Please help with your advice, needing new camera

Hello everyone,

I wanted to post a new thread in this forum because most of you that are D200 or D300 users are more advanced users than people in the other threads (for the most part and am not implying anything). I have a chance to get my first dslr. I am not an advanced photographer and am coming from a Canon Elph S230 3 megapixel camera. I was eying the Nikon D80 just because of the great price, but my friend has the D200 and is advising me that if I buy the D80, I might regret that I didn't buy the D200. I was wondering how many of you feel that a D200 or D300 would be way too advanced for a beginner with slrs. I want to get one that I am not going to outgrow shortly and want one that I can grow into and learn now to use really well. I will be shooting outdoor photography, pictures of my kids, and maybe some sporting events. I would like to hear from anyone if a d200 or d300 would be too advanced for me and that I should start on a d80, or if it would be just better getting the upper models.

If so, and you were going to buy a d200, would you recommend the d300 because of the advanced features? I know the d300 has just come out but if I am going to spend that kind of money on a d200, I wonder if it would be worth it to have the d300. Has many of you purchased the d80 and moved up to the d200 or d300? How long did it take you to outgrow the d80 and what were your reasons for moving up to the upper models? I would just really like to get some opinions before I go out and make the big purchase. I would really appreciate some advice. I looked into the Canon 40D but didn't really like everything that I read about that camera. I really want to go with a Nikon.

This is my 2 cents and I don't claim that is the answer for you but worked for me.

I have used the D50 (first SLR camera) for just over two years and now own the D300. My main reason to upgrade was to take advantage of the higher ISO and my fast glass for indoor sports. To start with the D200 or D300 probably would have been overwhelming for me. I feel the D50 & D80 are good starter DSLRs without breaking the bank plus the price difference will allow you to get some good glass.

• Start with the lower level camera.
• Get good glass.
• Learn the various features available on the DLSR.
• Learn the various types of glass and how and when to use them.
• Practice your techniques.
• Absorb everything you can.

Once you feel you have mastered the the lower level DSLR or are beyond the capabilities/features then look to take the jump to the D200 or D300. Lastly, the first thing I would do is to download the manuals for each camera you are looking at. This might help you to understand what you do or don't need.

I have been very happy with this transition and now have the D50 as a backup which is still a very capable camera. I hope this helps.

--
Regards,
Bryan

As in, do you wish to learn how to control EVERY aspect of your image taking, or do you want a camera that will make the decisions for you?

The major difference between the D200/D300 and the D80 is that the higher level cameras are designed for photographers who want to be able to control every aspect of image taking. So it has a VERY expansive and complex feature set included in the camera. For a newbie, plan on at least 6 months to a year before your fully comfortable using every feature these cameras offer. Until then, you'll want to rely on the basic automation built into the camera, which does work well but won't permit you to realize the full capability that these cameras can deliver. Basically, if you shoot all auto, you'll have to do some post processing of your images before you print them and you will find a few clunkers due to a poor choice for the default focusing mode not being really suitable for your subject. BTW, if you choose the D200 and learn how to use it fully, you'll be tempted to move up in 2 or 3 years. If you choose the D300, you'll have 3 to 5 years before you'll feel the temptation to move up. One tip here, either camera is good enough that you won't ever really have to move up until the camera breaks because they will be able to deliver images that compare well to any camera coming out in the next 5-10 years. To be blunt, they are good enough to be "keepers". They are also built well enough to last at least 10 years if you don't get stupid about taking a picture of anything that is in front of the camera, meaning don't burn thru 1000 exposures every time you pick it up.

As for the D80, it features a lot more automated mode settings that make it easier for someone who doesn't want to fully control how the camera works. So, if you want a point and shoot for most of your picture taking it's a good choice. However, the D80 does include a lot of the control features available in the higher level cameras so it is a good learning tool. It's also not nearly as ruggedly made as the D200 or D300, so it won't last nearly as long. If you choose this camera, make sure to baby it, keep your exposure count low, and plan on trading up in another few years.

Now, a lecture about shutter counts. The D300 has a shutter rated for 150,000 exposures. The D80 hasn't been officially rated by Nikon but most assume that it's good for 50,000 expsoures. Now, with the high capacity memory cards available it's quite easy to burn thru 1000 or more images at one setting. However, that means that you now have 1000 or more images to sit down and edit. It also means that if you go out and take 1000 pictures a week, you'll burn up the D80 in a year and the D300 in only 3 years. My advice is simple, buy small memory cards if your shooting in JPG and edit your images BEFORE you snap that picture. It will make editing youri mages far easier and it will also make whatever camera you buy last a lot longer.

