Which digital slr for a noob please?

alexisonfire said:
Non DX lenses do autofocus with the D40 as long as they are AF-S. The DX range are purely deigned for digital cameras, and the AF-S is the silent autofocus motor which is found in the lens. (The d40 doesn't have one built into the camera like the d50/d70/d80 etc) There for no lens without AF-S will autofocus with the d40, but will work perfectly well. It just means you will need to use manual focus. But as i said eailer, its not like there isn't a wide range of AF-S lenses to choose from.
Click to expand...


Exactly, the only non Af-S lens I can ever see most people wanting is one of the fast primes (the 50mm f1.5 being particularly good).

The only Af-D lens most noobs were going to get before was the 70-300G, but the new version has AF-S and VR so that doesn't matter so much. The only other I can think of is the 80-400, which has (super slow) AF-D mechanics and is pretty expensive...
 
There are loads of good AF-D lenses.
such as 85mm f1.4 probably THE most famous primes from Nikon.
There are good cheapish second hand AF-D lenses going around like the 20-35mm, 80-200mm. 18-35mm.
 
nolimit said:
There are loads of good AF-D lenses.
such as 85mm f1.4 probably THE most famous primes from Nikon.
There are good cheapish second hand AF-D lenses going around like the 20-35mm, 80-200mm. 18-35mm.
Click to expand...


How many people who are buying a D40 because of its price (Only major reason to get one over a D50/D70s really) are then going to go out and spend £800 on an 85mm F1.4 Prime?

That was the point, people buying into the cheap end of the DSLR spectrum are not very likely to then run off and spend double the price of their new body+kit lens on a single new lens, as such they have an ample selection of AF-S lenses to pick from.
 
nolimit said:
There are loads of good AF-D lenses.
such as 85mm f1.4 probably THE most famous primes from Nikon.
There are good cheapish second hand AF-D lenses going around like the 20-35mm, 80-200mm. 18-35mm.
Click to expand...

The type of photography done with the 20-35mm i would imagine to be handheld, which is going to be difficult to manual focus with for someone just starting out in photography. But yes, its suppose to be a very good lens. The 18-35mm.......you could get the AF-S 18-135mm for a lot less money, only difference is the maximum lowest F/number is 5.6 instead of 4.5. And again, imo, as for the 80-200mm 2.8, i would still go for the 70-300mm AF-S VRII over this lens. The VR will compensate a tiny bit for the lower f/stop of the 80-200, the AF-S is obviously going to be very handy at 100mm+, and of course the extra 100mm top end is a big bonus.
 
divine_madness said:
How many people who are buying a D40 because of its price (Only major reason to get one over a D50/D70s really) are then going to go out and spend £800 on an 85mm F1.4 Prime?

That was the point, people buying into the cheap end of the DSLR spectrum are not very likely to then run off and spend double the price of their new body+kit lens on a single new lens, as such they have an ample selection of AF-S lenses to pick from.
Click to expand...

Only pointed out there are many good AF-D lenses.

But i'l answer your theory.

You think someone who is buying cheaper starter camera will not buy a expensive lens? It doesn't mean they will want more expensive lens in the future and ideally you would want more selection.
If someone is buying e.g Nikon D200 will more likely to buy 17-55/28-70 straightaway? just cause they can afford D200?
It doesn't work like that.
Everyone's learning and buying method is different and I personally would like to have a camera body that will work 100% with AF-D/AF-S etc.

Given the price difference between D40/x and the D50/70s, I would go with the D50/70s but THAT doesn't mean others will.

I'm pointing out the cons and hidden secrets of the camera, someone might not know about, there is no point defending it.

@Alex,

It is not all about VR, or extra mm. 80-200 it works better in lowlight, produces better bokeh and it has blazing fast af. why do you think people want f2.8 over f/4. It works far better in low light condition.
 
Last edited:
nolimit said:
Only pointed out there are many good AF-D lenses.

But i'l answer your theory.

You think someone who is buying cheaper starter camera will not buy a expensive lens? It doesn't mean they will want more expensive lens in the future and ideally you would want more selection.
If someone is buying e.g Nikon D200 will more likely to buy 17-55/28-70 straightaway? just cause they can afford D200?
It doesn't work like that.
Everyone's learning and buying method is different and I personally would like to have a camera body that will work 100% with AF-D/AF-S etc.
Click to expand...

I would put money on 99% of noob shooters updating their bodies beyond the typical 400D/D40 level SLRs ages before they buy £800+ lenses--especially given the typical lifetimes of bodies.
 
robmiller, true for 45%.

You will find maybe half of those people will get L or Pro lens before updating their camera body.

Just have a look here, the likes of TomWilko, Gord, Scuzi and many others using 350D/400D with good glass and I should have done the same, cause I could have had by now 70-200L, 24-105L.
When I had my Nikon D50, I had Sigma 70-200, Tamron 28-75 before updating to D70.
 
Last edited:
Were talking about the Nikon d40, not canon dslrs, and L series glass.

I can't imagine that anyone that goes and buys a D40 is then a few months later going to spend 800-1000 on a new lens, unless they have more money than sense. I imagine most people, after buying a d40 and kit lens, will either purchase the 70-300mm AF-S VRII, or 18-200mm AF-S VRII, simply because these are the most hyped up lens from Nikon on a consumer level, and most reviews or descriptions say these are a perfect match for the d40.

I bought a cheap telephoto lens for the odd time i might need one, and a relatively expensive wide angle lens, because it suits the style of photography i shoot. There is no way, at my level of photography i would even consider going out and buying a non AF-S lens costing £800~. In a couple of years time if i still feel strongly about photography i will think about upgrading my lens to something of a more professional level, but not with the D40, i will upgrade to a D80, or D200 depending if i could afford one.
 
getting back to the OP question, is the 400D the best bang/buck camera out there for a starter?
Looking to get a camera myself but I have only used an SLR once and that was 2 weeks ago, so obviously I dont want to spend a lot if it turns out i'm not going to use it that much!
 
tsinc80697 said:
getting back to the OP question, is the 400D the best bang/buck camera out there for a starter?
Looking to get a camera myself but I have only used an SLR once and that was 2 weeks ago, so obviously I dont want to spend a lot if it turns out i'm not going to use it that much!
Click to expand...

With the current offers on the 400D at the moment, and the canon rebate offers as well, yes its currently the best bang for buck in my opinion. Even the cheapest 2nd hand DSLR's like the D50/D40/350D are going to be fairly near to the price of the 400D on special, and from what i have read its considerably better.
 
alexisonfire said:
non AF-S lens costing £800~.
Click to expand...
Not all Non AF-S cost more £800 or more infact it is hard to find it new, therefore it is second hand and you can get it cheap e.g 80-200 can be had for £350-390.
Most 350/400D owners tend to go for £350-400 lens like the 17-40L/70-200 f/4, so they are not spending £800+

Why can't you compare the Nikon D40 with the D50/Canon 350D?
these were all introduced as beginners DSLR camera.

Like I said I don't care if anyone buys the Nikon D40, but just don't tell me these owners will not want non AF-S lenses or going to buy lenses that cost more and other crap tbh!


And finally, so if you bought a lens thats costs £800, why would you not use it with the D40? then you should have bought the Nikon D50/70s in the first place.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom