We were pretty stoked when
Nikon finally announced the D40, but we were even more stoked when we got to play with one. It's light, it's fast, and it's a lot of fun to fool around with for amateurs photographers like us (and we do mean amateur). Click on for a ton of unboxing shots and to see how the D40 looks in the buff alongside an older sibling.
What, the side of the box is just as interesting!
It comes with a battery, charger, power cable (for the charger), USB cable, and strap.
So close.
There she is.
Hello, beautiful.
This obviously doesn't show a lot of scale, but wow is this thing small for a DSLR.
Now for the comparisons to the completely moderately sized D70s. Keep in mind, the D70s is by no means a large DSLR.
Sorry, son, those old batteries won't work anymore.
Notice: no camera info LCD. All that's emulated in the actual main display now.
SD slot, we're so over CF.
With that bundled 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor lens.
Let's turn 'er on.
Look familiar?
Nice, up to 1600 ISO.
Love those RAW options.
The full LCD even emulates the old school LCD it's missing.
posted Nov 21st 2006 3:23PM
Horrible! I cannot believe Nikon is building this crappy product.
Pretty cool what they've done to the inteface for the remplacement of the top lcd.
Was the D80 winner ever officially announced?
That looks pretty sweet. But it's too small.
Woah, at first i was kinda angered at the LCD that was missing. Cool that they put it on the LCD. You can even see it in the dark (unlike the D50). Looks cool.
Nikon completely messed up the pricing of the unit, atleast up here in Canada.
$749.95 D40 Kit with AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 G ED II Lens
$999.95 D40 Kit with AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 G IF-ED Lens
wtf? Are they seriously trying to come up with a new internet joke or something? The D50 kit with 18-55 is only a couple dollars more, and even the D70 is just a tad over 1k with 18-70. Hell, the D70 should be even cheaper than that now. There's no way a newcomer to DSLRs will spend that money when they could get the D70 - hell, even an XTi, in and around the same price.
damn i just bought a D50 a month ago!!
congrats! You own a better camera!
I have yet to see the d80 announcement/follow up... I don't believe it's been posted.
The PS3 & Wii Coverages are pretty much over with now, and next is the BF Coverage... After that, we have a couple of weeks before (hopefully) Engadget begins an annual Christmas Giveaway Contest!
Day 21 and counting...
"Mother," - Daffy Duck
phojo11 - They already announced that they haven't made the decision on the winnder of the D80. They have been so busy with PS3, 360, and Wii coverage that they haven't had time.
Sorry I should have stated the annual Christmahanaquansika contest
you mean ramahaunakwansmas?
would this have image stabilization? Or was that also cut to "bring down" the price?
Look like a decent beginner DSLR though.
Brian,
Most DSLR do not have VR (vibration reduction). For DSLRs VR is done with optics in the actual lens.
Much better job with the photos!!! Kudos!!
The packaging sucks! That thing could get damaged if it's box were abused.
mmmm, Nipr0n
now if only the price could fall just a little I would have a new crush to spend all my overtime money on... the wife will kill me for saying it, but I am inlove...
Nice as this is, ill stick with my Canon EOS 5D, speedlight 580 and 3 L-Series lenses :)
cool DSLR tho
Rebel XTi 10mp...$740
Nikon D40 6mp...$599
for $140 bucks more, you can get the Rebel that HAS auto focus(d40 has no motor)!!
True, it has no auto focus motor, but it can still auto focus with an AF-S or AF-I lens.
Check out all the specs here http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond40/
Don't mislead people, the D40 has autofocus. It just doesn't have the extra motor built in to allow it to drive older "non-S" lenses. The new Nikon S lenses (which have been coming out for years now) all have the AF motor built in to the lens, which is a much more mechanically efficient design. They're quieter and faster than using a motor built into the camera body.
ISO actually goes up to 3200. They call it HI-1 for some reason.
The D40 looks nice but a few things make me happy to have a D50 instead.
