I started by making one particular point about the D40.
You had to jump in and (incorrectly) say "Not slow", "Not true".
And I see you took offense. So sorry.
Maybe I was a bit grumpy, I felt you were deliberately misunderstanding
or twistng the issue but your post seems sincere and I apologise too.
And am I correct in assuming that you mean, per your original post
that a bridge camera with IS is better? Say the Panny line of FZs?
Or the Canon line of SIS's? Then noise becomes a big issue, as well
as, yes, low light/high iso.
I was, I guess, making a point about slow kit lenses and the drawback
of being limited to those by giving an example of a particular situation
(hand shake being limiting factor).
If we have a sufficiently static scene,
the D40 + 55-200 at 200mm wide open i.e. f5.6 and
a handheld shutter speed of 1/300s iso 3200 on the one hand
and the S3 IS at f3.4, 300mm (equiv.) 1/40s iso 160 on the other,
we have the same exposure, the same high hit rate of sharp photos.
Then I think you agree that the S3 will look less noisy at about iso160
than the D40 at iso 3200.
I would STILL most likely take the
D40, if those are my alternatives.
Bring a tripod and you are fine.
Yet there are still less expensive alternatives available, and, no
doubt, Sigma, Tokina and TamAron
Hey, I like your humour! I had a simple Tamron zoom as my
fav. lens on my SLR as a teenager in the 80's so I guess I still
have a soft spot for them.
will provide even more alternatives at more attractive price
points. Nikon is just too big of a player to be ignored.
Well, it's been my impression that those players often are
not moving fast. And even if Nikon have 35% now and will perhaps
grow a bit more, the D40 isn't their only well selling DSLR and at
PMA there may be even more competition in the D40 price class
so we'll see just how much it will sell in the long run.
If all those are right, who claim the typical D40 buyer wouldn't
even know what a 3rd party lens is if it dropped in their lap,
and that their lens budget if existing at all is small, then
the question is how profitable it is for the 3rd party players to
rush anything here.
Eventually it will come of course, particularly if the D40 is indicative
of the path Nikon will follow in the future, but maybe the D40 will
be old by the time a versatile set of affordable auto-focusing
lenses are available.
Like Canon doesn't do noise reduction at the CHIP level? Point
being, noise isn't an issue, except for the pixel peeping crowd, of
one it appears you are a member.
Ok, I confess.
But many others are worse.
Just my two oere
Erik from Sweden
