Canon EOS 400D / Digital Rebel XTi vs Nikon D40x
Filed under: Canon XTi, Nikon D40x | Last updated: Wednesday, September 5th, 2007The Nikon D40x announcement in March 2007 makes it one of the two lowest-priced, 10 MP (Megapixel) digital SLR cameras on the market, a position which was previously occupied only by the Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi / 400D.
On paper the XTi has more features and functionality over the D40x, but it may not necessarily be the automatic choice in all cases.
In this comparison, I attempt to lay out and summarize the strengths in each camera, and it's then left up to you to decide which one to buy. In order to contain this article to reasonable limits, I'll make the following assumptions:
- You don't have any digital SLR system to begin with, or the one you have is not a significant factor in your decision
- You have a limited budget (I won't assume how much), and you're looking to get the best value for the money paid
Canon Digital Rebel XTi / EOS 400D Pros
There is no other 10MP digital SLR camera on the market at this price or below that can boast the amount of features that the XTi has. Click here for the XTi specs sheet, and then go here to see a side-by-side comparison of features with the D40x.
The XTi has more buttons and wheels on the camera body to enable you to make quick changes to White Balance and ISO settings if needed.
On the D40x, you'd need to go into the menu to perform the same task, although setting the flash mode and compensation is easier on the D40x, with the availability of a dedicated button, which is pressed in combination with the pressing of another button and / or the turning of the wheel.
If you value having Mirror Lock-Up capability, which allows for sharper macro shots at slower shutter speeds, then the XTi is a must-have. This feature is not available on the D40x.
Other features not available on the D40x but can be found on the XTi are exposure bracketing and white balance bracketing, and DOF (depth of field) preview.
The ability to autofocus (AF) with a wide range of lenses is another strong point on the XTi.
With the D40x, you are generally limited to Nikkor AF-S or Sigma HSM lenses if you want AF compatibility, so you can forget about using nice, third-party lenses such as the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 or Sigma 105mm macro lenses. You also can't AF with the excellent prime lenses from Nikon such as the 85mm f/1.4D or Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D lenses.
Not so on the Canon XTi - if you have a friend who can loan you an EF 85mm f/1.8 USM lens, you'll be out-shooting a Nikon D40x owner trying to photograph the action during an indoor basketball match. A Nikon D40x owner is at a serious disadvantage if they try to shoot indoor sports since they don't have access to any bright (f/1.8 or larger) prime lenses that can AF with the camera.
Nikon D40x Pros
If I were to go solely by the official image samples released by each manufacturer, I would say that the Nikon D40x gives better images even if you were to mount ordinary, consumer-level Nikkor lenses on it. A sampling of lens ratings taken from slrgear.com further proves the superiority of Nikon consumer lenses over those from Canon (source: DPReview.com forum thread):
• Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED DX - 9.11 rating
• Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED DX - 8.27 rating
• Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR - 8.19 rating
• Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM - 7.45 rating
In other words, you don't need to purchase expensive glass to enjoy high quality output (consider a 400D user review by Jovo, who shared some excellent pictures taken with pro-level lenses and advised against using cheap glass with the XTi) from the camera, something that cannot be said of the Canon system. Judge for yourself from the links below.
Canon XTi Official Photos (click on the thumbnail series to go directly to the gallery)
All photos were taken with very expensive Canon lenses (EF 35mm f/1.4L USM $1120, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM $310, EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM $1790, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM $1700, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, 17-40mm $680), and in my opinion, turned out sub-par compared to the photos from the D40x
Nikon D40x Official Samples (click on the thumbnail series to go directly to the gallery)
In contrast with the Canon samples above, all except one photo were shot using only the very cheap, newly-introduced, consumer-level Nikkor 55-200mm VR (vibration reduction) lens (expected to cost no more than $250 when it hits the streets). Colors are brilliant, contrast is superb, bokeh is beautiful, and sharpness is excellent. None of the cheaper zoom lenses from Canon can give you this level of image quality. In fact, the quality from the 55-200mm VR lens compares very favorably to Nikon's other professional-level lenses, see the full-sized, Nikon D40X comparison samples posted by AndreasE.
For general photography (I'm thinking snapshots and travel), the combination of a Nikon D40x plus the Nikkor 18-55mm II and Nikkor 55-200mm lens cannot be beaten. There is no equivalent selection of lenses available with the XTi at this price that can match the focal length range, image quality and availability of image stabilization in the 55-200mm range. The D40x itself is already slightly smaller and lighter than the XTi, so this system is the ideal travel / backpack / hiking combination.
One related word of warning: the Canon 18-55mm lens is generally acknowledged by various reviews to be among the worst-performing lenses on the market, and it will be a huge waste to mate this lens to the highly-capable Canon XTi. You might like to compare the Photozone.de test results on various 18-55mm kit lens on offer by various manufacturers, and see for yourself:
Canon 18-55mm | Nikkor 18-55mm II | Pentax 18-55mm
Some have reported that Nikon D40 (and D40x) seems to have the brightest viewfinder when compared with the EOS 400D / XTi, and even the Nikon D80 (which has a larger viewfinder but not as bright). I don't consider this a critical advantage in the D40x's favor, but it does make photography a more enjoyable process.
I personally found the D40x to be the much more comfortable camera to hold and operate in my hands (most of the folks in this MacRumors.com thread and Jennifer and Lauren from DigitalScrapBookPlace.com say pretty much the same thing). All the controls, especially the shutter button, were within comfortable reach and didn't cause my hand to feel cramped or contorted. But, this is me we're talking about here, so I'd advise you, if you can, to go to a camera store and try both out to see which camera fits and feels better in your hands.
I've not read many user opinions comparing both cameras yet, but this particular post (#16) by DanDan on a Race-dezert.com forum thread seems to indicate that straight-from-the-camera pictures are better from the D40 (Nikon's 6MP camera which produces images having the same color, contrast and exposure characteristics as those from the 10 MP D40x) vs the XTi / 400D.
Weight and Dimensions Compared
Canon XTi / 400D:
Weight, including batteries - 556 g (19.6 oz)
Dimensions - 127 x 94 x 65 mm (5 x 3.7 x 2.6 in)
Nikon D40x:
Weight, including batteries - 522 g (18.4 oz)
Dimensions - 124 x 94 x 64 mm (4.9 x 3.7 x 2.5 in)
Conclusion
I would highly recommend the D40x to the photographer who wishes for a simple-to-operate camera, which gives brilliant pictures without the need for much tweaking, and who doesn't mind exploring photography only with the various high-quality consumer lenses that Nikon has made available.
It must be borne in mind that the XTi needs to be tweaked to get images that "pop" - some photographers welcome this, others want to avoid having to perform this task as much as possible (and I'd recommend the D40x to this group of individuals).
If the photographer demands a system that offers a high level of camera configuration, with no limits placed on the AF capability with lenses available on the market, then the XTi gets my highest vote.
If you shoot a high proportion of indoor sports (say college basketball), then the XTi is a must, don't even contemplate the D40x in this case.
More Nikon D40x topics
- Nikon D40x Reviews
- Nikon D40x Samples
- Nikon D40 Links - The Giant List - much of what is said about the D40 is equally applicable to the D40x - hope you find the collection of links there helpful
April 6th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
So basically, lens choice dictates which the winner. Sounds like what Canon needs is to have the two Nikkor lenses to make it the ultimate choice for all occasions. Is anything on the cards?
April 13th, 2007 at 9:46 am
You had me hooked on the D40 until the last line. I am an amateur but want to take good indoor sports photographs of my kids for my own pleasure. Basketball, volleyball, etc. Poor lighting, fast action. I currently have a canon S2IS and need a DSLR. Should I go Canon or Nikon D40? What lense is the minimum needed to get decent shots for indoor? Limited budget.
April 13th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Julie,
I tried replying to your email, but it bounced, so I hope you don't mind me writing my thoughts here.
For fast-action indoor sports, it's hard to beat using a lens with a large aperture to suck in what little light exists in such dim conditions. Not only that, you'd need to keep shutter speeds high enough so all that action don't become meaningless blur.
Many photographers have found that using cheap prime (fixed focal
length) lenses such as the $72 Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II gives them the ability to capture great indoor sports. Because the 50mm isn't long enough, it'll be good if you can find a seat closer to the action. Otherwise, a prime lens such as the $400-plus Canon 85mm f/1.8 provides you a longer reach.
In the light of the requirements for fast lenses (lenses with large apertures, preferably f/2 or larger - f/1.8, f/1.4) for indoor sports, I'd say it's best to go with the Canon Rebel XTi since the D40(x) can't autofocus with any of Nikon's 50mm or 85mm prime lenses.
Hope this helps - if you need further clarification, just ask away.
April 17th, 2007 at 5:17 am
You're using stock photos from the Canon and Nikon websites to compare the 2 cameras? That seems really shortsighted and naive to me. If you want to compare image quality, it seems as though the only way is to get the 2 cameras yourself and take the same photo at nearly the same time. All I'm hearing from this review is that Canon chose a poor set of example images for the XTi, and Nikon chose a very good set.
April 18th, 2007 at 1:32 am
Thanks David. I appreciate the personal help. You have made my decision process so much easier.
April 19th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
Hi all,
I am an amateur and just bought a D40 (not X).
I have been using the kit lens only and eventhough it delivers great image quality, I feel it is short on aperture and zoom lengh.
I have been reading and hearing a lot of the XTi and before I buy my first lens, I was thinking that maybe it would be a better idea to switch to Canon because I will be able to buy cheaper lenses. But now I think that even for Canon one needs the expensive glass to get "pro-looking" photographs, and so changing does not feel too apealing now.
My first pictures with the D40 are at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amaynez
I want the camera for travel/family, and ocassionaly for photography for the sake of it.
Does anyone have some thoughts that might help me?
Thanks a lot,
Armando.
April 20th, 2007 at 7:35 am
I am confronted with the choice between these two cameras.
Excellent analysis, the D40x for me it is.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:53 am
I've been shopping around for a DSLR for quite some time now.
My first choice was the Nikon D80, however they are more expensive than what I'm willing to pay (plus I heard the D40x has better qualities)
Then my sights were set on the Rebel XTi, and now the D40x is out...
But I still really cannot decide on which camera to get!
I mostly shoot landscapes and nature, but I also take pictures of my boyfriends band on stage... and portraits of people and cats.
Any advice will help!
Thanks.
April 25th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
in the middle of your first paragraph, you mentioned that the 400d needs to be "tweaked" to get the same kinds of photos as a D40x. exactly how do you do that? also are you implying that the 400d can get the same kinds of "pop" in its images that a d40x can?
April 27th, 2007 at 7:20 am
So, I have been fine with my 35mm Nikon film camera for some time now. But I have decided to go to digital. I am a freshman in high school and I am devoted to the arts. What camera should I get, D80, D40x, or Rebel Xti? I have a limited budget (basically I am paying for it by myself.
May 8th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
hey david im still cant make up my mind. what should i buy? D40, D40x or 400D? im an amateur photograph and i need DSLR. my photos are usually nature and close ups..i did not need to take photos from my gym class because my friend does it all, so i need your help to determine my choices. and oh, i have a limited budget of $850
May 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
i own D40X. i used to shoot everything with Canon cameras but then it was before the digital era.
before i bought the nikon, i compare specs, i compare photo samples, i read previews & comments and last, i tried both cameras several times. i went back again another week to try both cameras again until i was sure which one i really wanted, which features i can ignore, which features really matter to me etc..
it's not about one has better this and that, it's about which one will suit you better.
happy comparing!
May 14th, 2007 at 1:02 am
Great comparison/review! However, it doesn't fully point out how great the results from the XTi can be (key point coming) WITH a good lens. Yes, the results can be a bit dissatisfying with the crummy kit lens, or a slow EF-S lens, but get a good lens and the results can be as good or better than the Nikon.
I'm a broadcast engineer by trade, and the additional functionality and tweakability of the Canon are a plus, in terms of 'growth'. OTOH, that is less important if you'll always be a point-and-shooter.
Here's an example: exposure bracketing can be a must-have feature, even if you don't know why, *today*. Once you try the combination of RAW + the choice of ideal exposure, underexposed, and overexposed, you'll see that you almost always end up with a great pic. How often will you get a chance to take that great shot in Italy/Paris/Yosemite/NYC...? Using bracketing to ensure that you got a reasonable exposure means less disappointment when you look at the pictures back home. Plus you can then Photoshop together the under-and-overexposed shots to get better dynamic range and details (think about a portrait with a bright sky background).
I came from being Pentax user, tried all the affordable DSLRs... and for me it was easily the XTi over the D40x. Just get a good lens (NOT the 18-55 kit lens). The 10-22mm is a great choice, or the 17-40. Do the good lenses cost more? Yes, but are you serious, or just playing..? If you ever want to take serious shots, at consumer prices, the Canon has much more potential. And if you invest in the EF lenses instead of the EF-S lenses you can always carry that investment into a pro-level Canon body, at a later time. That's really smart (if you have ambition/dreams of grandeur).
When my wife needs to use it, I simply slap on the kit lens and put it in full auto. She thinks it's a great P&S zoom camera.
Happy shooting!
Ken
May 18th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Hi all,
first of all, great review! Now, I'm confused again. This will be my first SLR. During the past five days I've been researching online, checking DPReview, going a few times to B&H (New York), talking with professionals, etc. Every night my decision is: Canon. Nikon. Canon. Nikon.
Both of them has pros and cons. The big problem with Nikon for me was the AF-S issue and the limited amount of lenses you can use for that reason. Another pro for XTI that it wasn't mentioned in the review is the new mechanism for auto-cleaning called Dust reduction ('EOS Integrated Cleaning System')... something interesting that D40X hasn't.
Then I totally agree with KEN about having the exposure bracket as a pro in XTI. I must confess that I prefer the Nikon grip, it feels better in my hand, more professional, Canon is like more plastic, but for the other characteristics I was decided for XTI. Now... I want to start with the 18-55 so after reading this review, with people saying "don't buy the basic kit"... now I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO! My budget is $750 limit. It's the Amazon price: Canon body $677, body+lens $730. Nikon body $700, body+lens $730. I can't spend extra $100 or $150 just to have a better basic 18-55 lens.
So, side-to-side paying the same price, both cameras with the basic 18-55... What should I do? Any help? Any psychoanalyst there?
Thanks
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:41 am
Hi All,
After weeks of contemplating between the d40x and the eos 400d I decided to get both for a week....from two friends...now im no pro and its the first time ive moved from a digital compact to a digi slr and mind you I have used a sony compact and recently moved t nikon because they seemed to offer so much more for prices that are atleast 20-30% cheaper than sony...so mainly for now although i have been experimenting with manual controls and quite enjoying it, as a first time user i tok images with the kit lens on both the cameras and then transferred them on to the computer. The result- The images from the d40x won hands down! On the computer and on the lovely hi-res display that I dont think canon could match. I understand from various reviews that the lens kit with the 400d is not that good but then when ure starting off you cant afford to invest in £1000+ kit....i think its foolish....Nikon did great by complemeting the camera with an awesome kit lens and also went on to win best entry level digital slr at TIPA check this link:
The camera also feels more solidly built and personally i think im better off getting "punchier" results directly from the camera in the beginning than having to play around with a hundred settings everytime. I know thats the point of a good slr in the first place but when starting off i dont think first time users will want to do that. For me though the Nikon stays and the canon goes....looks live ive made my choice of SLR system and I choice i think i will probably stick to for the rest of my life....i hope this helps!
May 24th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
whats the best sit to buy a camera safe and sound??i agree on buying the D40 :]]]
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:22 am
Hello everyone,
I'm new to digital photography, but will be choosing between the Nikon D40 or the Canon 400D/XTi.
Being an amateur, I'd like to know how crucial the absence of the AF motor in the D40 as compared to a body with one? I saw the great picture of armando maynez taken with a D40.
Another thing, how significant is the 'dust remover' of the Canon 400D/XTi? Would it greatly affect the quality of the image? Is there a way to remove dust from cameras that does not have this feature.
I hope anyone can shed some light on this. Thanks a lot!
June 3rd, 2007 at 6:30 pm
Hi all,
To all worried about the lack of "dust remover" feature of the Nikon... they did a clever thing; they put a protector lens in front of the sensor, so far out that the dust becomes so blurred it is unnoticeable. I have never had any problems with dust in my Nikon. And for safety there is a dust removal software feature in hand.
After I posted my last message, I had a chance to test an XTi from a close relative, we both even shot the same event (family gathering), but still (maybe he needs to get a hang of it) the pictures out of the D40 were superior (both cameras in P mode).
I think that both cameras are great, and it depends on personal preference which system works for you. When I tried the XTi I found it unnatural to use, and all the settings took many "clicks" to get to, in contrast with the D40, which has all the shooting settings in the same screen with a touch of a button.
So, in spite of the fewer AF points, AF-S issue, mirror lock-up and exposure bracketing, the D40 having a superior sensor and software is the choice for me and still "tweekeable" enough.
Many of the world's best photographs were taken with manual focus, so the AF-s issue is not really a problem for me.
Remember that great pictures can be taken with a polaroid or an old Kodak 110 film p&s. Just find a camera that suits you and shoot, shoot, shoot.
Cheers!
Armando
June 11th, 2007 at 12:05 am
Thank you for this review. I've been debating between the two for about a month now, but I think the D40x will suit my needs.
June 14th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
They have the Nikon D40x on sale at places such as costco or ritz. I got mine at Costco for less than a $1000 (tax not included) but it comes with 2 lenses, a bag, a memory card, and 2 dvds.
All I can say is it's a steal.
I've thought of buying Canon Xti. But I bought this one because of the price.
This is my first time owning a DSLR. But so far, the pictures that I have taken with Nikon D40x are really superb. My only proof for saying this is because I compared the pictures that I have taken with some that were taken by the pros. (I believe you don't have to have a "Professional Eyes" to see the difference). It's simply amazing!
Every single one of my wife's co-workers are like asking her "oh wow is your husband a professional photographer?" When I heard that I was totally flattered.
I hope this helps.
July 11th, 2007 at 6:03 am
I bought both of them and returned both, and then went back to get the D40x. I am happy with the sharpness of the photos and the bright display. Nikon was a better deal coming with 2 lenses kit and a bag and 1 gig card. Most Nikons are not made in Japan, which may be an issue in the life span of the camera. Lenses are also not from Japan.. if that means anything. Feel is better, in my opinion. In the long run, lens upgrading may not be as good as Canon lenses.. considering that fact that only about 20+ may work with the camera. I prefer the SD card over CF.
Canon has better button position and faster menu option access. It was also heavier and the memory card gets jammed easier (CF Card). Most parts are from Japan. I don't like the cheap plastic feel of it and Nikon just looks better to me (referring to the camera body). Slow writing response and expensive but better lenses.
For an entry level camera to experiment with, without the possibility of upgrading lenses, Nikon is the way to go, but with a motive to become serious, I still wouldn't recommend the XTi because it feels stripped down from a more advance camera, but I would go with Canon 30D although it is a little more, it is a better investment.
July 11th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
Hey Everyone,
I have to say that people shouldn't critique unless they have tried both cameras.
I basically shoot Nikon (D2X, D200, D40X). I have to admit that I love all three cameras (for the purpose that they were intended for). I've shot the XTI for about 3 months in Korea along-side my D200 and D40x. The Canon, just couldn't compare with the D40x. The eyepiece on the XTI had a fogging problem in hi-humidity. I aslo found that the XTI was temp. sensitive. In the extreme cold, auto focus was impared. Also, the anti-dust shaker was a waste (my had to used my blower way more then I expected to). I do have to say though, that the XTI had a wide range of lenses available and a great number of body mounted function keys (great for changing setting very quickly).
The Nikon D40X ended up being the better buy. Sadly, it is limited on the lenses. Only AF-S DX lenses are compatable. I was shooting with the Nikkor 18-55mm AF-S DX, 55-200mm AF-S VR DX, and the Tokina 12-25 AF-X DX fisheye. For you new-bees out their, Tokina is the manufacturer of the Nikkor lenses (look it up, LOL). Anyways, the shots I got from the D40X were great. For an entry level DSLR, The picture quality was the equivalent to my D200 (crazy). The Canon picture quality was pore, regardless of the lense I used. The d40x has a few major draw backs. First, is the three area autofocus. With this type of focusing, taking pictures at night becomes slightly hindering.Second, the d40x does not have dust seals. It tends to become dusty very fast. Constant cleaning is required. Third, it is very slim on function keys. Menu surfing tends to become annoying. Lastly, the d40x is a battery hog. But, so is the XTI.
In conclusion, I'm looking at the d40x and Xti as a pro photographer. So my critique is going to be a little more intense. But, for the normal consumer. The Nikon D40x is the way to go. Most new photographers tend to look at ease of use and picture quality of the camera (lense), not at the speed of changing settings. With this in mind, the D40x is the most user friendly camera. Plus, the lenses from Nikon (at the moment) sky-rocket over Canon (in picture clarity). The D40x may not have all the fluff of Canon. But, it makes up for it in your final prints. Plus as a new DSLR user. The Nikon alows you to learn how to capture photos in a fun, non-threatening way.
I personally love the D40X. I'm currently using it as my back-up camera. Also it is my first choice when I do any Mtn. Biking or backpacking shots. It fits in my tamrack pack very easily and is extremly light.
If you are an experienced photographer, you may feel that the D40x is a little annoying in regards to the function keys (might as well buy a D80). But, if your new at photography. Buy this camera, you'll love it!!!
July 12th, 2007 at 11:36 pm
Is canon better than Nikon???
I agree with James as he noted "I have to say that people shouldn't critique unless they have tried both cameras" Which I did, I tested the Nikon D40x first and now I'm playing with the Canon Xti.
All I can say is, D40x pictures are 10x better than the canon considering the fact that I am only using the kit lens that it came with.
As I said I just got the Canon and I'm still tweaking it. But so far the pictures aren't that impressive using the stock lens. And if I'm not mistaken you have to get a better lens than the stock to get great pictures with the Xti. But do I really don't wan'na spend another $400-$1000 just for the lens? With the Nikon D40x kit lenses they are great based on my observations. The controls with Nikon I'll say controls on the Xti is very user friendly. However, Canon Xti is built and made in Japan. While the Nikon D40x is made in Thailand (to cut cost maybe), anyhow, this may make Canon a little bit durable in the long run.
So now, I'll give the Xti a benefit of the doubt and use it for a few more weeks. For the Nikon D40x, with it's stock lens, is trully a GREAT camera. The only problem I encountered with the D40x is when I'm doing a self-portrait (I had it on a tripod with the timer set) but all the pictures came out blurry. I don't know if I'm doing it wrong or is it because the Camera doesn't automatically focus when it's on a timer mode without the subject being in front of the camera.
In conclusion, again, I find the D40x better than the Canon Xti (using kit lenses)
There are gazillion reviews about the Xti. But you also have to consider that the Rebel Xti came out about a year ago. But let me just remind the readers that the Nikon D40x just came out recently, April 2007, so there's not too many reviews done on this camera yet.
So is Canon better than Nikon? It's like asking is Mercedes Benz better than BMW or is Nike better than Adidas.
It's a really tough question, I believe you really have to try "not just one" camera "but you have to try every single cameras" these two companies make before making a final decision. This is just to be fair and square.
July 14th, 2007 at 8:25 am
It is true that Canon IS better than Nikon. Nikon is better in film, but I guess they can't keep up with Canon's transition to the digital world. The XTi is a bad camera compared to the D40x... but the 30D is far more superior than higher model Nikons, if it had more expensive lenses. Nikon sensors aren't as good as Canon for digital cameras thus the quality just isn't the same.
July 24th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
got the xti after comparing it back to back to the d40x(i used my friends cameras for a day). i felt that the d40x did feel better in my hands, but growth is very limited, as in what it can do. the metering system in the d40x is way better then the xti, but you can compensate! the reason why i got a dslr is so i can control everything, not to leave it in auto or p mode, thats what a p&s is for. here is a couple of pics that i have taken with the xti and kit lens:
http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/romeo26/AX2001day1/?action=view¤t=20070630_0015.jpg
needs to be cropped to get a better effect!
http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/romeo26/oc_fair/?action=view¤t=20070721_0612.jpg
this picture amazed me, it was done under very poor lighting.
i have more taken today but i dont have them up loaded yet.
all of these came rite out of the camera and on to photobucket!
July 26th, 2007 at 11:29 am
Good news for Nikon D40 / D40x owners looking for a low-cost, low-light zoom lens.
Sigma has just announced the availability of HSM support for two lenses.
HSM means these lenses will AF (auto focus) on the D40 / D40x. And the lens that'll be great for low-light applications (offering wide-open aperture of f/2.8) is the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO HSM.
At the very least, it should be whole deal cheaper than the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 DX lens!
And f/2.8 is always a nice option to have if you want to blur the background when shooting portraits.
I own the older version of the Sigma 18-50mm, known as the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC. You can check two full-sized image samples, unedited, and shot with the Nikon D70 and Nikon D200.
It's my zoom lens of choice when I shoot general wedding photos indoors because the large aperture available throughout the zoom range means that my flash doesn't have to use up a lot of power when firing. I typically stop down the aperture to f/3.5 which offers a sufficient depth of field for most of the shots I take.
July 30th, 2007 at 7:03 am
Hey, I'm an amateur photographer and am looking to snag a new camera I narrowed my choices down to the two above mentioned cameras, and after reading the comparisons I think the D40x is the camera for me. I like to take a lot of outdoor photographs and I don't do much indoor photography, but just to be sure I'd like to get a little more opinion on the matter.
Thanks,
Cameron
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:46 am
Armando Maynez - I have to say how impressed I am with some of your pics! I was set to buy a D40x, but now may even be happy with a D40 lol:
I love this picture in particular:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/180/487683048_ce0c92b0b0_b.jpg
I also agree with the sentiments of the OP, that is while the Canon is a brilliant camera, to get good shots out of it you really do need a good lens, at the very least one costing around half the price of the camera itself. Whereas with the Nikon, the kit lens is actually very good - you you are not being forced to spend more.
I'm set to get a D40x, only thing making me want to hold off is that I feel new cameras will be annouced within 8 weeks... so should I wait?
August 23rd, 2007 at 4:20 am
I agree with you Brook.
There's a mistical magnetic surrounding the object in that picture sent by Armando Mainez.
Look at the proper lighting and supporting out focus bacground colour.
Yet it's just a simple dried flower taken with cheap camera.
I think Armando is a pro.
As he said, no matter is the camera, just shoot shoot shoot.
Erm... Did you say there'll be new camera coming???? Should I wait as well?
(I didn't have patience for waiting... ended up only got KDL40V2500 for the price of KDL40D3000)
_
September 1st, 2007 at 7:55 am
Hi,
I always had a confusion on which one to buy like some of the members in this forum. Like whether to buy D40, D40X or 400D. And from the reviews I found here, I almost made up my mind in buying D40 because of the advantage of having a better lens coming up with the kit. I won't be using it just for a Point And Shoot but would be looking forward to try a lot of the photography related features.
The main two things i'm really concerned on seeing the review on internet on D40 series are the lack of Depth of Field Preview and only the 3 point AF system compared to the 9 point AF system of 400D. Can somebody help me in understanding how badly it's going to affect me if I go for D40 or the limitations I will be having in taking photos with the lack of these features? I'm only an amateur and would like to know about these things before finalysing my choice of buying the D40.
Regards,
MK
September 4th, 2007 at 10:19 pm
I have been trying to decided between the 400D and the D40x like everyone else. Your review/comparison of the two was very helpful. For my skill level and budget, the D40x seems best, but I would like to take photographs of skateboarding. This almost always takes place outdoors, day or night. I wouldn't say it's as high paced as basketball because you have time to set up for a shot and you know more or less what will happen. I am not just taking photos of skating though. I pretty much want to be able to take good skateboarding photos, but that is not my priority. Landscapes, nature, etc... are what I will be taking most of my photos of. What would you recommend. Thank You!
September 17th, 2007 at 2:58 am
Thanks for the comment rondha, but I'm not a pro. I only have the D40 with the kit lens, and shoot as I feel.
I need a lot of practice, and theory to really grasp the essence.
September 30th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
I also cannot decide whether to get the D400 or the D40x... I am not really a pro, I just want to take good pictures during my travels which I do a couple of times a year... and maybe take up classes... Which is the better option for me?
October 7th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
Hi everyone
I am not a pro by no means but I love to take photographs of just about everything. I am however wanting to start up a business. I have been taking pictures for family and friends with just a point and shoot (Sony DSC-S85)and the reviews I get back are great so I thought I would try to take this on a more professional level. I have ALOT to learn before starting my business. The first thing I have to do is decide between the D40x and Xti. I was wanting the Canon at first just because of the reviews so I went to the store to actually hold it in my hand. It didnt feel bad but when I took some pics in the store, they looked a little underexposed. I didnt even know of the D40x until I started comparing the canon to other slr's in that price range. I picked up the D40x and It just fit my hand perfect plus it was so lightweight. I then took some pics with it and they were very colorful. I pretty much narrowed my decision down to buying the Nikon. Now my husband is checking out the two and he is thinking the Canon would be better for me to grow with. I dont want to spend thousands on the lenses when I know I can get great results with the Nikon lens kit. But then again I also want to use the camera to take good action photos of my 2 year old (indoors and outdoors). Its a hard decision. Someone please help me decide! I also want to mention that the Nikon does in camera editing so I would be able to edit and print the pictures on sight. This is a big plus for me. I would like to know if anyone who has the D40x has used this feature and how well does it work?
October 9th, 2007 at 5:49 am
After reading all your helpful comments, I decided on Nikon D40x. The store that I went to gave me a very good price (which also triggers me to buy it) for only Canadian $699 with the Kit len.
My friends suggested Nikon D80 instead of D40x. I read some other reviews comparing D80 with D40x, they bascially give you the same image quality. D80 gives you more room to grow since it's more compatible with other lens more than D40x. After rethinking it, I still went for D40x. I decided on Nikon D40x because of its price, weight, feel, and their kit len (at a starter, I don't want to spend too much on lens).
Thank you!
October 9th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Just wanted to say I like the Canon, but ultimately I went with the Nikon D40x and Nikkor 18-200mm AF-S ED VR lens. This body and lens has proven to be an awesome combination that has resulted in excellent photos. Recently I took it on a trip to California and came home with some stunning shots. I highly recommend this combo, especially if you're looking for a great travel system. Lastly, if you need a small-ish flash you may want to consider the travel-friendly Nikon SB-400 to complete your D40x/18-200/flash travel system.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:35 am
Hey, Hi to All
I saw ur work n its great n inspiring.....
i am a student of Industrial design n was using previously using EOS88 for manual photography.
My basic need for shoots are:
- Product Photography with different light condition.
- High quality images.
- clearity with minimum noise in the image.
so for this which camera will you suggest, will be best for me....?
basically i m concentrating on following three,
CANON 400D / Rebel XTI
Nikon D80
Nikon D40X
Regards,
Salil S.V.
India
October 15th, 2007 at 3:43 am
hey, Hi to all
i need to know about the compatability of lenses for Canon Rebel XTI (400D).
October 16th, 2007 at 11:44 pm
While lens tests are good to assess technical aspects of lenses, most lenses on the market perform well when used by someone who knows how to get the best out of them.
Here's a website of an artist selling prints of his work, so I guess he/she qualifies as a professional.
http://www.deviantart.com/print/301220/
Note that all pictures were taken with a lowly Rebel XT and that 'worst performing lens on the market' the EF-S 18-55mm.
Only those who can take pictures like that or better should diss the lens. I don't count myself even nearly qualified, so I will wholeheartedly recommend that lens to anyone looking for an affordable wide lens for travel and other shooting.
October 21st, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Hi all,
Thank you very much for the posting and they really help me a lot in deciding which is best for me. Canon has advertised heavily on the fact that 400D is manufactured in Japan, has there been any concrete link of quality to the country of manufacture ? I used to have Sony digital camera which was made in Japan but went dead after 2 years.
Thanks, CH
October 26th, 2007 at 6:26 am
Well, I have to say that I'm a bit bummed out. I did the research on both of these cameras and decided on the Canon. I was so happy to see what David said about basketball games, but became more disappointed as I read on. The main reason I wanted a new camera - besides the fact that my current digital is 5 years old - it to take basketball pictures of my son. The package that I bought did have a bonus EF75-300mm lense, so I'm hoping that will help me from the stands. Does anyone have more comments on indoor active sports shots? thanks - it's been an education reading all of your stories.
October 27th, 2007 at 10:56 pm
Thanks for the great review, David! This is just what I needed! My sister was pushing the Canon hard (she's has an older digital rebel) and I was leaning towards the D40. I think I'm settled on the Nikon now (not sure about D40 vs D40x). I think more lenses will be available in the future since Nikon is pushing the D40 so hard, but maybe I'm just being optimistic. (There is always manual focus!)