1. The D40 only has 3 AF points. I already find myself wishing the D50 had more than 5.
2. The status LCD keeps battery life really good because you don't hav to turn on the main LCD as often.
3. According to dpreview you have to dig into the menus to change ISO. Big bummer.
OTOH, the displays on the D40 look sweet! I dig the graphical indication of aperture.
"3. According to dpreview you have to dig into the menus to change ISO. Big bummer."
True, but the D50 does not have the awesome Auto-ISO feature the D40/D80 have. You are less likely to fiddle around with manual ISO selection with the Auto-ISO feature.
3 AF points is enough for most people (I usually just use the center point/recompose technique anyway). Add in the lower noise at high-ISO, and it sounds like a winner. If only Nikon would make more AF-S primes.
John G:
Please do not compare street price with MSRP.
I belive it would be about $899 for the Rebel XTi, if you want to do a comparison.
I didnt. That is street price according to pricegrabber.com
Yeah, nice job block, theyve already released the next new camera from Nikon and you guys haven't ev3en given away the last one, pretty cool. YOu know what would have maddened me more though, if the side by side with the D70i was actually a side by side with the D80, that woulda meant that someone still remembers it, =) STILLL cant wait for that announcement cause its almost been a month now
I love my EOS-1Ds MkII but i'll be the first to say I will NOT buy another dSLR till they come with some anti-dust features like the Oly or Canon XTi. Nikon really screwed the pooch here by not including that single feature no matter what else it can or can't do.
FYI, even dslrs with anti dust mechanisms will eventually have to have their sensors cleaned. Dust is a fact of life with dslrs. It's not a big deal to clean the sensor, which you will have to do eventually anyway - so get over it.
You guys are funny.... Comparing a 5D to a entry level DSLR?
Gee, lets compare the D200 to the Digital Rebel. *sigh*
For entry into SLR's this is a great camera. Low enough priced for the "prosumer" and decent lens selection for a pro who wants a point and shoot to take around and not lug the pro-body on say... a vacation.
Image quality from what I have seen thus far is outstanding.
I think this is a smart move from Nikon. Get the enthusiastatic prosumer at a budget, and lock them in with glass. Their next camera will more then likely be another nikon that their glass will work on.
The other thing.. Hooray for SD... I'm one of the few pro's that welcome SD memory.
Cheaper, lower power and smaller package. Better all around.
Don't buy it. Get the canon rebel XTi. 10MP for nearly the same price and it's a much better camera. Take it from me, I'm a photo major at NYU and an SLR freak. A budget 6MP DSLR these days is like buying expired meat on sale. It's cheap but it just aint no good. If you are going to drop some change on a DSLR it's gotta be at least 8MP to be worth the lenses you put on it. I just bought a rebel XTi and couldn't be happier. Great camera for a great price.
Pulp, D50 has Auto ISO.
Can you review it and show some test shots instead of what it looks like in the flesh? I need the GORE!
Max, you're an idiot.
First of all, photography is a hobby/profession but not an academic subject. Geometric optics certainly is a subject; photography isn't. If you need professors (of course, there is no PhD in photography so there is no such thing) to help you learn how to take photos for FOUR YEARS, you must be an idiot. And to prove it, you state that 6 megapixels aren't enough- newsflash: megapixels do not make a photographer. You would need 4 times the megapixel to have twice the resolution. (That means 6 times 4 = 24. 24 megapixels to have twice the resolution of 6) 6 and 8 - the two megapixel difference isn't much at all. I'm sure you would know that if you weren't a photography "major," because you would've learned things like math anbd physics which actually explain what is going on in your cameras.
Man,
If you're looking at the Nikon D40, you also need to look at the Canon XTi (10MP), Olympus E-500 (8MP + 2 lens), Pentax K10D (10MP). They're a few dollars more, but I think anyone of them is better than the D40.
That's damn sexy.
Do either the D40 or D80 support hooking to a GPS and auto embedding GPS Coordinates in the EXIF headers of a JPEG?
