Nikon D40 or Nikon D3000

Hi everyone,

I need some help here. I'm trying to decide whether to purchase the D40 or the new D3000. I've already used the D40 and I liked it alot but I'm wondering if I should take the next step up and shell out a few more bucks for the newcomer. I'm just a bit hesitant with the D3000 since there really aren't many reviews out on it. I've read that it's very similar to the D60 and I did not like the D60 very much at all so that's concerning. What do you all think?

Excellent question! I'm actually owning and using the D40 for almost two years now and trying to figure out if I should 'upgrade' to the D3000. I'm very pleased with the D40 and the results it delivers, I messed it up however - there's dust in the VF I can't get rid of (Nikon doesn't seem to succeed either). It doesn't show up in the pictures but I just can't concentrate with all that spots in the VF... The fun-factor got lost a bit :-(

I would love the D90 but I'm struggling with it's price. Besides, my (pretty small) hands like the D40/D60/D3000 better. So it's all down to either a new D40 or a D3000.

Any suggestions would be welcome ;-)

Yeah same boat here. Anyone else have any insight? I'm trying to make a purchase today.

MiWo said:

Excellent question! I'm actually owning and using the D40 for almost two years now and trying to figure out if I should 'upgrade' to the D3000. I'm very pleased with the D40 and the results it delivers, I messed it up however - there's dust in the VF I can't get rid of (Nikon doesn't seem to succeed either). It doesn't show up in the pictures but I just can't concentrate with all that spots in the VF... The fun-factor got lost a bit :-(

I would love the D90 but I'm struggling with it's price. Besides, my (pretty small) hands like the D40/D60/D3000 better. So it's all down to either a new D40 or a D3000.

Any suggestions would be welcome ;-)

Click to expand...

Wow upgrading or replacing a camera for some dust in the VF? Any of the mirror box cameras are susceptible to this, including the D3000 & D5000, so if this is really an issue for you then you should save up for a prism camera (D90 upwards).

elg2487 said:

Hi everyone,

I need some help here. I'm trying to decide whether to purchase the D40 or the new D3000. I've already used the D40 and I liked it alot but I'm wondering if I should take the next step up and shell out a few more bucks for the newcomer. I'm just a bit hesitant with the D3000 since there really aren't many reviews out on it. I've read that it's very similar to the D60 and I did not like the D60 very much at all so that's concerning. What do you all think?

Click to expand...

All the entry level models (D40(x) / D60 / D3000) are almost identical from an ergonomics point of view. The only real difference between the D60 and D3000 is the improved AF on the latter.

A few questions that will help me (and others) provide the most helpful answers:

What do you like to shoot? How big do you print? Why would you want to move up from a D40? How do you feel it is limiting you from reaching your full photographic potential? Is there anything about the D40 that you really don't like?

elg2487 said:

Hi everyone,

I need some help here. I'm trying to decide whether to purchase the D40 or the new D3000. I've already used the D40 and I liked it alot but I'm wondering if I should take the next step up and shell out a few more bucks for the newcomer. I'm just a bit hesitant with the D3000 since there really aren't many reviews out on it. I've read that it's very similar to the D60 and I did not like the D60 very much at all so that's concerning. What do you all think?

Click to expand...

Well, I like to shoot landscapes, nature and portraits mostly. I also like to shoot more abstract stuff too. I haven't done much printing yet, but when I do, it wouldn't be anything to large. And honestly, I don't feel that the D40 limits my photographic potential and I liked it alot but my biggest fear is that if I get the D40 today and I decide to upgrade later to say a D90 or D5000, I won't be able to get anything for my D40 whereas with the D3000, I'll probably get more money when/if I decide to sell.

goldbean said:

A few questions that will help me (and others) provide the most helpful answers:

What do you like to shoot? How big do you print? Why would you want to move up from a D40? How do you feel it is limiting you from reaching your full photographic potential? Is there anything about the D40 that you really don't like?

Click to expand...

Well, the dust was on the sensor first, now due to uncareful treatment it's everywhere - including the VF :-( My hope is/was that with some sort of dust-removal system as in the D3000 the dust hadn't been on the sensor and I wouldn't have the opportunity to blow it all over the place...

JoKing said:

MiWo said:

Excellent question! I'm actually owning and using the D40 for almost two years now and trying to figure out if I should 'upgrade' to the D3000. I'm very pleased with the D40 and the results it delivers, I messed it up however - there's dust in the VF I can't get rid of (Nikon doesn't seem to succeed either). It doesn't show up in the pictures but I just can't concentrate with all that spots in the VF... The fun-factor got lost a bit :-(

I would love the D90 but I'm struggling with it's price. Besides, my (pretty small) hands like the D40/D60/D3000 better. So it's all down to either a new D40 or a D3000.

Any suggestions would be welcome ;-)

Click to expand...

Wow upgrading or replacing a camera for some dust in the VF? Any of the mirror box cameras are susceptible to this, including the D3000 & D5000, so if this is really an issue for you then you should save up for a prism camera (D90 upwards).

Click to expand...

I think id go for the latest technology if it was me ... but if you are serious about photography then perhaps the D90 is the way to go as you may grow out of the D3000 in a few months ..
Just my opinion
Sally
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sallyghl/

Go for the newer, more updated technology, the D3000. Unless you can get a D40 for a super-de-duper-uber-cheap price, so that you could throw the D40 around for a year until you have more money for a D90 or something.

I wouldnt see much point in upgrading to a D3000 from a D40 though

sallygohl said:

I think id go for the latest technology if it was me ... but if you are serious about photography then perhaps the D90 is the way to go as you may grow out of the D3000 in a few months ..

Click to expand...

It will take you a very very long time to "outgrow" the D3k. You may (and probably will) sooner or later find features that you wish you had, but it will probably be years before your technique is so good that a camera like the D3000 will actually be the limiting factor in your images.

The same can be said for the D40, but I would still go with the D3000 unless the D40 is much cheaper.

D3000 is a slightly updated D40. D3000 has 11 point autofocus, guide mode, larger LCD, and VR lens in the kit. It also has the updated shutter and processor The guide mode is very basic and is for people who never had an SLR camera before. D3000 kit costs about $100 more than D40. So if you can spend the extra $100, get D3000. Otherwise get D40.

here is one problem why i sometimes regret trading D40 for D40x. You will have the same problem with D3000. Your D40 has 1/500 Xsync rate which you may take for granted, but when you get D3000 with 1/200 and you try to use a fill-in flash in the middle of a sunny day, you'll be missing that 1/500 rate. And I don't believe D3000 has a FP override with external flash, I know D40/40x/60 don't so I assume D3000 doesn't either. But if I am wrong and it does, someone will correct me.
--
Nikon D300- Nikon D40X- Panny TZ5- Sanyo E2
Previously owned DSLRS: Canon 40D, Nikon D40

The D3000 has one HUGE advantage compared to the D40: 11 area AF instead of 3 area AF.

I have been shooting with my D40 for 3 years now, and I like the camera a lot, and there isn't much I'm missing that could make me want to 'upgrade' to the D5000 or the D90. But there are 2 things that do annoy me from time to time: the 3 area AF (3 areas simply aren't enough) and the fact that AF only works with AF-S lenses (I borrowed a 1.8 85mm lens from a friend to give it a try and take a few portraits with very shallow depth of field, but manual focusing was such a pain in the ass that I eventually gave up completely).

I know that neither the D3000 nor the D5000's AF works with non-AF-S lenses, but at least you get a MUCH better AF with the D3000.

So my advice is to go for the D3000 or even the D5000 if you can afford it.

I would stick with the D40. In my experience, the D40's AF is perfectly fine for those applications.

I can't predict the future of used camera prices, but I expect the D40 will have stable demand because of its unique flash capabilities. You can sync at 1/500 without using an FP mode that drastically reduces flash output. I think this is faster than any other DSLR currently in production. With a tiny bit of work, the D40 can even sync all the way up to 1/4000, again without an FP trick: http://strobist.blogspot.com/2008/01/control-your-world-with-ultra-high-sync.html

If you assume the D3000's sensor is similar to the D60's, I don't think you will get any IQ advantage from the D3000. If you look at dxomark, the D40 is better than the D60 by every measure at the pixel level. Even when you take into account the D60's megapixel advantage and downsize the image, the D40 and D60 are in a dead heat (each has slight advantages in different areas).

If the IQ is roughly the same and you don't need the better AF, think about why you want to buy the D3000. If it's just resale value, I suspect there will be a glut of the 10mp Nikons (D40x/D60/D3000) in the near future. But I think there will always be some people looking for the D40 and its special sync capabilities.

Good luck with whatever you choose.

elg2487 said:

Well, I like to shoot landscapes, nature and portraits mostly. I also like to shoot more abstract stuff too. I haven't done much printing yet, but when I do, it wouldn't be anything to large. And honestly, I don't feel that the D40 limits my photographic potential and I liked it alot but my biggest fear is that if I get the D40 today and I decide to upgrade later to say a D90 or D5000, I won't be able to get anything for my D40 whereas with the D3000, I'll probably get more money when/if I decide to sell.

goldbean said:

A few questions that will help me (and others) provide the most helpful answers:

What do you like to shoot? How big do you print? Why would you want to move up from a D40? How do you feel it is limiting you from reaching your full photographic potential? Is there anything about the D40 that you really don't like?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Based on the limited number of D3000 photos I've seen at ISO 800 and above, I would say that the D40s high ISO capabilities surpass those of the D3000 by a comfortable margin. I use the D40 with reckless abandon at ISOs > 800 and have always been impressed by its low noise characteristics and detail retention at those levels.

Perhaps when more D3000 photo samples become available it will be easier decision but it would very difficult (at least for me) to give up high ISO performance.

I was thinking of picking up the D3000 for my SO but decided on a second D40 before stocks run completely dry.

The AF on the D40 is adequate for high school sports - soccer, basketball, volleyball, and cheerleading. The D3000 MIGHT be better than the D40, but it hasn't been proven (yet)....and even if it is, does it make any difference to you?

The high ISO and higher flash sync speed have been wonderful on my D40. You will have to decide which is better for you.

I moved up from a Coolpix 4800 with a good zoom to the D3000 but prior to the Coolpix I used a Pentax SLR film camera. Why did I wait so long for a digital SLR, the D3000 really is an excellent camera and you don't have to use the Guide Mode! All can be manually set but why not use some of the 'preset features' ... they really do work!

I went for the 18-105 lens pack instead of the 18-55

.......if you don't already have a D40 but there's nothing wrong with wanting a bit more resolution for cropping and the better AF system in the D3000.

Noise differences are going to be insignificant or minimal . Another point is the smaller form factor is retained vs the larger D5000 body.

I've been doing just fine with my D40 for a long time but I'm happy that Nikon updated and improved it . At some point I'll probably spring for the D3000.

The D40 has always represented real value in a Nikon digital slr and the D3000 is it's successor.

Goldbean hit the nail on the head regarding the D40 - go with the D40 and 18 - 55 VR kit lens and take the money you save and buy a 55 - 200 VR lens ...you can't go wrong with this combo !

• Chris