I would go with the D40 for now and upgrade later. It is a great camera and will serve you well. If you want the resolution, get the D40x. Get the 18-200VR and the 50 f/1.8 and you'll have a ball. If you need low light or don't want to spend $700 on the 18-200, get a Tamron 17-50 2.8 or 28-70 2.8 for about $400-450.

Don't forget an external flash that can be bounced. The SB400 is great.

--

'Does it take more time to spell-check and proofread what you write? Yes. It also takes time to shower and brush your teeth each day.'
John Gruber, daringfireball.net

24/7/365, makes no sense; it is not a logical progression. It should be 24/7/52...just a pet peeve.

In your situation, I'd be tempted to say go for the D80, learn it, then get the D300. I'd skip the D200. However, I wonder how long it will be before the D80 is replaced with a D90, with a limited number of the bells and whistles of the D300. You might consider a used D200, I guess, since it seems like lots of folks are dumping them to go to the D300.

I had a D70. Used it for years, then bought a D300. I certainly didn't need a D300, I'm totally a hobbyist, but I really enjoy being able to control so many aspects of my shots. The D300 has no auto mode. If that will be a problem, don't get it. Get a D80.
--
Imagine no religion--and please don't be offended
D300, 18-70mm; 70-300mm VR; Tamron 90mm Macro; SB-600; Canon Pro9000 printer

I started with the D50 and went to the D200. Not because I'm an advanced photographer, I'm an advanced newb. I started to get to the point that I understood the controls of my camera, and wanted(please note: did not NEED to upgrade, wanted to). I don't think that my skills(after 2 years) have exceeded the ability of my D50 at all. I love my D200, but my D50 was so much easier to use as a beginner. First time I turned on my D200 I said, "what the f* k are all these controls for". About 8 months later, I'm still learning.

I agree with the first reply, get a more "entry level" camera(D50, D80), buy good glass, learn everything you can learn. You might find you never outgrow the camera, you might find that in 6 months you need something much nicer, only you can know that for sure. Can't say I'm a fan of the D40/x, only for the lack of internal focus motor which limits the lenses you can use and retain the auto focus feature.
--
Jeremy

Everyone's an idiot sometimes, I just advertise.
A few of my feeble attempts at
http://www.jeremyrwilliams.com/coppermine or
http://s199.photobucket.com/albums/aa203/jrw1275/

And doing with the output?

Roman
--
'Miles to go before I sleep.'
--Robert Frost
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Thank you everyone for your feedback. I went to a place finally today to hold both the d80 and the d200. I definately liked the feel and weight of the d200 more than the d80. I think I will pass on the d40s because they are actually too small for my hands. I need a better grip to hang on to. I am definately choosing either the d80 or the d200. This will be kind of like a once in a great while purchase. I can't see my wife being ok with buying a d80 now and then in 2-4 years buying another body. I would rather purchase possibly the d200 and learn to adapt to it and not really "need" to upgrade to another body (of course unless it is damaged or what not). I am also reading up on whether or not I would need the "scene" modes from the d80 since I am a newbie to slrs. I appreciate everyone's advice and if anyone else wants to comment, that is cool too. I think you all have really great advice and I respect it since you are already dslr owners. I really like this forum and it is really helping me make up my mind.

Jaremy

I've had a D50 for around 2years now too, Now i have a D300.

I think when i got my D50 it took me around 2 weeks to a month of taking photos to get them all looking the way i wanted them to look which is trying my best to make it look like what i see in reality.

Now with the D300 it's been almost a month and i still haven't got the photos the way I like them to look because there is much more tweaking with this camera.
I'm expecting that the D200 would have a lot of tweaks too.

The thing is if you take a lot of photos then you get to know you're camera much better and much faster. After a while when have taken enough photos you can just see what settings you need from just memorising from previous photo sessions for the perfect shot.

There is no doubt that both the D80 and D200 are great cameras, and you sure can learn alot by taking shots with it.

I bought my first DSLR (D70), and played with it for about 6 months. I then upgraded to a D200 back in Feb of this year, as I seek for more manual control and time lapse shooting. When the D300 came out, I did not jump onto it because I knew the D200 suits for my needs. However, I still went ahead and upgraded to a D300 several weeks ago.

