Nikon D60 gets reviewed, bests the D40x only just barely
By Paul Miller 
posted March 3rd 2008 9:07AM
posted March 3rd 2008 9:07AM
posted March 3rd 2008 9:07AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Sweet, now I don't feel so bad about my d40x being outdated.
So wait: Nikon stuck VR into their godawful entry kit lens and they're calling it a value?
I'm not a camera snob, I own a D50 and a 100$ 50mm fixed lens. I bought that lens because the results from the kit lens were just not that terriffic (also, not going lower than f3.5 was starting to tick me off).
VR or not, that lens is just not that great.
It's obvious you're not a camera snob. In fact, it's pretty clear you don't really know what you're talking about.
g
Honestly the competition completely outspecs this camera at the same (if not cheaper) price. Canon XT and Sony A200 both give you better/more AF sensors, Sony gives you in-body anti-shake and a lens motor for older lenses. Olympus E-510 is also great in this class too.
Why can't they make an affordable, robust DSLR that is tailored to _enthusiasts_ who actually knows how to handle a camera? There are quite a few of them. All those newbie friendly features only distract and annoy. Make the program selection ring for selecting the shutter speed, as it used to be, and add a ring to the lens mount to select the aperture without having to have an old lens that does that. One focus zone is more than enough, and make the viewfinder big and bright, with a replaceable focusing screen. That's all I want. Speed, resolution, focusing performance etc. is all secondary. In fact, just build a FM2/FM3a with a digital sensor, maybe full frame, and around 6-8 MP. There should be a decent audience for that, without having any competition at all.
Why can't they make an affordable, robust DSLR that is tailored to _enthusiasts_ who actually knows how to handle a camera? There are quite a few of them. All those newbie friendly features only distract and annoy. Make the program selection ring for selecting the shutter speed, as it used to be, and add a ring to the lens mount to select the aperture without having to have an old lens that does that. One focus zone is more than enough, and make the viewfinder big and bright, with a replaceable focusing screen. That's all I want. Speed, resolution, focusing performance etc. is all secondary. In fact, just build a FM2/FM3a with a digital sensor, maybe full frame, and around 6-8 MP. There should be a decent audience for that, without having any competition at all.
I don't think you'll ever see exactly what you're asking for here, but you might consider a D40 - along with those old Nikon lenses. Some very good old Nikon lenses are dirt cheap on eBay and mount just fine on the D40. You'll need to operate in full manual mode, but I assume that's what you mean by "enthusiast" anyhow. The focusing screen is a little trickier, but I've been reading of folks modifying their screens to split-prism models without too much cost or difficulty.
g
Not to mention that the D40 is dirt cheap these days - if you can find one. I finally gave in to my urge to buy a DSLR when a local store had the D40 kit for 399€... :)
Yes, but the manual mode of a modern DSLR is not much better to use than that of my P&S Canon. I'm interested in the classical layout as used for a long long time, these programs just annoy me. There are 2 cameras that came somewhat close... Sigma SD10 which only could do RAW (good thing), but the shutter speed dial was more like slowest, slow, fast, faster... and there was no ring for the aperture. And the Panasonic L1, which is very expensive and only has a four thirds sensor. And of course Leica M8 and Epson D-R1, and they are rangefinders and between expensive and extremely expensive.
But try and imagine what I'm suggesting. Take your favorite Nikon lens - some of their best are 20-30 years old - and put it on a D40. You've got the aperture ring on the lens plus the thumbwheel to shuffle through shutter speeds (D40 goes all the way to 1/4000). That's MUCH easier than my Canon P&S; you don't even need to take it away from your eye. Plus, you've got fast access to ISO adjustments, so you're already more flexible than the FM2/FM3A you're opining. You could even map the ISO to a thumbwheel+function button combo. So choose your aperture or shutterspeed, guess at the accompanying settings, take a test shot, chimp the LCD, adjust as needed.
Actually not a bad idea, makes sense. But aren't these lenses MF? Even with a split-prism focusing screen I'm not too confident in shooting really sharp photos with these small viewfinders... at least it won't be as easy as with a FM2 for example. I'll certainly consider this though, thanks :)
Yeah, it'll be MF... if you've never done any of this before (no meter, no AF, etc.) it sounds kind of intimidating, but if you're a D40 owner already or are considering it it's an easy thing to pick up an old lens (as cheap as $20... for *good* lenses) and give it a try.
g
Well, I've worked with the FM2 before, so I'm kind of used to MF, but that had a much bigger screen. No metering shouldn't be a big problem, you can always reshoot with different settings (the beauty of digital :D ). I could imagine that aperture priority should work too.
I'm still satisfied with my d40, even with the releases of the 40x and 60. The stock vr 18-55 lens looks nice, though.
I'm not regretting my D40 purchase. If you've got the standard kit lens, the addition of VR isn't THAT big of a deal. But it's a nice little feature.
By the way, for an entry level lens, it's excellent. People complaining about a $100 lens not going below f/3.5...seriously?
Let's put this into perspective, shall we?
You've got the kit lens which is f/3.5-5.6 (if I remember correctly), for $100.
....or you can buy the huge, heavy 17-55mm lens with a constant f/2.8...for $1600.
How's that for value?
Just as well... I'm not regretting my D60 purchase. It's one of my best buys ever (and most expensive). I think it was well worth it.
Right guys... this with the VR or the 450d with the IS?