lovephoto2626
newbie
Reged: 15/08/2008
Posts: 3
|
|
Hello! I have a D40x, and I love it. I have someone offering to buy it from me, and while I do not feel ready for a better camera yet, I think I should use this opportunity to upgrade my camera while someone is waving cash in my face! I am just starting out, but I plan on doing portrait photography, babies, kids, etc., and I would like to have a camera with the ability to take breathtaking shots at weddings, etc. I have a 70-300VR lens and a 50mm f1.8 lens with my D40x. Should I get a D300...D700...I don't know. Any thoughts?
|
Roger_Provins
Made-it Man
Reged: 22/10/2005
Posts: 3224
Loc: Gloucester, UK
|
|
Quote:
and I would like to have a camera with the ability to take breathtaking shots at weddings, etc.
Cameras don't do that - good photographers do it 
--------------------
Rog
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9546
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
Hello! I have a D40x, and I love it. I have someone offering to buy it from me, and while I do not feel ready for a better camera yet, I think I should use this opportunity to upgrade my camera while someone is waving cash in my face!
Why? You say you are just starting out so I think it unlikely you have sufficent experience to be able to determine what you wish to achieve that your current camera cannot deliver. You claim to love the camera yet somebody waves a few quid at you and you instantly seem to think you want to get rid of it... 
The camera and lenses you have are quite capable of delivering quality results providing you learn how to use them. A fancy expensive camera with loads of knobs and dials will not make you a better photographer - just a more confused one with empty pockets. I suggest you learn to walk before you try running.
Keep the D40, learn to use it, explore it's full potential and then maybe you will be better placed to A) understand what it can and can't do and B) be able to determine which of the more advanced cameras offer what you need...
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is more fun than one in the cupboard........
|
Skyline_kid
enthusiast
Reged: 22/07/2008
Posts: 267
Loc: Cardiff innit like
|
|
^^^ what he said.
|
Gold1
No Glass
Reged: 26/05/2008
Posts: 104
|
|
The advice on here always tends to lean towards "being a better photographer" rather than "getting a better camera" which sounds like the "wise" thing to aspire to.
However, it's not always that straight forward. When we all used film SLR's, it really didn't matter what camera we had, as they all essentially produced the same results, keeping us all on a much more even footing. Your money was always better spent on good quality lenses and the rest purely came down to one thing: how good you were.
With digital cameras I believe things are very different. The main difference is that they're still not as good as film cameras in terms of consistency. Each brand and model seems to produce hugely varying results, some better than others.
Recently the differences are major ones too. With some cameras being FX while others are still DX format. Some can now be used at very high ISO ratings without noise being a problem, when others are pretty much stuck on a maximum of 400 ISO, to name just a couple. These kind of new improvements are not just faddish gadgets, they're fundamental differences.
My advice is, if it's something that you're passionate about and you've got a few quid to spend, then why not? Get the best camera you can afford and enjoy it!
As for which one to go for? I would say that at the moment the D700 has enough major advantages to justify changing (even if you wait for the price to drop while you save up for it).
It may not make you a better photographer, but you will probably get better results anyway.
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9546
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
So I guess you'd recommend learning to drive in a Ferrari...
Time and time again we get newbies on the forum who have been seduced by the marketing tosh and rushed out, spent a fortune on the latest all-singing, all-dancing pro or near-pro model and then what happens......... they get poor to average pictures and what gets the blame? Their inexperience? Of course not.........it must be the camera/lens that’s faulty because the advert/brain dead Jessies serf (Tom Sergeant excepted) has intimated the camera will make them into a top 'tog overnight. Most times it turns out the poor schmuck with the fancy bling and a big credit card bill hasn't a clue what most of the buttons knobs and dials really do or how to set them.
You're quite right in one respect - in the days of film things were much easier camera wise. You slapped a film in and pretty much all you had in the way of controls was a shutter dial, aperture ring, release button, wind arm and rewind crank regardless of whether you had a basic camera or big heavy pro model. Things aren't quite the same with digital... pro cameras are stuffed to the gills with all sorts of options which the beginner doesn't (may never) need but which if fiddled with can totally screw up any chance of getting a good picture - how many enthusiast 'togs let alone newbies would really know how to micro-adjust AF calibration properly and accurately for instance? I only ask because that is a feature available on the current Canon 1D pro bodies and one that I suspect could well be a disaster if messed around with in a state of total ignorance.