It is not that I really needed to upgrade to a better camera each time; but I just found limitation and there are certain functions that I "need" from each new one.

D70 to D200, more manual control and time lapse...
D200 to D300, better high ISO noise reduction and quicker autofocus...

Now, with two cameras with me at this time... I end up buying a used Nikon 70-200mm VR lens tonight and that will fit into my D200. I am quite sure that I am not going to upgrade to another camera for several years; so, stick with something that you enjoy holding on to it - it is the feel that counts. I was debating either to buy the D80 or D200; but after holding on to the D200, I felt it is more solidly built and liked the weight.

The story to this is that you have to know what equipment suits your need and get to know your equipments well. I am just one-of-those guys that enjoy taking pictures of my kids, and my wife really appreciate the quality of the shots after each upgrade.... In reality, I think I am just getting better at taking pictures with more practices...

Regards,
Frankie

TexasAg03 said:

I would go with the D40 for now and upgrade later.

Click to expand...

Right idea; wrong camera.

TexasAg03 said:

It is a great camera and will serve you well.

Click to expand...

We'll have to "agree to disagree" on that one.

TexasAg03 said:

If you want the resolution, get theD40x.

Click to expand...

No. All the same problems of the D40, with "aimed at idiots" marketing features tacked on. Ultra-high resolution is the LAST thing newbie shooters need to produce nice photos.

TexasAg03 said:

Get the 18-200VR

Click to expand...

I wouldn't. Most of the folks buying this do so because of the huge zoom range; but that is exactly the reason you shouldn't buy this lens, unless you absolutely need that extreme zoom range (which you probably don't). No 11:1 zoom which is even remotely affordable by mere mortals can ever provide anything like the performance of a decent similar-length prime or a competently designed zoom of (much) more modest zoom ratio. There are just too many compromises which must be made in the optical design to accommodate that zoom ratio. So unless you must have a "one-size-fits-all" zoom (such as for an overseas vacation where for whatever reason you simply cannot manage to carry two or three lenses), there are FAR better ways to go, and probably for less cost.

TexasAg03 said:

and the 50 f/1.8

Click to expand...

A great lens, but how exactly do you suggest he focus it when mounted on a D40/D40x?

TexasAg03 said:

If you need low light or don't want to spend $700 on the 18-200, get a
Tamron 17-50 2.8 or 28-70 2.8 for about $400-450.

Click to expand...

At least one of those has the same problem as the 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor -- i.e., it won't auto-focus on a D40/D40x (which is pretty much a show-stopper for someone just barely graduating from a P&S).

TexasAg03 said:

Don't forget an external flash that can be bounced. The SB400 is great.

Click to expand...

Actually, it's quite limited as compared to the SB-600 or SB-800. For example... How do you bounce it off the ceiling when shooting in portrait mode?

TexasAg03 said:

'Does it take more time to spell-check and proofread what you write?
Yes. It also takes time to shower and brush your teeth each day.'
John Gruber, daringfireball.net

Click to expand...

It also takes more time to think before you post. I suggest you try it.

digitalj said:

Hello everyone,

I wanted to post a new thread in this forum because most of you that
are D200 or D300 users are more advanced users than people in the
other threads (for the most part and am not implying anything). I
have a chance to get my first dslr. I am not an advanced photographer
and am coming from a Canon Elph S230 3 megapixel camera. I was eying
the Nikon D80 just because of the great price, but my friend has the
D200 and is advising me that if I buy the D80, I might regret that I
didn't buy the D200. I was wondering how many of you feel that a D200
or D300 would be way too advanced for a beginner with slrs.

Click to expand...

That depends mostly on how much you have already "outgrown" that Canon P&S. For example, do you (usually) shoot in "full-auto" mode, letting the camera make the decisions on things like shutter speed, aperture, ISO, white balance, etc.? If so, I suspect you'll want at least some of the "newbie-friendly" features of the more consumer-oriented bodies like the D50, D70, D80, etc.; where as a D200 or D300 will force you to deal with these issues yourself, which you may well find overwhelming (at least at first), perhaps to the point where you give up in frustration. I've seen this happen even with a D70; and trust me, the D200/D300 is a LOT more to "swallow", in one gulp (so to speak).

digitalj said:

I want to
get one that I am not going to outgrow shortly and want one that I
can grow into and learn now to use really well.

Click to expand...

Understandable. But as long as you stay away from the D40/D40x (which is just too crippled, IMCO), you should have no problems "growing into" one of the less ambitious bodies, as opposed to "growing out of" it.

Let me put it this way... I've been what might be called an "advanced amateur" photographer for most of my adult life, and have been shooting with SLRs (including fully manual SLRs) for more than 35 years. I bought a D70 some 3-1/2 years ago, and found it more than adequate vis-a-vis my skill level (which, based on your comments, is near-certainly considerably more advanced than yours -- no insult intended; I'm just trying to put things in perspective). Less than a week ago, I bought a nice clean second-hand D200. I did this not because I needed it; the D70 was and is still providing good service, doing everything I bought it for, and I could probably live happily with it for several more years if I had to. But I wanted the D200, and I could justify it (in part) by "handing down" my D70 to my wife (who is also graduating from a Canon P&S), so I bought myself a (slightly belated) Christmas present. I've spent the last several days just reading the manual (and some online reviews) to get the hang of the extensive array of settings & options, and getting the camera set up to my preferences. I've taken a few test shots along the way, but I've not yet used the D200 for any "real" shooting -- and frankly, I'm a little nervous about that, even despite my decades of experience and the care I've taken to make sure I've got the D200 set up to mimic the D70's behavior as much as possible (i.e., trying to ensure "no unpleasant surprises" when it comes time to need the shots from the D200).

digitalj said:

I will be shooting
outdoor photography, pictures of my kids, and maybe some sporting
events. I would like to hear from anyone if a d200 or d300 would be
too advanced for me and that I should start on a d80, or if it would
be just better getting the upper models.

Click to expand...

As you can probably gather from the above, I don't think the D200 or D300 is for you, at least not right now.

digitalj said:

If so, and you were going to buy a d200, would you recommend the d300
because of the advanced features? I know the d300 has just come out
but if I am going to spend that kind of money on a d200, I wonder if
it would be worth it to have the d300.

Click to expand...

Before I bought my D200, I seriously considered the D300. Feature for feature, it is undeniably a "better" camera than the D200 -- IF we consider only the camera itself. But that is not all that we need to consider. To effectively support the D300 requires a MUCH more powerful computer than even the D200, and it MUST be running certain specific software -- software which itself is problematic in several ways. I won't bother elaborating on this here because it's mostly off-topic for this thread (and besides, I've already covered it at length in other posts -- see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=26134023 and http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=26238113 for the gory details).

Furthermore, you need to have obtained at least a certain level of competence using the above-noted software, before you can even dream of getting (at least most of) the benefits the D300 has to offer. And given the fact that your little Canon P&S is a "straight to-JPEG-only" model, it's a pretty good bet that you have not yet come to grips with a "serious" post-processing workflow. In short: You're going to have enough to deal with just getting used to a D50/D70/D80/whatever; you don't need this added headache.

(continued in next post...)

(...continued from previous post)

digitalj said:

Has many of you purchased the
d80 and moved up to the d200 or d300? How long did it take you to
outgrow the d80 and what were your reasons for moving up to the upper
models?

Click to expand...

See above. The D80 is essentially just an updated version of the D80 (OK, that's a small oversimplification; but the point remains); so the same logic applies. I didn't really "outgrow" the D70; I just wanted some of the features of the D200 (particularly in terms of its ergonomics and its adaptability for one type of shooting that I like to do -- specifically, motorsports).

digitalj said:

I would just really like to get some opinions before I go out
and make the big purchase. I would really appreciate some advice.

Click to expand...

One thing which has not really been discussed, but which you NEED to understand...

ANY of the DSLRs under discussion will allow you to take very nice pictures. But, at least past a certain (very minimal) level, it's not the camera itself that will be the limiting factor, but rather the lens(es). Further, while the lenses tend to hold their values pretty well (some of Nikon's better lenses now sell used for more than they cost new), the (digital) camera bodies themselves are always rapidly diminishing assets -- for example, my D70 is now worth roughly 1/3 what I paid for it just 3-1/2 short years ago. So it makes no sense for you to "over-invest" in the camera body, especially since you are pretty obviously not yet up to speed on using any DSLR, and it will likely take you some time to "get there".

With that in mind, I would suggest that you strongly consider buying a good used D70 (which are widely available for perhaps $350 or so), and put the rest of whatever your budget is into some decent (but not too outrageous) "starter" glass (which is a topic worthy of its own discussion). By the time you're ready to "graduate" from that to a more advanced body ( IF that ever happens), the price/performance landscape will no doubt have changed markedly anyway -- for example, you'll likely be able to pick up a good used D300 for 1/3 - 1/2 half of what it would cost you today. This will not only put you (many) dollars ahead overall; it will help you make better pictures in the meantime.

digitalj said:

I looked into the Canon 40D but didn't really like everything that I
read about that camera. I really want to go with a Nikon.

Click to expand...

I doubt you'll get much argument about that here. ;-)

SecondWindShooter said:

to consider. To effectively support the D300 requires a MUCH more
powerful computer than even the D200, and it MUST be running certain
specific software -- software which itself is problematic in several
ways. I won't bother elaborating on this here because it's mostly
off-topic for this thread (and besides, I've already covered it at
length in other posts -- see

Click to expand...

You're scaring him off with all this post processing rant. What's wrong with shooting in jpegs? You can get pretty good results with jpegs and I know lot's of pros, semi-pros and advanced amateurs who shoot mainly jpegs.

SecondWindShooter said:

Furthermore, you need to have obtained at least a certain level of
competence using the above-noted software, before you can even dream
of getting (at least most of) the benefits the D300 has to offer.

Click to expand...

I disagree. You can get at least 95% benefit from the D300 by shooting and post processing jpegs. The balance is mainly extreme cases where you need to squeeze a little more shadow/highlight detail.

SecondWindShooter said:

And given the fact that your little Canon P&S is a "straight
to-JPEG-only" model, it's a pretty good bet that you have not yet
come to grips with a "serious" post-processing workflow. In short:
You're going to have enough to deal with just getting used to a
D50/D70/D80/whatever; you don't need this added headache.

Click to expand...

You're right. He doesn't need this added headache. If we buy your argument that shooting RAW is the way to go for D300, doesn't the same thing apply to D50/D70/D80?

The D80 will be more than enough of a camera for you to grow in to and up with. It will do the shots for the requirments you have very well. If jpegs get a bit lean shoot RAW. The D80 has quite a few auto modes but you don't have to use them !!!

My suggestion, buy the less expensive body and get really decent lenses. Learn how to use it all. In two or three years think about if you need to upgrade or not.

David

digitalj said:

Hello everyone,

I wanted to post a new thread in this forum because most of you that
are D200 or D300 users are more advanced users than people in the
other threads (for the most part and am not implying anything). I
have a chance to get my first dslr. I am not an advanced photographer
and am coming from a Canon Elph S230 3 megapixel camera. I was eying
the Nikon D80 just because of the great price, but my friend has the
D200 and is advising me that if I buy the D80, I might regret that I
didn't buy the D200. I was wondering how many of you feel that a D200
or D300 would be way too advanced for a beginner with slrs. I want to
get one that I am not going to outgrow shortly and want one that I
can grow into and learn now to use really well. I will be shooting
outdoor photography, pictures of my kids, and maybe some sporting
events. I would like to hear from anyone if a d200 or d300 would be
too advanced for me and that I should start on a d80, or if it would
be just better getting the upper models.

If so, and you were going to buy a d200, would you recommend the d300
because of the advanced features? I know the d300 has just come out
but if I am going to spend that kind of money on a d200, I wonder if
it would be worth it to have the d300. Has many of you purchased the
d80 and moved up to the d200 or d300? How long did it take you to
outgrow the d80 and what were your reasons for moving up to the upper
models? I would just really like to get some opinions before I go out
and make the big purchase. I would really appreciate some advice. I
looked into the Canon 40D but didn't really like everything that I
read about that camera. I really want to go with a Nikon.

Click to expand...

SecondWindShooter said:

With that in mind, I would suggest that you strongly consider buying
a good used D70 (which are widely available for perhaps $350 or so),
and put the rest of whatever your budget is into some decent (but not
too outrageous) "starter" glass (which is a topic worthy of its own
discussion). By the time you're ready to "graduate" from that to a
more advanced body ( IF that ever happens), the price/performance
landscape will no doubt have changed markedly anyway -- for example,
you'll likely be able to pick up a good used D300 for 1/3 - 1/2 half
of what it would cost you today. This will not only put you (many)
dollars ahead overall; it will help you make better pictures in the
meantime.

Click to expand...

LOL! Do you think everybody likes to buy used? There are emotional benefits to buying new besides the warranty. What makes you think his priority is saving money?