Rod,
Why do you say that photography is not an academic subject? Are all persons born with the innate ability to understand F-stops, focal lengths, white balance, etc? I don't think so. One has to learn the mechanics of a given subject, no matter what it may be, somewhere. Did you pop out of the womb an immediately understand how to read, write, and compute? No, you had to learn them in school. Just like Max is learning now. In school.
So just becuase his advice (which I agree with, by the way) doesn't agree with yours does not make him an idiot. If you're going to spend that kind of money on a DSLR, the D40 is not much of a value. Neverthless, the extra megapixels WILL make a difference with good glass, especially if you're shooting in RAW.
PS: The prerequisite for being a professor is not necessarily having a PhD. Many universities assign the title to their teaching staff based on their own criteria. So there.
Max A. might want to take a look at this: http://www.lifehacker.com/software/shopping/why-your-new-cameras-megapixels-dont-matter-216422.php
Why megapixels don't matter, and why a 6 megapixel Nikon D70s will print out photos every bit as good a 10 megapixel Canon Rebel.
Oh yeah, and I'm a photo student. Whatever.
I find it funny that on general gadget sites like this the fanboys come out of the woodwork to blast Canon or Nikon but if you read the dedicated photo blogs such as the Nikon blog at Photo.net everyone is civil and honest about the pros and cons of each camera. If you ask whether you should get the D40 or the 400D, the Nikon pros with thousands of dollars of gear that have been shooting for years will give you their opinions of each and ultimately tell you that you should decide on the system based on the lenses you need and the way the camera feels in your hand.
On the subject of the D40 - I think most people are forgetting the market for this camera. If you already us an SLR, you're not going to be happy with this camera. If you are looking for an advanced point and shoot then you could be very happy with this camera for the same price. This camera will take better pictures than any point and shoot on the market regardless of megapixels.
Tiny
Big Al, if learning about depth-of-field and white balance requires 4 years of college, then I'd like to see your degree. Learning photo basics is like learning how to drive. Did you go to college for your driver's license?
Photography courses are geared more towards themes, composition, variety of subject matter, architecture, etc.
Even in my HS photo class, we spent 1 hour going over the basics of f-stops, DOF, etc. I'm sorry it took you and Max 4 years to figure that out.
Sorry, some college 'photo student' who claims 1 camera is superior to another because 10mp > 6mp needs to pay more attention in class and lay off the substances. FWIW, I'm a Canon user (because I shoot mostly with long teles) but would say that if forced to choose between a XTI and a D50/D40, I'd go with the Nikon. I think most people already know the strengths/weaknesses of both Nikon/Canon so no need to hash that out.
megapixels schmegapixels. Check out David Pogue's blog on the megapixel myth:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/21pogues-posts-2/
megapixels schmegapixels. Check out David Pogue's blog on the megapixel myth:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/21pogues-posts-2/
megapixels schmegapixels. Check out David Pogue's blog on the megapixel myth:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/21pogues-posts-2/
Ha - love this series you've done! The Nikon D40 has all the right curves and look fantastic next to the D70s (I own the D70 and what I would give to have that cool, colorful and huge LCD of the D40).
Linked at: http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/nikon_d40_links#banter
Expensive.
Not exactly. The D50 has an auto mode, but it isn't as nice as the D80/D40 models, where you can select maximum ISO and minimum shutter speeds. The Auto ISO setting in the D50 is pretty obtuse and useless.
Pulp, I believe you are mistaken. While the D50 auto ISO function cannot specify maximum ISO (unlike D40/D80), you can specify minimum shutter speeds with D50 and I find it very useful (I keep mine at 1/15 or 1/30 minimum shutter speed with my 18-200 VR lens). I don't mind the maximum ISO specification because I don't mind ISO1600 if it means I can get a sharp photo; I rather have a slightly grainy picture than a blurred picture.
Seriously it's funny when people argue about how their $1000 camera can take their crappy pictures better than another persons $1000 camera. "Look! I can see extra detail and no fringing on this boring/bland/horribly composed/uninteresting shot!"
I love the size of that thing! Tiny! Sometimes I really wish my D200 was a lot smaller...
Its one prettly little DSLR !!
it can go up to 3200 ISO thats what the HI is