One question is really making me wonder though. Is there really no bracketing/exposure compensation in the Nikon D40x? I went to the link at the top of this page with the side-by-side comparison of both models. The D40 read "-5 to +5 EV in 1/3 EV steps", which is actually better than the XTi's "-2 to +2 EV in 1/3 EV or 1/2 EV steps". But I have seen here, and in other reviews, that there is no exposure compensation. Could someone please explain this?
Thank you in advance!
Christine
November 8th, 2007 at 6:02 am
hi
Im in the same undecided situation as all these other letters, whether to buy the D40X Xti or the sony a100, i was looking forward to purchasing a nikon, then i read that the xti is probably the better camera, then i read that the sont is probably best for price and features. What would make my decision for me, is if you can tell me if the Nikon D40x has auto focus with the kit lense, as it would be some time b4 i bought an additional lense. And also is Antishake really a must have, as the Sony seems to be the one which has it. For normal landscape, portrait, football match outdoors shots, and some close up will the D40x suffice ?
Cheers
Alan.
November 13th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Christine,
While the D40 does have exposure compensation +/- 5 ev, it does not have auto-bracketing, or automatically taking one shot at the metered exposure, and then taking one shot automatically above and below that exposure. I use this quite a bit on my point and shoots to get the exposure right. To get the same effect in the D40 you would take your first shot, then adjust the exposure down and take the second shot, and then adjust your exposure up and take the third shot. Needless to say, its a pain and I don't do it in the D40 I'm playing with. Otherwise I really like the D40's ergonomics.
November 15th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
I am just switching over to my first DSLR from a Panasonic DMC-FZ20. While the sensor in my old camera is shitty you can't beat the optics. You can't beat a Leica lens with a zoom range 26-432 mm and a 2.8 aperture through the entire zoom range. I would like to be able to compare to the optics on my P$S Panasonic and I am a little torn between these two cameras and the question of Canon or Nikon.
Canon - More lenses, more expensive lenses, better auto-focus, more room for growth...
Nikon - Better quality stock lens, cheaper lens upgrades...
I love concert photography and I ALWAYS use the max zoom and aperture on my camera. After reading everything I feel confident in the Canon, especially after looking at the deviantart link RiverSide posted.
November 16th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
wow, i have just read, what i have been researching on those 2 cameras for couple months. thank you David
first i was planning go with Canon EOS 400D, because of its auto cleaning system, but i knew that it is not more important than lenses. Canon has more choices of lenses in high price, whereas Nikon is not. in limited budget, i think i should go with Nikon D40x right?
November 22nd, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Hi guys, I am Herry from Bali, Indonesia. Sorry if my English is not really that good. From all the review, I havent got a clue which one is better (D40x or 400D) if I want to take underwater photo. My plan is to open a pre-wedding underwater studio/photography. I have browse the Internet and I found that for entry level I can use EWA Marine for the softcase of the camera (the hardcase such as Ikelite or Fanasea is really expensive). I thank you so much for your advices, and also I am more thankful if you want to cc your answer to my email: herryswastika_at_gmail_com. Thanx again.
November 23rd, 2007 at 12:54 pm
Hi, this thread is seriously effective for me. So on kit lenses the D40x si better than the 400D right? But the 400D's compatability is awesome, how much are those lenses that would equalize with the D40x's kit lenses?
November 24th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
Hello all.
I hope my post will help some reach a decision. I was looking almost exclusively at the XTi as the price seemed better for all the "features" the camera offered. However, I could not find very many reasonably priced kits that offered two lenses, with wide and telephoto options. Also, I gave up completely on finding an affordable VR lens for the XTi, figuring I would have to do without (VR Canon lenses are many hundreds of dollars).
So I was set on Canon, as the price seemed right, thought it left a few features off the table I wanted. I expected to pay $900 for camera, basic lens, and and addition 300mm(max) lens, case, and memory.
Then I went to Costco today.....
D40x and XTi right beside each other.
D40x $950 - $100 rebate = $850
XTi $875
Hmmm... but my heart was set on XTi, no big deal.....
BANG! I noticed two things. D40x, same resolution as XTi, comes with two lenses, same as XTi, BUT D40X has VR!!!!!!! OK, it is a 100mm smaller lens than the XTi. So I pick the two cameras up, and compare side by side.
D40X is quiter, much faster focus response than the XTi lenses. The difference between the D40x 200mm lens and XTi 300mm (100mm diff.) was visually not that noticable to me, and I have to say again, D40x has faster focus, and a VR lense IN THE INCLUDED KIT! Already, I found a feautre I had given up on for the XTi as I thought I would never afford it.
Then I remebered, Nikkon, though they support a much more narrower range of lenses (specifically their own), the two basic lenses in the kit are of much higher quality than the two basic lenses in the XTi kit. I was sold.
After just 5 minutes, I walked out with a D40x instead of the XTi, even after all the pricing and feature research I had done on the XTi. The price (because of a Costco rebate) was finally comparable, and the quality of the Nikkon (D40x) lenses surpassed the Cannon XTi.
I knew Nikkon had better quality in the basic lenses, but I also knew that that quality cost more than the XTi. I was willing to put up with the XTi basic lenses till I could afford better. But the Costco rebate is what really sent my head thinking.
Today, yes today, I made a very fast decision about two excellent product I considered to be very knowledgeable about. I ended up changing my mind after a week of research on the XTi, and a few months of field use with Nikon (thought not D40x) cameras. I thought that XTi was for me, and a good price, though Nikon was where I always aspired. And when the opportunity arose, I changed my mind, with few reservations.
And after reading this entire post, dispite the pros and cons weighed in for both cameras, I am exteremly confident in my choice.
Just my 2 cents worth...
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:39 pm
I got the D40x package at costco and used it for about a month or two when I noticed that all of my pictures contained a green pixel towards the bottom of the picture. My brand new camera had a dead pixel upon purchase. I took it back and Costco is great about returns (90 day return policy no questions asked). So after getting my money back i went back into the store and bought a new one. I did a day of shooting and when reviewing my pictures there is an even bigger dot in all my shots except this time it is red and basically right in the middle! Other than these problems I really like the d40x so im going to go exchange it yet again for another brand new one tomorrow, hopefully 3rd times a charm.
December 14th, 2007 at 6:56 am
This is an excellent discussion. Like many others I'm in the market for my first digital SLR and I've narrowed my choice to either the XTi or D40x. I've owned two 35mm SLRs, the second being a Nikon FA, so I'm familiar with how they work (at least with film). Some features that are important to me were not mentioned -- durability and reliability. Does anyone have experience/information on this that they can share? In advance, thanks.
