Nikon D40 or D40X


Status
Not open for further replies.

marsulein

New Member
Jul 12, 2005
157
0
0
Singapore
#1
Dear Enthusiasts,

I noticed recently Nikon released the new D40X which boast higher megapixels of 10 as well as lower base sensitivity (ISO 100). I have also read a few standalone review and these two stand almost equal in terms of rating.

However, there is 1 thread of a photographer who said that D40 worths more than D40X despite of the better ISO and megapixels. He didn't really go into detail the reasons behind it. Not wanting to disappoint later after purchasing a D40 I would like to ask the opinions of clubsnap enthusiasts.

Any opinions are highly appreciated and thanks in advance.

Regards,
Mar
 

Artosoft

Senior Member
Aug 31, 2005
3,710
0
0
Tanjong Katong
#2
If you need high megapixel, go D40X. If not, just go D40 and you can save.

Regards,
Arto.
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#3
D40X was released because Sony stopped manufacturing 6MP sensors. So Nikon put the Sony 10MP sensor into the D40 body (Same sensor as the D200, I believe).

Personally though I'd avoid the D40 series entirely. I don't like the build quality and the restrictions on the lenses.
 

ihub88

New Member
Mar 3, 2007
586
0
0
#6
how many pixel you need?
 

IceMocha

New Member
May 23, 2007
134
0
0
The Upper Room
#7
how many pixel you need?
I always face the same decision as the thread starter. I know people will say you probably don;t need 10M, but that's best on current need and what's acceptale isn't.

I recently load some of my old digitial photos (1 or 2 M) on my new 40" LCD and OMG, they look horrible. They were perfect for viewing in the past, but not acceptable now.

So, I'm really not sure should I take a D40 or pay a little more for a D40x which I know I don't really need the extra pixels.
 

ExplorerZ

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2006
7,752
0
36
West Legion
hkchew03.deviantart.com
#8
I always face the same decision as the thread starter. I know people will say you probably don;t need 10M, but that's best on current need and what's acceptale isn't.

I recently load some of my old digitial photos (1 or 2 M) on my new 40" LCD and OMG, they look horrible. They were perfect for viewing in the past, but not acceptable now.

So, I'm really not sure should I take a D40 or pay a little more for a D40x which I know I don't really need the extra pixels.
ur 40" is LCD-TV or LCD? if LCD TV, 6mp is more than enough to look good. :bsmilie:
 

IceMocha

New Member
May 23, 2007
134
0
0
The Upper Room
#11
ur 40" is LCD-TV or LCD? if LCD TV, 6mp is more than enough to look good. :bsmilie:
My point is, the 2MP photos look good and more than enoughfor CRT TV viewing in the past (just a few yrs back).

Now that I view it over the 40" LCD TV, it looks horrible. I know a 6mp is good enough for a 40" LCD TV, but is a 40" LCD TV good enough for more of us? We will all upgrade to large LCD TV within 2-3 yrs, the photo taken now may then look like ****.

So, I can't answer how many pixels I need. Guess it's down to budget, which I don't really have a limit. I'm considering the D40 of 40x because I want something small for travelling.
 

marsulein

New Member
Jul 12, 2005
157
0
0
Singapore
#12
It's a GOOD thing I actually post this on CS. I never knew that D40 & D40X doesn't support ALL the nikon lenses!!!!!!

Although I am not really a heavy addict to photography but I think getting a nikon SLR which supports all the range of lenses will be better compared to limited support.

After looking at Nikon SLRs again, I am considering to get a D50 but I saw a lot of you guys are recommending me to go for D70. The price difference between D50 and D70s (kit) is very near so I dont mind getting the D70s but why is the D70 has a big price gap?

Anyone could advise?
 

Artosoft

Senior Member
Aug 31, 2005
3,710
0
0
Tanjong Katong
#13
It's a GOOD thing I actually post this on CS. I never knew that D40 & D40X doesn't support ALL the nikon lenses!!!!!!
D40 or D40x don't have AF motor inside the camera body. So, AF only can be done with the lenses with AF motor on the lens.

Regards,
Arto.
 

mickie

New Member
Jan 26, 2007
94
0
0
#16
Another difference is that D40X has slower 1/200 flash sync which is down from 1/500 of the D40. What do flash sync do? Is it better for filled-flash?
 

spazzer

New Member
May 5, 2007
1,997
0
0
BUKIT PANJANG
#18
u want 10mp go for d 80 1780 for body with 18-135mm kit lens (rather good) living with it... heard that there are some prob with d40x from my friend it keeps restarting(on and off) sometimes and has problems supporting lenses so he say don buy it he
 

mickie

New Member
Jan 26, 2007
94
0
0
#19
Please explain. Are there changes to the shutter?
From nikon's site.
D40: Combined mechanical and CCD electronic shutter, 30 to 1/4000 s. in steps of 1/3, bulb

D40x: Electronically controlled vertical-travel focal plane shutter, 30 to 1/4000 s. in steps of 1/3 EV, bulb

So which is 'better'? Any difference between these two?
 

mickie

New Member
Jan 26, 2007
94
0
0
#20
I'm also interested to know about these 2 camera. Same at marsulein
These are the difference that bother me.

1. D40 has a faster flash sync speed than D40x.
Beside knowing that sync speed is the fastest shutter speed you can use with flash. What else does it really help in?

2. ISO 100. From a magazine I read, it said it's better for long shutter speed or studio flash. So what say you guys?

3. Shutter:
D40: Combined mechanical and CCD electronic shutter, 30 to 1/4000 s. in steps of 1/3, bulb
D40x: Electronically controlled vertical-travel focal plane shutter, 30 to 1/4000 s. in steps of 1/3 EV, bulb
What is the difference between these 2? Which is 'better'?

marsulein, please tell me if I'm hijacking your thread. Will remove my post.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom