17-55,70-200 VR) but not using it as much as I should because of 1. weight 2. carry on bag travel restrictions.
Want: a very small body WITHOUT a grip, can use non-AFS primes, decent finder, DOF preview,10MP. Sort of a digital OM4. D50 - poor build quality, poor finder, 6MP, no DOF preview, still has a bulky grip D80 - better but still has the grip and is still too big for my wishes D200 - not small and light enough
D40 - piece of cynical junk, AFS lenses only -yeah like the 'high' quality 18-55mm The D400 looks better Q and spec, and that's saying something.... Look like Nikon are fighting canon for the bottom feeders.
I've put an order in for the Olympus E400 instead...............
What grip - the right-hand grip? Every camera since the F100/F4 era has had that, and people overwhelmingly love it - it's here to stay. If you want to try and hold a grip on a nice sharp rectangle, might as well go back to film and MF.
Brendan the D50 and D80 as far as build goes are almost identical and the viewfinder in the D80 is very good. Plus I find the D50 well built in its price range , I know compared to the D2X its small and plastic but it still feels solid and I am a F100/FM3a user. As far as the grip it is removable on the D80 but I guess my question is how about the D200? Jim
Thanks James for the suggestion. By the 'Grip' I mean the thing the Right hand holds onto on a 'modern' SLR....
I confess that being unable to take my D2X with me with the recent air baggage restrictions, I've been using my OM4Ti with a 21mm f3.5, 35mm f2 and 85mm f2 + velvia 100. The velvia's a pain to process and scan, but the OM is a dream of a travel camera - I've used OM's for 35 years, so what I mean by 'light' is slim 'classic' body, small lens and light enough to hold in one hand... E400 ??????
Ah I got you. I feel the same way about my FM3a wonderful to travel with. I agree I think the olympus is more flat but I though it was the E-300(330 newer version seems very flat) but I am not up on thier DSLR's but I have heard good things about them olympus has always been solid. Jim
Edited I just looked at the E400 not as flat as the E330 but still seems more tradition very nice looking camera. Plus WOW nest to the D80 it is very small(lets go digital review) Jim
I disagree. Its all about how you sell it, the cameras advantages, the "how big do you do your prints" argument, yada yada. Selling a D50 over a big zoom point n shoot is relatively easy if they dont care about size. Hey the D40 is even smaller! Ooh nice. What a pity I dont sell cameras anymore it would have been a fun time, if theres any available to sell that is.
This camera seems like the Digital F55, small, cheap and simple. Camera enthusiasts shake thier head in disbelief but new comers to the SLR market will snap them up.
I'm nearly done. Only one more shot. Just give me five minutes...
Right now, Amazon has the D50 with the lens kit (18-55mm) for $629. Once the release of the D40 is official, do you all think that this price will go up, down, or remain the same? I think $629 is the lowest I've seen the D50.
>Ha Larry I did the same yesterday the viewfinder is awsome. >I have decided to get one this month. Jeesh NAS but the >viewfinder is awsome, plus it feels heavier to me how about >you?
Hard to say - my demo had mounted the 55-200DX which is a pretty light lens, and it had a spring-retractable shop lifting cable which makes it feel heaver. Congrats on buying the D80, I'm hoping to get one for Christmas.
If "Soccer Moms" are the target market, then they are still far behind Kodak and HP, because those two have been bundling digicams and photo-printers for years...
My sister is the epitomy of a soccer mom, and when it comes to anything even remotely close to that market, she's all over it, so unless Nikon is actually planning to provide her with a better photo-printer and a bigger/better/faster photo hosting site in addition to a camera that has similar specs to her already year old Kodak (non-DSLR), it doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell, especially since she has an LCD display that functions as a viewfinder, which allows her to point and shoot!
Why all the fuss over unusable lenses? The reason for the D40 is exactly that getting rid of that superfluous focusing motor will allow you to design a smaller body. Small for some hands, but perfect for small hands, remember! The D40 owner will have a very restricted choice of lenses compared to the rest of us, but (s)he will experience the responsiveness of a DSLR - something my 11-year old daughter realized in 2 seconds. She kept her Canon A400 in her pocket and dragged around with my D200/18-200 whenever she could snap it out of my hands. "It fires immediately, dad". Something any soccer mom is able to appreciate, probably including tgreene´s sister!
However, I think the release of this D40 is the wrong angle for Nikon to take... Nikon should be attracting more people to the D50 by releasing a D50s or D60 with a 2.5 inch lcd, 8mp and the viewfinder from the D80 to compete with the Canon 400d/Rebel XTi.
The D50 is already cheaper than the canon 400d and whilst I understand that Nikon are obviously hoping to corner the very bottom end of the DSLR market they should be worried about the 400d taking all the sales away from the D50 for those who want a decent entry level DSLR that's not a piece of junk (D40) and is not out of their price range (D80 and above).
Lastly, If Nikon want to make any sales at all they need to get their cameras into stores (D80 still not available over the counter in most stores in australia unless you pre-order it and wait a couple of weeks!)