Canon Eos 400D or Nikon D40

[Soundwave]

Right guys about too take my first foray into buying a DSLR (in fact it will be my first SLR full stop) & just wondered what I should aim for??

Now my total budget is £550 for Camera, Lens & Memory card

At Jessops right now I can get a Nikon D40 with 18-55mm kit lens, 50-200mm Tamron lens, bag & 1GB Memory card for £530 or
Cannon EOS400D with 18-55mm Kit Lens for £500

My head is telling me to go for the Nikon because I'm getting more for my money, but after reading some reviews my heart is telling me the Canon...I'm in a pickle

Basically this is my first ever SLR & I'm only just starting out in the hobby so really need a VERY user friendly camera that I can learn with easily, which is where I think the Nikon comes into it's own, but I'm also worried that I might out grow it quickly & as such become a false ecconomy, so the Canon looks fine from that point of view.

I really need some recommendations from owners if possible??
Where would you spend your money??

Thanks in advance guys.

Neil

[PaulBoy]

Neil - Hi - You will see similar threads here all the time as no one wants to shell out £500 & find they have made a hash of it!

As an easy to use starter D-SLR the D40 is an excellent choice - the main drawback with it is it only works with certain lenses from Nikon & other manufacturers ranges (lenses with their own motors) - Despite the value of the bundle at Jessops I feel you could do better with your money - The D40 & kit lens (18-55mm) can be had for £365 (see www.camerapricebuster.co.uk) with the £135 left from your budget you could but a better zoom like the Sigma 70-300mm APO - SD cards are cheap as chips for 1gb 2gb & 4gb cards (see www.7dayshop.com)

The 400D is a more capable but also more complicated camera so depending on how much time & effort you want to put into your new hobby might be the way to go but of course you will only get the body & kit lens for your £500 (£479 via camerapricebuster btw) - You will need a CF card for it but again these are not expensive

HTH - Paul

[jonnypb]

I too went throught the same dilema!

I looked at the D40 and D80 - D80 too expensive for my needs

Also looked at the 400D as it is well priced and I have always liked canons, has features off the 30D such as 9 point focus. Also has the lens cleaning system which is a big plus. I think the canon has more choices of lenses and accessories as well

I've decided to get the 400D - there are lots of options you can change for pictures but also you still have the auto for the quick shots and scene settings. IMO the 400D will give better results than the D40 and although it is a little more it seems to be a very good camera.

Whatever one you pick you'll be pleased with either I'm sure

[Soundwave]

Thats great Paul thanks.

I am thinking I will go for the Nikon, lots of the reviews say it's an absolute belter for a starter camera.

The main reason for me mentioning Jessops is that they are pretty local so can go have a little play before I part with the cash & also they used price match with 'web prices...not sure if they still do but I'll be asking before I buy from them

Will let you know how I get on

Thanks again.

Neil

[nealgs]

What about the Nikon D50?? AFAIA you are not restricted to Lenses like on the D40 - Kit including 18-55mm is £370 from PC world checkout www.camerapricebuster.co.uk

I'm also looking at moving to DSLR, with the 30d being my current want.


regards
Gary

[PaulBoy]

Originally Posted by Soundwave

Thats great Paul thanks.

I am thinking I will go for the Nikon, lots of the reviews say it's an absolute belter for a starter camera.

The main reason for me mentioning Jessops is that they are pretty local so can go have a little play before I part with the cash & also they used price match with 'web prices...not sure if they still do but I'll be asking before I buy from them

Will let you know how I get on

Thanks again.

Neil

Neil - Having a play is very important as cameras all feel very different in your hands - My brother was dead set on a 400D but hadn't fondled one before I suggested he needed to - He actually preferred the D80 & was very pleased he had a play & didn't buy blind - Good luck whatever you decide ... Paul
PS - The other thing to remember is that if you get "hooked" you can keep a decent lens(es) to use on your new D-SLR body when you upgrade

[Yandros]

I'd take a look at the 400D and D40 and see how you get on with them size/control wise. If you have big hands, you may find that the bigger models are more comfortable. By all accounts the D40 is producing some stunning results straight off camera, and in the real world 6 vs 10MP is negligible difference. The anti-dust of the Canon is helpful, and does appear to work in reducing (not eliminating) dust bunnies, but you'll probably need a blower whichever you go for.

I'd be tempted to only go for the kit lens to start with, and play with that, and then save up for a more expensive long zoom than the Tamron. The Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO Macro DG at £160 usually regarded as the best budget lens. If you go for Nikon, then consider saving up (and joining the queue) for something like the Nikon AF-S VR 70-300mm (£337). This has vibration reduction built in, and makes hand holding a practical proposition.
You may outgrow your D40/400D body, but if you get quality glass (doesn't need to be 'pro' level), it'll last you through several cameras.

One last point - buy your memory cards online (somewhere like Amazon). The high street stores have a massive markup on memory.

To help you with your dilemma - both cameras are easy to use, and both are pretty much state of the art in terms of producing great photos 'straight out of the box'. Whichever you go for, it's highly unlikely that you'll regret it. Go into Jessops and handle them, and get the one that feels right to you.

[Del45]

I cant help with the canon I'm afraid.

But I do have a D40 and am very pleased with it, the camera is very easy to use and the results are fantastic (see my other thread First Night Shots ) some people complain because older lens will not auto focus but this should not be a problem for you, as you progress the camera will also give you all the manual control you will need.

The kit lens that comes with the D40 is very good and you always have the option of getting better lenses if you feel the need.

Go with the D40 and use the discount codes from camera price buster...

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/

Get a decent tripod from jessops at the same time as you order the camera and you should get a discount.

Memory is cheaper elsewhere I would recommend these....

http://www.play.com/Electronics/Elec...archtype=genre

http://www.play.com/Electronics/Elec...archtype=genre

And dont forget to use quidco for a bit more cash back.

[jamesbryan17]

I've got a 350D and it is a superb camera for my first D-SLR. My brother has the 400D and i have had some experience with it but it's really similar to mine, so i would recommend the 400D as you would get the advantage of the 10megapixels rather than the 6 or so from the D40.

[Yandros]

Originally Posted by jamesbryan17

I've got a 350D and it is a superb camera for my first D-SLR. My brother has the 400D and i have had some experience with it but it's really similar to mine, so i would recommend the 400D as you would get the advantage of the 10megapixels rather than the 6 or so from the D40.

The megapixels count is a non-issue unless you're printing at poster size. The only use of 10Mp over 6 or 8MP is heavy cropping, and even then camera shake or your lens will generally let you down before you hit the pixel limit.

Here's a fairly well known article exploding the megapixel myth...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/te...in&oref=slogin

[flyinfordson]

I was in the same boat as you a few months back - first DSLR - and apart from an old Practica many moons ago, basically my first SLR. I considered the D50 and 350D. But after having a play with both cameras at Jessops, I dropped for the Nikon on 3 accounts. Easier to handle, seemed more user friendly, and I could get more for my money.

It's a great camera - certainly good enough for my limited knowledge, and as such, I'd recomend it, based on my circumstances.

[Trev2971]

Hi All

Ive been lurking here for a while and read all the reviews I possibly could on the canon 350/400 the D50/70 and even to the D80, if I really felt I would stick out the possible DSLR fad (may as well be honest in my first post ...I can be a bit fickle) I've read and read somemore including all the for and against posts and opinions regarding the D40 and to be honest (this is personal and by no means even that calculated ) I fell in love with the D40 even after reading the many negative posts from peep's who obviously know what they are talking about, although to be fair the main gripes were price (Ive paid £319 which is about the same as I paid for a new finepix 5300 some years ago iirc) and the fact that it has no auto focus drive in the body although I really cant see me going for that many glass changes or options this early on.
The way Im looking at it is that if I can get to grips with the D40 and enjoy the differance between that and my Canon A75 I can move to the more exiteing bodies later and still have a small'ish cabable shooter to replace the
A75 which I can progress with at my pace and have relitively good (or even very good!) results with more or less from the box ( We have 3 kids and not a great deal of time to learn all the clicky, change this and that stuff that come with the other more 'Pro' DSLR's)
Ive bought 2 2Gb cards which I think will be more that adequate as Im used to having on 512meg in the canon

Im happy with my choice and definately not kicking myself.......although Im not sure if I will think the same in maybe 12 month time but if so I'll just go and get me something else with more things to play with



regards
Trev

p.s sorry for making reference to the adjustments you guys make as 'stuff'

[Liquid101]

Originally Posted by Yandros

Here's a fairly well known article exploding the megapixel myth...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/te...in&oref=slogin

I've read this article before, and i'm still unconvinced. Not that I don't agree that the quality of the pixel is more important than the quantity - it's just that I don't think that this was the way to prove it.

The Durst Lambda, while a great way of making digital prints, is actually fairly low resolution. This will go some way to levelling the playing field for the different resolution images. Having used large format Epson printers with considerably higher resolutions (1440dpi v 400dpi) for a number of years, I have seen many a low resolution image pushed beyond it's limitations. I have also seen the subtle variations in quality between the same image, but with different resolutions.

So while I think that a 6MP DSLR will usually (read - almost always) give a higher quality image than a 10MP Point and shoot, a 10MP DSLR is a completely different story.

Personally, I will probably trade in my D50 for a D200 soon - but not just because it offers more pixels.

EDIT: Of course, if you never plan to make prints over 5x7 inches, it is a non issue. But anything over A3 size, and you'll notice the difference.

[PaulBoy]

I noticed over at www.bythom.com that Thom Hogan has reviewed the D40 and is pretty keen on it - here are his final comments:

As I write this, the D50 and D70s are still being offered, but I expect that to change soon, meaning the D40 is likely to be Nikon's only 6mp and entry-level DSLR for awhile. As such, it goes up against the Pentax K100 series, used bodies, high-end compact digicams, and a host of other products. And I think it'll hold its own.

First, the image quality is excellent. Nikon has proven once again that they know how to suck every last little bit of quality out of the 6mp sensors they've been using for more than four years. And amazingly, the included kit lens doesn't let the sensor down. For those that aren't trying to shoot wall murals and are satisfied with the size prints you'd get off, say, a really good desktop inkjet, there's nothing to complain about in image quality until you get to ISO 3200, and even then some will find it usable at smaller print sizes.

But the impressive thing about the D40 is that it is arguably the best-designed small camera to date. Handwise, it's perfect. The viewfinder is good, if not up to the D200 level. The controls are sensible and what we Nikon users expect. And the moving of the top LCD to the color LCD, while still with some slightly rough edges, turns out to be a lot more useful than you'd expect. As I note in the handling section, you can do 99% of the settings you're likely to make while shooting without dropping into the actual menus. Nikon almost hit a home run with that, and frankly, why their top end Coolpix cameras don't borrow the best aspects of this design I don't know. Color, noise, and resolution are quite good, and you have enough control over the first two items to get excellent image quality.

Paul

[Soundwave]

Thanks for all the advice guys, it's appreciated.

I have decided I am going for the D40, had a quick fiddle over the weekend & the D40 was pretty much perfect.

Was nice to hold, VERY easy to use & the pictures looked great.

The 400D was alos a very nice camera, but was just a little over complicated after the D40, pictures looked fine, Also the fact that I'm paying more for less kit was playing in the back of my mind so I decided against it.
I know I dont specifically need the second lens that comes with the D40 it is nice to have the option of having it if you see what I mean??

I'm still an utter noob at all this so I think the ease of use of the D40 pretty much sold me on it

I will be getting it from Jessops as I found out they do by now pay later which helps me no end as it means it free's up some extra cash to get a Tripod & Flash gun at the same time as well

Should be sorting it all out to collect next weekend after payday...cant wait now

Thanks again for all the input it has been a great help.

Neil