Jim
December 15th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Hi I am considereing both these cameras but it is the kit of Nikon D40Dx & 18-135mm lens that does it for me, if I want a macro in the future I can use MF. My main aim is image quality and ease of use, so it is the D40x based on all reviews i have read and sample images. Check out Steves digicams for more test images - you can refer to the D80 images as this is the sensor used on the D40x.
December 21st, 2007 at 6:13 am
Ahhhg! Did this help or just make the decision harder?
I was leaning towards the D40x but now...no auto-bracketing??? My fuji S5700 even has auto-bracketing. Oh well. Is the lens quality really THAT different?
December 22nd, 2007 at 4:43 am
Thank you all very much for your comments and advice. I can't tell you how much they are appreciated. I'm new to to DSLRs and had only heard about the Rebel XTi in print and TV advertising and was on my way to buy one for my wife for Christmas. Then a couple of people said I should look at the D40x. After holding it and reading the reviews I went with the D40x because of (1) the ease of use, (2) the feel of it, (3) lighter weight, and (4) better pictures with better lenses for less than $1,000.
My question is this, though, we will be shooting some indoor sporting events, so if I am going to buy a lens for indoor sports, what should I get?
Thanks everyone!
December 22nd, 2007 at 7:17 am
Thanks all for your input!
I was just about to purchase the XTi and since reading this page, I have done a 180 turn and am going for the D40x.
January 5th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
I am fairly new to photography and decided that it was time to hand in my compact and upgrade to an entry level DSLR.
My choice came down to these two cameras, and after and agonizing amount of reserch and ummming and ahhhring I decided to go for the Nikon D40X. I spent a lot of time handleing both cameras and getting a feel for them as well as asking for advice. In the end I made my decision based on my desired purpose for the camera which is to to go back-packing and as an DSLR goes the D40X is neat, light and to my liking, very easy to use. I have had a lot of fun with it thus far and reading these reviews has confirmed in my mind that I have made the right choice.
January 8th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Went to Costco today and they have both on sale with 2 lenses. With the $100 rebate on the Nikon, both are the same price, under $900. And the Nikon lens is the VR!
If I don't opt for the D80, I will go with the D40x
January 8th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Nikon D40 + Nikon AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED.
Are these 2 a perfect match?I really new to slr.This will be my first slr camera.I've been told that Nikon AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED can handle 90% of your shots and Canon has nothing like it.Is it true?
What I want is to shot near and far object and make background appear blured.Can that lens do the job?Or maybe I should buy
Canon 400D + Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO
Any advise?
January 16th, 2008 at 3:26 am
I just bought myself a Nikon D40x with Nikkor 18-55mm II and Nikkor 55-200mm VR for $879+ tax at futureshop. My question is, Should I take a 3-4 yr warranty with the store. Is there any site that I can get some tutorials on of D40x or on how to use it, having a hard time reading the manual.
January 19th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Good day,
I am only 16 and considering purchasing an SLR. As a beginner what would be the best option or should I consider another camera?
Thanks
January 19th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
@Blake - age has nothing to to do with what camera you should purchase. More importantly, consider your interests and aspirations as far as photography is concerned. Total budget that you have available now, and in future, needs to be carefully considered too.
If you see yourself taking snapshots for memories, then I'd say go with the Nikon D40X.
If you want more functionality in order to learn all you can about SLR photography, then I'd say the Canon 400D / XTi is a better choice.
If you want to shoot, for instance, macros 90-plus percent of the time and most of your photos will be shot in good light, then a prosumer superzoom camera such as the Panasoninc DMC-FZ18
, might be a better idea.
Equipping a DSLR to match the huge zoom flexibility of the Panasonic FZ-18 would mean that you'll end up spending a lot of money, which is something you'd want to think about carefully first.
Good luck!
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:36 am
Hi
I have been looking for a DSLR for a while, The primary purpace of the camera is for dental use.
There si two different packages, both with macro lens and ring flash (CANON EOS Digital Rebel XTi ( 400D) SLR(SILVER)
Medical/Dental Kit.
WITH CANON EF-S 60MM f/2.8 MACRO LENS AND
CANON DEDICATED MACRO RING FLASH--------
NIKON D40X Dental - Medical - Macro Kit
WITH SIGMA 50MM f/2.8 MACRO LENS
AND SIGMA EM-140 DEDICATED MACRO RING FLASH )
I need something simple. I would also want to be able to take picture of my little girl and be able to print it on canvas etc.
AS you can see I am a real amature and would apriciate any help.
Many thanks
January 27th, 2008 at 7:51 am
I have a question about the Nikon 18-200VR lens for the D40x. I would like to know what a good price would be for one and where you bought it. Are you satisfied with it?
Thanks for any input.
January 30th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Hello to all!
I'm yet another photography junkie, new to the game of DSLR's and excited about getting my first DSLR fairly soon!
I think the general trend here in this thread is that the Nikon D40 & D40x would be the camera of choice for those of us who'd prefer to learn the basics and fundamentals of photography without the hassle of technical jargon or technobabble (not every former Point & shooter knows what f-stops and shutter speed and ISO sensitivities are about - not just yet anyway).
The reviews I've read so far about the Nikon sing praises about its ease of use, above average Kit-lens performance and ergonomic design. I my humble opinion, I feel that this is the more ideal situation for a budding amateur photographer - this camera helps make photography easier for you while you learn about the fundamentals; composition, timing, patience, exposures, focal lengths and technique. The lack of auto-exposure bracketing, field-of-view preview and so on as compared to the XTi shouldn't affect what's one of the more important considerations of photography - learning to take "well thought out, properly composed and oriented pictures". The d40 and d40x should be the beginner's dream, where they can learn to create a picture first, then later on as their skill grows, learn to manually tweak the D40/x and learn the finer aspects of this art.
That being said now, the Canon XTi is a fantastic camera, once you've learnt how to pair it with a better lens (assuming you know some caveats of photography already). The marketing machine behind canon has perhaps pushed its kit 18-55mm lens towards the consumer who is ready for their first DSLR and is hungry to grow and learn much more - thus coaxing them towards purchasing a better lens from Canon or its supported 3rd parties - and generating more profit. Now, Canon lenses are in general: fantastic. The XTi is also a fantastic camera (read the reviews online - they all sing high-praise, so I'm sure it wouldn't be a bad final choice) but it doesn't seem as geared towards the budding beginner as the D40/x. It's perfect for those who want to jump right into the deep end and learn the more technical aspects of photography, perhaps assuming they already have a grasp of the fundamentals of "creating" good pictures.
Now with the announcement of the new D60 from Nikon, this is a very exciting time for us newbies :). I'm very excited to see a lot more technical aspects being included in the new D60, and it seems so far that it's even better for us who may need the training wheels to help us grow into photography. The new Canon 450D XTi is also very exciting, but in my final word , i would like to say that I would personally go for the Nikons.