With cameras, as with most things, it's horses for courses. If a camera has a feature you don't understand then you don't really need it... Much better that a novice photographer learns the basics of aperture, shutter speed, lighting, composition etc than wastes time faffing about with a huge range of options that won't make sense until you have mastered the aforementioned basics...
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is more fun than one in the cupboard........
|
Gold1
No Glass
Reged: 26/05/2008
Posts: 104
|
|
Oh blimey...
Classic response there from 'El Sid'
"advert/brain dead Jessies" ?
"schmuck with the fancy bling and a big credit card bill" ?
I mean steady on old bean, he's only considering buying a new camera. Seems to me that 'El Sid' should hang up the camera and go into creative writing instead.
(although with 9038 posts on here, it seems that maybe he already has?)
Just for the record, wether your a 'newbie' or hugely experienced on here, means nothing in terms of experience as a photographer.
|
lovephoto2626
newbie
Reged: 15/08/2008
Posts: 3
|
|
With all due respect sir, while I do not consider myself a seasoned photographer, I have spent plenty of time learning about my camera. You do not know anything about my knowledge base, so please think before you criticize. Thank you for your suggestions.
|
mjc7uk
Am I banned yet?
Reged: 08/07/2006
Posts: 2868
|
|
Have you consider the Nikon D80 that's if you want to stick to Nikon brand, but if not then the world is your oyster!
Good luck...
--------------------
The Nikonboy is back...
We can't stand about here doing nothing. People will think we're workmen. - Spike Milligan.
|
GeoffR
Reged: 31/05/2003
Posts: 3938
Loc: Bucks
|
|
The Nikon D40x is an excellent camera, were it not for the absence of a focus motor in the body I would consider one my self, it isn't always convenient to carry a D2x, they are hardly unobtrusive.
Unless you have found a limitation with yours, I wouldn't change. If you want to spend your money get some better lenses. Otherwise buy some more memory cards and go no a weeks holiday with the rest.
|
Towershot
old hand
Reged: 19/03/2007
Posts: 773
Loc: Lancashire, U,K.
|
|
Quote:
Have you consider the Nikon D80 that's if you want to stick to Nikon brand, but if not then the world is your oyster!
Good luck...
^^^^^^^^
W H S
The Nikon D80 a good upgrade IMHO, it has it,s own motor to auto-focus so opens up doors for you for cheaper lenses than you can buy for the D40
It,s a damb good camera,and enough to learn.
I,for one partially agree with El Cid, the D300,D700 and D3 are far to technical for most,and would tend to put a lot of people off.
Get a D80 
--------------------
Got a good camera, now to get a good photographer.:~<
Rick
My Flickr
|
surf_digby
journeyman
Reged: 04/04/2008
Posts: 60
|
|
Do you not have a lens shorter than the 50mm 1.8?
I'd consider getting another lens with a wider view to bring more flexibility to your set up. If you haven't got a seperate flash, then I'd add one of those too.
|
lovephoto2626
newbie
Reged: 15/08/2008
Posts: 3
|
|
I agree, I think the D80 would be a good camera for me. I get frustrated when my D40x won't autofocus my 50mm F1.8 lens. I don't mind manual focus, but at least with the D80 I would have the option. Thank you all for your help!
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 2475
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
Do you find it frustrating to go to the menus to adjust things like white balance or iso or other functions that can be performed by pressing a button and 'twiddling' a knob on the D300 and above?
Do you want the superb low noise at high iso of the D700 or D3? Do you want the rugged build quality and drive rate(and associated bulk and mass) of a D3?
If the answer to those questions is no then stick with the D40x. I use a D300 with a D40x as a backup body. The need to access menus to change things on the D40x that can be done on the D300 quicker with dedicated buttons is real to me but the advantages of the D700 and D3 are not. That's fine for me; I'm happy. Don't ask us to make subjective judgements; they are personal to us and you. The actual image quality of the D300 is not significantly better (if at all) than the D40x. The D300 does not make better images than a D40x; it is just easier to get them.
May I ask what lenses you are using? Although Nikkor kit lenses are good compared to the competision, using a really top class Nikkor of length and aperture to suit your favourite subject would be an eye opening experience and make far more difference than a new camera body. If you have cash burning a hole in your pocket ......
I am sticking with my present bodies although I can afford to upgrade without debt. I am satisfied with what I have. Of course if Nikon were to release modest length primes with VR and AFs I would be tempted. If they also had aperture rings so I could use them on my old film FMn2 as well as the digital bodies then I could not resist.
Don't bother with a D80. It is a good camera and a worthwile step from a D100 or D70(s) or D50 but not from a D40x. If you really must upgrade then a new D300 or second hand D2x at about the same price is the least you should consider.
|
Gold1
No Glass
Reged: 26/05/2008
Posts: 104
|
|
Quote:
the D300,D700 and D3 are far to technical for most,and would tend to put a lot of people off.
Such technophobes!
I know these big scary cameras can look a little intimidating, but the truth of the matter is that they are no more difficult to use than any other camera on the market.
Yes some of the gadgets and menu options aren't going to be of use to some people, but there is one simple solution to this... don't use them.
"so why waste your money on a state of the art camera if you're not going to use every available function?" I hear you cry.
Because the quality they offer far exceeds the second rate offerings that Nikon have come up with previously. When I say second rate, I'm comparing the quality of results from digital SLR's pre D700 & D3 with any basic film camera.
With the D700 & D3 Nikon can finally be proud to offer digital cameras that seriously compare to film. In terms of quality this is the starting point, everything before has been substandard.
The gadgets and dozens of options available are irrelevant. If you do happen to be tempted to start fiddling and it all goes wrong, simply hit the "restore to factory settings" function. Easy.
I'm sure most of you have no idea of the potential that the PC you're using right now has beyond the basics either. Even your mobile phone offers technology way beyond most peoples grasp, but it doesn't matter, you don't need a degree in computer science to use this stuff anyway.
|
Towershot
old hand
Reged: 19/03/2007
Posts: 773
Loc: Lancashire, U,K.
|
|
I think I am a bit of a technophobe, but I have the D300
And A F2
So must be caught in the middle.
Just trying to advise on a good camera without to much expenditure......for what sounds like a newby in Digital..
--------------------
Got a good camera, now to get a good photographer.:~<
Rick
My Flickr
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 2475
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
Quote:
the quality they offer far exceeds the second rate offerings that Nikon have come up with previously. When I say second rate, I'm comparing the quality of results from digital SLR's pre D700 & D3 with any basic film camera.
I would disagree. The image quality from the D40x,D60, D80, d200, and d300 is very good. What the more expensive cameras offer is better AF systems, better prisms, faster framerates, better shutters, better build quality and generally better reliability and fnctionality. But the image quality of the lower members of the family is fully up to the Nikon standard. i.e first rate.
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3729
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
I don't really understand this view that the latest thing is too technical. I'm certain that I don't use many of the features of my camera as I only use Aperture priority, Manual or very very occasionally Shutter priority or Programme mode, other than those things I use fiddle with ISO and exposure compensation and that's about it. But, even if I only used some of the features of the latest thing I'd still get the benefits of the new sensor and better low light / higher ISO performance, and dust system too.
In the great scheme of things, cameras aren't really that complicated and I'm sure that anyone even half interested in photography or cameras will derive some enjoyment and get some benefit from a newer camera.
I say go for the upgrade, if you can afford it and that's what you want to do.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
GeoffR
Reged: 31/05/2003
Posts: 3938
Loc: Bucks
|
|
Saying that a D3 is "too technical" is like saying TV is to complex. You don't have to understand how either works to enjoy using it. There is no "need" to touch the menu or custom settings on a D3 it is just a camera
|
Gold1
No Glass
Reged: 26/05/2008
Posts: 104
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
the quality they offer far exceeds the second rate offerings that Nikon have come up with previously. When I say second rate, I'm comparing the quality of results from digital SLR's pre D700 & D3 with any basic film camera.
I would disagree. The image quality from the D40x,D60, D80, d200, and d300 is very good. What the more expensive cameras offer is better AF systems, better prisms, faster framerates, better shutters, better build quality and generally better reliability and fnctionality. But the image quality of the lower members of the family is fully up to the Nikon standard. i.e first rate.
Well all these things you mention are certainly plus points to buying a D700 / D3, however you haven't mentioned the single most important development that these cameras offer: Nikons magnificent new full frame sensor. That is the defining difference between these two cameras and everything else offered by Nikon until now.
It's the use of this sensor and the results that are achieved with it, that brings these cameras back up to the level of using a basic film SLR. Give it a couple of years and I'm sure that we'll all look back at the old DX format digital SLR's and laugh at how lame they were in comparison (even to film).
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