IMO, there are 2 ways the OP can go about this. Either start with a D40, play with it for a while and then get a D300 when he feels comfortable or go straight to a D300 if he feels he can take the challenge of a steep learning curve. The D200 is obsolete and should be avoided in favor of a D300 especially if the OP intends to keep the camera for a while.

KennyKB said:

You're scaring him off with all this post processing rant.

Click to expand...

If you mean scaring him off of a D300, that's probably a good thing.

KennyKB said:

What's wrong with shooting in jpegs?

Click to expand...

Well for starters, how about the fact that the fact that you're throwing away more than 90% of the image data, then permanently mangling what little is left with lossy compression..?

KennyKB said:

You can get pretty good results with
jpegs

Click to expand...

I guess we have different working definitions of "pretty good results".

Personally, I would never spend upwards of two grand for that sort of "pretty good" results -- and I would probably question the sanity/wisdom (and eyesight!) of anyone who would. (This is not to say that there are never circumstances where shooting JPEG with a D300 would be appropriate; but they are special cases, and not what we're talking about here.)

KennyKB said:

You're right. He doesn't need this added headache. If we buy your
argument that shooting RAW is the way to go for D300, doesn't the
same thing apply to D50/D70/D80?

Click to expand...

Absolutely. But in those cases, he has a wide assortment of suitable tools to choose from, at least most of which do NOT make unreasonable demands on his computer system.

I have the D-50, D-70, D-80 and D-300.
In your case, I will suggest you to get the D-80.

After lerning very well, all the photographic bases and two years os experience you will be ready to go to a more sofisticated DSLR.

Select the photographic topics that you will shoot most, and then get help to select the lenses that you need with the D-80.

Please, buy only Nikon glass, please keep away of other brands.

KennyKB said:

SecondWindShooter said:

With that in mind, I would suggest that you strongly consider buying
a good used D70 (which are widely available for perhaps $350 or so),
and put the rest of whatever your budget is into some decent (but not
too outrageous) "starter" glass (which is a topic worthy of its own
discussion). By the time you're ready to "graduate" from that to a
more advanced body ( IF that ever happens), the price/performance
landscape will no doubt have changed markedly anyway -- for example,
you'll likely be able to pick up a good used D300 for 1/3 - 1/2 half
of what it would cost you today. This will not only put you (many)
dollars ahead overall; it will help you make better pictures in the
meantime.

Click to expand...

LOL! Do you think everybody likes to buy used?

Click to expand...

I never claimed any such thing. I merely suggested an alternative approach for the OP's consideration -- an approach intended to give him better value for whatever amount of money he winds up spending en toto on the new camera gear (including lenses, PP software, and misc. odds and ends).

KennyKB said:

There are emotional
benefits to buying new besides the warranty.

Click to expand...

Probably so; but this is a photography forum, not "The Amateur Psychoanalysis Hour". If you're going to base your purchasing decisions solely or largely on intangible emotional factors, no one can possibly offer any meaningful guidance -- which sort'a makes posting such questions here a moot point, doesn't it?

KennyKB said:

What makes you think his priority is saving money?

Click to expand...

It always comes down to money.

If cost were truly no object to the OP he would not have used phrases such as "...if I am going to spend that kind of money...", and "I wonder if it would be worth it ..." and "...before I go out and make the big purchase."

For all intents and purposes, the OP is starting from scratch. So he'll need not only the camera, but a compliment of lenses and other gadgets. And as already established, the budget may be indefinite, but it is NOT unlimited. Given that, Truism 101 applies: Within any given budget (even a moderately flexible one), it's always a better trade-off to scrimp on the body and splurge on the lenses, as opposed to the other way around -- and this is true from both a photographic and an investment standpoint.

KennyKB said:

IMO, there are 2 ways the OP can go about this. Either start with a
D40, play with it for a while and then get a D300 when he feels
comfortable or go straight to a D300 if he feels he can take the
challenge of a steep learning curve.

Click to expand...

Spoken like someone who has owned only a D40 and (maybe) a D300.

KennyKB said:

The D200 is obsolete and should
be avoided in favor of a D300 especially if the OP intends to keep
the camera for a while.

Click to expand...

Nonsense. Sheer, utter NONSENSE.

First, "Newer" does NOT necessarily equal "better". Only the young and/or foolish think otherwise.

Second, the D200 is a VERY viable camera, and will remain so long after your D40 has crumbled into the dust.