Perhaps as my skills (and budgets) grow over time, the months, the years, I will become a balanced composing-photographer (and I hope you all do too!!). Then the choices between Nikon and Canon may become clearer, as we'd be ready to get into the more pro-sumer level of DSLRs (the Canon D30 and above, vs. the Nikon D300 and so on).
Good luck to all you beginners, I'm choosing the Nikon (i currently use a Canon Powershot S3is, it's great to learn on) and I look forward to hearing what you guys have to say!
cheers!
January 30th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
sorry, forgot to include two more things:
1. The XTi is now $499 online with the kit lens (check http://www.pricegrabber.com)
2. Nikons in general seem to be more affordable than Canons (at least in the entry-level, lower ended DSLR market) - hence more suited for those on a budget
Once again, I'd advise the rest of us to not worry too much about the technical aspects (self-cleaning, ISO settings, auto-focus, etc.) and try to learn the fundamentals first. Perhaps the D40 series will help you to become more of an "all-rounded" and well balanced, skilled photographer first; and a technical photographer second.
Good luck to all!
(btw, Armando, you are a shining example of what i'm trying to say. Superb photos sir! You are a great inspiration to my mantra of "skills first, tools second".)
February 16th, 2008 at 3:00 am
hey!
im considering between the d40 which im gettin with an additional lens or the d400xti which is without an additional lens(the price on both is kinda the same.
which 1 makes more sense, i cant decide.?!
thanx
February 27th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Hi to all! Thanks for the review. Im a newbie planning to buy my first DSLR (on a budget). Im into fish keeping (aquarium) and scuba diving. I also like to take pictures of my family with background scenery for remembrance, but not much into landscape photography.
I was planning to go with the 400D but only today that Ive came across the D40x. I know both have underwater casing for scuba diving. The cons about the 400Ds lenses and the D40x indoor shooting got me confused with what camera to buy.
I shoot indoors when I shoot aquarium photos and lighting is a problem when scuba diving (problem with the D40x). While the 400Ds lenses having just low quality pics (my friend has one and he's not satisfied with the lens kit included). Im still opting for the 400D and I don't mind tweaking photos but the canon lenses are to pricey.
I hope you could help me decide which camera to buy. Thank in advance.
February 29th, 2008 at 7:04 am
Hi,
I've been reading on the SLRs and I wanted to make the change from the point and shoot to entry level SLR cameras. I'm really looking at getting a camera to allow for good indoor shots (not sports), but obviously will use it for all other occasions, (trips, landscapes, portraits).
I'm deciding between the D40X and the 400D, sounds like the basic D40X twin lens kit with the 18-55 lens and VR 55-200 kit sounds like a better option since most reviews have somewhat argued that the canon lens kit is not good.
What I'm stuck on is the dust reduction capability of the canon 400D, does this really make any difference to the camera performance over time. Furthermore, I've been led to believe that the 400D is overall, a better camera, that comes with a very bad lens. I've heard there are 'enthusiast' (excuse my spelling) dual lens kits that can come with the 400D, so was wondering wheter this kit would provide images that are equivilent to the kit I've described above.
I'm on a budget (I live in Australia) so don't want to spend megabucks on a expensive lens for the Canon 400D. Can you help me decide which to go for?
Roger
March 10th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
I am choosing between a canon 400d or nikon d40x to shoot mainly skateboarding. I am going to buy the base kit and as fisheye lenses are very expensive i was just going to get a fisheye adapter. which is the better choice? looking withing the $1000 mark.
March 13th, 2008 at 7:56 am
two years or so ageo i started to get intrested in photography, i bought a cheep camra and started shooting.now i love it!!!but i an still shooting with the same old cheep camra. i am intrested in the cannon xti or the nikon d40x. the problem is that i dont know anything about camras or lenses, or a thing about photography!! is there any advice you can give me?
March 31st, 2008 at 5:59 am
i'm looking for a cheap d-slr mainly for shooting skateboarding, live bands, and a lot of outdoor urban styled photography(graffiti, architecture, etc.). this would be my first d-slr, so i really have no basis on which to choose.
from your comparison, i've gathered that the d40x is harder to focus and catch action in dim lighting, which would be important for the type of shots i would be taking. but the XTi also requires more lenses to get better shots, which is not something im ready to start doing quite yet.
any help?
March 31st, 2008 at 3:04 pm
I'm choosing betweet Nikon D40x and Canon 400D the price range is almost the same but i don't know which one to buy. I'm more into shooting sport scene like BMX and skateboarding. I've use my SLR-like Fuji Finepix 602Z and it's great on outdoor sports (for a SLR-like cam). You can see samples on this URL.
Help me choose the right DSLR Cam for me and my sport. Thanx!!!
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I just purchased the Rebel XTi and have also seen what the Nikon can do. If you are new to photography and just want a quick and easy point and shoot for good pictures then go for the Nikon. If you want to learn a bit more in depth about photography and don't mind reading the manual, get the XTi. The XTi takes great pictures, especially for sports. I agree with what is stated in the article. I personally am a big fan of the XTi.
April 6th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
hey
I have been going back and forth between the canon xti and the nikon d40x. this will be my first dslr and i really dont want to make the wrong decision. can anyone help me out? if im looking to shoot portraits, landscapes, concerts/moving subjects, which camera should i buy? i also wont have the money to buy too many lenses, so i want to make the right the choice. can anyone tell me which one would be better for my needs?
April 11th, 2008 at 12:17 am
I also am in doubt between these two cameras...
Can somebody tell me which one would be best to take product photo's?
Thank you!
May 15th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Well, it's been a year since this post was started, but anyway....
I decided to go for the D40, but now with the D60 realease I am quite confused since the D40x was discontinued and replaced with the D60.
What do you recommend? D40 and spend the rest of the money on lenses, or go directly for a D60?
Just in case, my email is nokuaru@gmail.com
Thanks!!
May 28th, 2008 at 9:07 am
i'm more confused...head's really buzzing now from all these reviews. I need to get a camera for my dad, he's a professional photographer, should i get the DX40 or the Cannon Rebel?
June 12th, 2008 at 8:32 am
I bought my Canon 350D while on holiday.
It comes with same lenses as the 400 kit.
Although I haven't used it much, here are some pics taken without care or attention and generally just messing.
The first was taken with the 75-300mm lens @ f5.6 and fully zoomed out to 300mm. ISO 400. The camera was just set on AUTO. It's also been compressed as jpeg down to 500Kb so its not great but at the above lens and camera settings its not bad.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3258/2571895524_7049c78112_b.jpg
Second picture was taken with the same lens 75mm @ 4.5 ISO 100.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3152/2571087269_8dac9d5607_b.jpg
You will find the similar results with the 18-55mm lens. That said, i've since had better but photos are on home computer. Better results come about whe