To help put this into perspective:.. The D200 was a BIG leap from the D70/D100 models that came before it. The D300 is an evolution of the D200. There are improvements, to be sure; but they do not constitute anything like the "revolution" that the D200 was. Meanwhile, the D40 was a step (or two) backwards from the D70, and was a deliberately compromised design aimed squarely at the ultra-low-cost/know-nothing entry-level market. So where do you think that leaves the D40 in relation to the D200?

SecondWindShooter said:

TexasAg03 said:

I would go with the D40 for now and upgrade later.

Click to expand...

Right idea; wrong camera.

Click to expand...

Well, I happen to think the D40 is a good camera for someone coming from a point and shoot who is buying their first DSLR. It has scene modes for people who like that and can also be used in aperture and shutter priority modes as well as manual. It's a good place to start for a reasonable price.

SecondWindShooter said:

SecondWindShooter said:

It is a great camera and will serve you well.

Click to expand...

We'll have to "agree to disagree" on that one.

SecondWindShooter said:

If you want the resolution, get theD40x.

Click to expand...

No. All the same problems of the D40, with "aimed at idiots"
marketing features tacked on. Ultra-high resolution is the LAST
thing newbie shooters need to produce nice photos.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what problems you are talking about, but I agree that the 10 megapixel resolution is more of a marketing feature than a necessary one. However, I certainly wouldn't call it "ultra-high resolution" since there are cameras out there with more than 10 megapixels.

SecondWindShooter said:

SecondWindShooter said:

Get the 18-200VR

Click to expand...

I wouldn't. Most of the folks buying this do so because of the huge
zoom range; but that is exactly the reason you shouldn't buy this
lens, unless you absolutely need that extreme zoom range (which you
probably don't). No 11:1 zoom which is even remotely affordable by
mere mortals can ever provide anything like the performance of a
decent similar-length prime or a competently designed zoom of (much)
more modest zoom ratio. There are just too many compromises which
must be made in the optical design to accommodate that zoom ratio.
So unless you must have a "one-size-fits-all" zoom (such as for an
overseas vacation where for whatever reason you simply cannot manage
to carry two or three lenses), there are FAR better ways to go, and
probably for less cost.

Click to expand...

I happen to think, as do MANY others, that the 18-200 is a good lens, especially considering the range. I keep it on my D300 most of the time when I am not shooting for money. I realize there are compromises, but for a consumer, it is a good lens. Most people graduating from a point and shoot don't want to carry around multiple lenses.

SecondWindShooter said:

SecondWindShooter said:

and the 50 f/1.8

Click to expand...

A great lens, but how exactly do you suggest he focus it when mounted
on a D40/D40x?

Click to expand...

Oh wow! I guess someone should invent a way to focus a lens by hand. Maybe I'll invent such a method and call it "manual focus"... :

I stand by the recommendation because, at the price, it is a great lens, even if you have to do it manually. I should have qualified my original statement.

SecondWindShooter said:

SecondWindShooter said:

If you need low light or don't want to spend $700 on the 18-200, get a
Tamron 17-50 2.8 or 28-70 2.8 for about $400-450.

Click to expand...

At least one of those has the same problem as the 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor
-- i.e., it won't auto-focus on a D40/D40x (which is pretty much a
show-stopper for someone just barely graduating from a P&S).

Click to expand...

You are correct there. I was thinking they had the focus motor built in - my mistake.

SecondWindShooter said:

SecondWindShooter said:

Don't forget an external flash that can be bounced. The SB400 is great.

Click to expand...

Actually, it's quite limited as compared to the SB-600 or SB-800.
For example... How do you bounce it off the ceiling when shooting in
portrait mode?

Click to expand...

Easy, you just move it to the bounce position.

SecondWindShooter said:

SecondWindShooter said:

'Does it take more time to spell-check and proofread what you write?
Yes. It also takes time to shower and brush your teeth each day.'
John Gruber, daringfireball.net

Click to expand...

It also takes more time to think before you post. I suggest you try it.

Click to expand...

I was just giving some advice and made one mistake in recommending the Tamrons. You make it sound as if the 50mm f/1.8 CAN'T be focused on the D40 with the statement you made. You also don't seem to know that the SB400 can be bounced.

I suggest YOU try thinking...

--

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

'Does it take more time to spell-check and proofread what you write? Yes. It also takes time to shower and brush your teeth each day.'
John Gruber, daringfireball.net

http://www.wikihow.com/Use-Apostrophes
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors