News - 'Big two' continue to dominate Japan

[Thom Hogan]

The fact you cannot use all of Nikon's AF lenses, with the AF on the
D40 is IMHO a rather limiting factor.

To existing Nikon users with legacy lenses. Sure. Do they buy a D40? No.

Whilst new users might not care

That was Nikon's goal. And remember the original point of the thread: Nikon's goal was to pull new people into the mount and grow their base. Based upon my surveys, the D40 did just that. And given that it has such strong sales numbers, it's one of the primary reasons why Nikon made the move against Canon in market share this past year. Why is that a bad thing?

My point here is, had they left the motor in..the 40d might have
pulled even more people onboard.

"Sold more" is not equal to "attracted more new to Nikon mount users." It should be clear that Nikon wanted existing customers to buy the D80 and D200. Again, my surveys show they did. And that they generally didn't buy the D50 or D40.

The whole reason for getting an SLR is to grow into it, and have full
control and experiment.

The whole reason for you, perhaps. What I'm finding is that what you say simply isn't true. The number one reason why the low-end DSLRs are booming is essentially an indictment of P&S cameras (many of which, by the way, have plenty of control and experimentation capability). Poor AF. Poor speed. Poor high ISO capability. Poor flash coverage. Poor image quality. Poor, poor, poor. Switch to a D40 and all those become good to excellent at a modest size and price cost. Has nothing to do with control. A Canon G9 or Ricoh GX100 has as much control as a D40.

Nothing unusual about makers putting out
models less well specified, but nikon went too far IMO.

The important point there is "IMO." My next door neighbor, my mom, and a host of other people I've identified and who now use a D40 instead of a P&S wouldn't agree with you. Indeed, most of them say the D40 is too complicated, but they tolerate that since they can just set it on auto.

Anyone buying an SLR just to use AUTO mode, isnt really going to get
much in the long run out of it..

Why must we all dictate our needs onto others? If someone is happy driving their Ferrari at 55mph I say more power to them.

Now, here comes the part where I'm going to agree with you ; ). Nikon should take the D40 and make a second version of it. Imagine the same size body and same internal digital components, but targeted at an FM2n user. Most of the "auto" stuff disappears, some manual controls return (as does metering with MF lenses). Put in a split screen prism. Beef up the outer body slightly. And, yes, return the screwdrive. THAT body would sell to existing Nikon mount users.

--
Thom Hogan
editor, Nikon DSLR Report

author, Complete Guides: D40/D40x, D50, D70s, D80, D100, D200, D1 series, D2 series
http://www.bythom.com

 

[d_chiesa]

...THAT body would sell to existing Nikon mount users.

And to some Canon users too! At least i would buy it...

 

[thw]

I read somewhere ( but I cannot recall where )

Wow. That is very convincing.

Whichever way you look at it, the D300 is selling
better than expected and is now being made at the same rate as the
40D was when it was introduced ( if the figures I recall reading are
accurate ). Has Canon increased production of the 40D? I've not
heard of them doing so. In fact, the 40D was subject to a cashback
scheme within 5 weeks of launch in Europe. Similarly the A700 is
also subject to a cashback scheme in the UK. The D300 on the other
hand is maintaining its launch price, is not subject to cashbacks
and Nikon are increasing production. So far, it sounds like a
success story to me.

Please stop your nonsensical speculations.

Since the argument here is centered on the japanese market, let's see what a picture teaches us:



The D300 peak was never higher than that of the 40D. In fact, it seems to fall a LOT faster than 40D. This is expected because (i) of the price differential (ii) every Nikon user knows that the D80 replacement will probably inherit all the main functions of the D300... without the extra cost.

Nikon's success hinges more on the sales of the D40, D40x and D80. Most certainly NOT the D200 or D300.

---------------------------------
Colors of my world:
thw.smugmug.com

 

[Barry Fitzgerald]

"Sold more" is not equal to "attracted more new to Nikon mount
users." It should be clear that Nikon wanted existing customers to
buy the D80 and D200. Again, my surveys show they did. And that they
generally didn't buy the D50 or D40.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Make people an offer they cannot refuse! Ala, for the sake of the AF motor, gain more pull.

The whole reason for you, perhaps. What I'm finding is that what you
say simply isn't true. The number one reason why the low-end DSLRs
are booming is essentially an indictment of P&S cameras (many of
which, by the way, have plenty of control and experimentation
capability). Poor AF. Poor speed. Poor high ISO capability. Poor
flash coverage. Poor image quality. Poor, poor, poor. Switch to a D40
and all those become good to excellent at a modest size and price
cost. Has nothing to do with control. A Canon G9 or Ricoh GX100 has
as much control as a D40.

I dont think its wise to compare. They meet different needs. Nobody is going to argue about how much better overall an SLR is. But its still not pocket sized is it? Compacts will always sell, because they are small. The D40 is a smaller SLR, but its aint shirt pocket size!

Most people are very ignorant of image quality, simply the number is what most look at.

The important point there is "IMO." My next door neighbor, my mom,
and a host of other people I've identified and who now use a D40
instead of a P&S wouldn't agree with you. Indeed, most of them say
the D40 is too complicated, but they tolerate that since they can
just set it on auto.

Well nikon didnt bag me did they? Lol

I almost got a D50, but ended up with the KM 5d, blow for blow a better camera all round, bar the cut down LCD res. If I had that choice again v D40, I would still get the KM over an entry level nikon. Now..maybe KM were dumb, but hey..least they tried!

Why must we all dictate our needs onto others? If someone is happy
driving their Ferrari at 55mph I say more power to them.

Back to the ignorance section here! Users might think they will be better photographers with an SLR, but reality is..they wont. Hats off to nikon for pushing the argument though..and no question the D40 sells well

Now, here comes the part where I'm going to agree with you ; ). Nikon
should take the D40 and make a second version of it. Imagine the same
size body and same internal digital components, but targeted at an
FM2n user. Most of the "auto" stuff disappears, some manual controls
return (as does metering with MF lenses). Put in a split screen
prism. Beef up the outer body slightly. And, yes, return the
screwdrive. THAT body would sell to existing Nikon mount users.

They can leave the auto stuff in, just put the motor back

--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

 

[Pedro Ernesto Guerra Azevedo]

They dominate in which direction? Seller ? Seller . does not mean quality, best does not mean to be! I am Pentax forever, Pentax is the best !!!

--
Pedro Ernesto Guerra Azevedo
[email protected]
Santos - São Paulo - Brasil

 

[Pedro Ernesto Guerra Azevedo]

Who is not the greater, best has that to be!
--
Pedro Ernesto Guerra Azevedo
[email protected]
Santos - São Paulo - Brasil

 

[sudirdjo]

The big difference in weight between the D40 and the K100D is
actually battery. AA's are heavy.

D40 + batt at 522gr is still less than 100D sans battery at 565gr.

AS adds some. So do the focus motor and top LCD panel.
The latter 2 are musts for anyone fairly serious.

Is that so. Sounds like you haven't use both for a reasonable period of time.

 

[RedFox88]

Currently the 40D is outselling the D300, and 400D
overall sales is still better than anything from Nikon.

You're taking Japan figures and applying them to the world without
considering other relevant information.

It's well known that when the XT came out, it was #1 selling dSLR every month until the XTi came out. Then the XTi has been the #1 selling dSLR out of all dSLRs for sale - worldwide. The Drebel might have had the same success as being a #1 selller while it was not replaced.

 

[Thom Hogan]

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Make people an offer they
cannot refuse!

Why not simply put all the D3 features into the D40, including the sensor? The point is that the Japanese are very good at calibrating elasticity of demand versus feature desirability. They tend to produce products that maximize their investment return, not maximize your picture-taking enjoyment. Nikon obviously wanted the group who you are part of to buy the D80, not the D40. Indeed, if you look at the Canon lineup, Canon did the wrong thing by not putting a model between the Rebel and the 30D/40D. It cost them dollars and sales (especially if you remember the discovery of the "disabled features" in the Rebels; suddenly you could buy a Rebel, hack it, and get all the features of the higher-priced model, so why would you buy the higher-priced model?).

I dont think its wise to compare. They meet different needs. Nobody
is going to argue about how much better overall an SLR is. But its
still not pocket sized is it? Compacts will always sell, because they
are small. The D40 is a smaller SLR, but its aint shirt pocket size!

You're missing the point. All those D40 buyers probably WOULD have bought a compact camera if it had the performance. But what's happened is that the camera makers have made a wide gap between the performance of even their top end compact and their low-end DSLR. So wide, that people are buying up.

This is actually a repeat of history. The same thing that is happening now with P&S and DSLRs happened with P&S and film SLRs. And there was a rapid run-up of low-end SLR buying then, too. At least until the compacts got to the size/price/performance expectations of the market. At which point the low-end SLR market collapsed almost as fast as it rose.

Most people are very ignorant of image quality, simply the number is
what most look at.

I think you sell "most people" short. They BOUGHT the P&S, they used it, it didn't deliver. Now they're sampling low-end DSLRs to try to get what they were missing, and, yes, some of that was image quality.

Well nikon didnt bag me did they? Lol

Nope. But they're bagging a lot of folk these days.

Back to the ignorance section here! Users might think they will be
better photographers with an SLR, but reality is..they wont.

Very true. Even true of many serious amateurs buying D300 and D3 bodies. Remember, my mentor took some of his most remembered shots with an FM-10 or equivalent. It isn't the camera that makes a great photo, though it can hinder the making of a great photo.

They can leave the auto stuff in, just put the motor back

You know, I just don't get that sentiment. The Nikkor world falls into essentially four camps:

• pre AI (the D40 can mount and use those lenses, unlike any other Nikon body)
• AI, AI-S, P (manual focus, so the issue of screwdrive still isn't relevant)
• old AF lenses, pre-D and D that haven't been updated (and here the screwdrive is relevant)
• new AF lenses, AF-I and AF-S

So in three of the four categories of lenses, the missing motor is irrelevant. In the case of the one category where it is, with very few exceptions (the 50mm and 85mm primes come to mind) the only person who would be bothered by it is someone who already has older Nikkors in that category. The typical D40 user buys only 1.2 lenses as far as I can tell from my surveys. And they're kit lenses (typically the 18-55mm and 55-200mm, but sometimes the 70-300mm or one of the longer 18-xx zooms).

And frankly, my favorite lens on the D40 is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM, which works just fine. That and the new 18-55mm and 55-200mm VR make for a perfectly fine set of options for that camera.

--
Thom Hogan
editor, Nikon DSLR Report

author, Complete Guides: D40/D40x, D50, D70s, D80, D100, D200, D1 series, D2 series
http://www.bythom.com

 

[sudirdjo]

some manual controls
return (as does metering with MF lenses). Put in a split screen
prism. Beef up the outer body slightly. And, yes, return the
screwdrive. THAT body would sell to existing Nikon mount users.

Nikon D30 ... I'd get one even without the screwdrive or even AF. ;-)

 

[AgentWD40]

I read somewhere ( but I cannot recall where )

Wow. That is very convincing.

Translation : You did a search and found out I was right. LOL

Whichever way you look at it, the D300 is selling
better than expected and is now being made at the same rate as the
40D was when it was introduced ( if the figures I recall reading are
accurate ). Has Canon increased production of the 40D? I've not
heard of them doing so. In fact, the 40D was subject to a cashback
scheme within 5 weeks of launch in Europe. Similarly the A700 is
also subject to a cashback scheme in the UK. The D300 on the other
hand is maintaining its launch price, is not subject to cashbacks
and Nikon are increasing production. So far, it sounds like a
success story to me.

Please stop your nonsensical speculations.

OK, let's deconstruct.

Has Nikon increased production of the D300? YES.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=26153445

Is it selling better than expected? Well, as they have to increase production, then that is a reasonable conclusion. Why else would they have to increase production?

As you have not provided alternative production figures for the 40D ( I'm betting you tried and failed ), is the D300 now being produced at the same level as the 40D was when launched. YES.

Has Canon increased production of the 40D? If they had, I'm sure you would have provided evidence. So, NO.

Is the 40D subject to a cashback scheme in Europe? YES. http://canon20thanniversary.onlinerebates.com/howtoclaim.aspx

Did the cashback start 5 weeks after the 40D's release? YES. Note the date as 1 Oct 2007. http://canon20thanniversary.onlinerebates.com/howtoclaim.aspx

Is the A700 subject to a UK cashback? YES. http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowArticle.action?articlesection=1&article=1196773883322&site=odw_en_GB

Is the D300 getting any cashback? NO. http://www.nikon.co.uk/sites/cashback/default.html See other Nikon sites for additional confirmation.

Is the D300 still selling for around its launch price? YES In the UK, some vendors have dropped their prices £50 below the lowest launch price. Nothing like the price plummet of the 40D.

Conclusion : 'Nonsensical speculation'? Nope, you lose.

Since the argument here is centered on the japanese market, let's see

Nope.

Since you snipped the quote, lets put it back in

Currently the 40D is outselling the D300, and 400D
overall sales is still better than anything from Nikon.

There we are.

There is no 'In Japan' in that statement. No limiter at all. Just a blanket statement that the 40D is outselling the D300.

Now just to be hammer it home a little more, I'll quote another bit from your earlier post http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=26392584 -

Notice how each time a new release goes into the market, there is a
boost in sales (at least in Japan).

Notice the rider in there? '(at least in Japan)'. So you weren't just talking of the Japanese figures. If so you wouldn't have needed to put that in would you?

what a picture teaches us:



The D300 peak was never higher than that of the 40D. In fact, it
seems to fall a LOT faster than 40D. This is expected because (i) of
the price differential (ii) every Nikon user knows that the D80
replacement will probably inherit all the main functions of the
D300... without the extra cost.

Please stop your nonsensical speculations. Sales of the D300 are good enough globally to raise production. In all probability, it is actually outselling the 40D globally.

Nikon's success hinges more on the sales of the D40, D40x and D80.
Most certainly NOT the D200 or D300.

And Canon's historic success wasn't reliant on the 400D? Here's news for you. Manufacturers sell more of their lower end product. Who'd have thought it eh?

You're not even close anyway. If you look at the top end, Nikon sold far more D2x than Canon sold 1d models. Nikon are currently making 12,000 D3 to Canon's 2,000 1Ds and 5,000 1D models. I'd call that success at both ends of the spectrum.

 

[K1000Photographer]

The big difference in weight between the D40 and the K100D is
actually battery. AA's are heavy.

D40 + batt at 522gr is still less than 100D sans battery at 565gr.

AS adds some. So do the focus motor and top LCD panel.
The latter 2 are musts for anyone fairly serious.

Is that so. Sounds like you haven't use both for a reasonable period
of time.

Have you ever compared it to a K100D? If the store ever changes the lowly alkalines in the K100D, it will AF faster, although with some extra noise. It is also a lot easier to access and change settings. If you ever wanted to change aperture, you can look at the K100D top panel and change it. There is no having to look through the viewfinder or pull it up on a menu that has some serious lag issues.

You can pick nits about body weight. I will suffer a couple ounces of body weight in order to not have to add on hundreds of dollars for heavier VR lenses. Then again, I can put on a pancake lens and get a pocketable camera. ;-)

 

[AgentWD40]

It's well known that when the XT came out, it was #1 selling dSLR
every month until the XTi came out. Then the XTi has been the #1
selling dSLR out of all dSLRs for sale - worldwide. The Drebel

Currently worldwide number 1? Figures to prove that please.

Not in Japan. D40 is number 1. http://bcnranking.jp/en/index.html

might have had the same success as being a #1 selller while it was
not replaced.

Nikon give their customers greater choice of models, so it is prefectly normal that individual Nikon models won't have the same peak figures as their customer base will be spread further.

 

[Alfisti]

and pretty much how I see it.

Oly and pentax especially need to re-think their lines, the entry level gear is almost too much camera for new users but not enough for the semi-serious shooter (like me).

Then there is this big gap to some bohemoth like the 10D or E-3, and really Canon do the same, nothing between the 400D and 40D and the size difference is staggering.

It's going to get worse too with Pentax adding yet more features to the K200D that new users will not know what to do with. They need a dumbed down K200D and then a semi serious K250D (or whatever) to cater to the serious amature that refuses to tote a camera large enough carry it's own postal code.

The big difference in weight between the D40 and the K100D is
actually battery. AA's are heavy. AS adds some. So do the focus motor
and top LCD panel. The latter 2 are musts for anyone fairly serious.

I think you're missing the point. There are essentially two types of
DSLR buyers: serious shooters and casual shooters.

The serious shooters buy as high as they can and anguish over every
little feature. I know because I hear from them constantly ; ). The
will pixel peep. They will note IS versus AS versus VR versus
none-of-the-above. They worry about dust. More is better with them,
so more megapixels, more features, more viewfinder, more everything.
The cost conscious will buy down (a D80 instead of a D300), but its
amazing how many of them do the opposite and buy up (a D3 instead of
a D300). Moreover, they're the one group that can be persuaded to
purchase again and again and again as they search for the perfect
camera.

The casual shooters just want to pick up their camera and shoot. They
want batteries that last a long time, they want simplicity, they want
big clear bright information, they want Auto ISO, Auto metering, Auto
focus, Auto everything. They DON'T want to read a manual. They don't
even want to watch a DVD if they can help it (but would prefer that
over a manual--hint, hint, camera makers). They are price sensitive
because they seem their DSLR purchase as being a big step up from the
auto everything P&S they were trying to use but weren't getting
something from (usually focus and high ISO).

The reason why Nikon and Canon are selling so many cameras is because
they've recognized what I just said and optimized their lines for
that. They've even gone further (Canon has always done this, even
back in the film days): "look, our low end auto everything DSLR
shoots football and other sports just like our pro stuff." They sell
low and high, and they try to have options that'll stretch the casual
folk higher (D80 versus D40x versus D40) or pull in the serious folk
at lower dollar amounts (D80 versus D200 versus D300 versus D3 right
now). Frankly, it's the D80 that's helped Nikon more than anything
else in this run-up against Canon, even though it sells in mid-pack
numbers compared to the D40 and Rebel. Canon sells low, medium high,
and high--they don't have a strong middle position that they can
upsell the casual shooter or hook the serious shooter that's strapped
for cash.

What I don't see Sony, Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic, or others doing is
managing the same process near as well. Some have too few models, and
all are not positioned quite right (that's not to knock the
cameras--many are quite good, perhaps better than the C and N
variants in some cases).

The other thing is this: you have to attract NEW customers to the
mount to do well long term. That's clear with Oly, since it's a new
mount to start with. But Sony and Pentax so far have only show that
they can convert a number of their established users to stay with the
mount. The intriguing thing to me is that Nikon appears to be holding
their old users, winning back a few of the switchers, AND attracting
new people to the mount. And I do mean new people. As in "new to
DSLRs."

--
Thom Hogan
editor, Nikon DSLR Report
author, Complete Guides: D40/D40x, D50, D70s, D80, D100, D200, D1
series, D2 series
http://www.bythom.com

--
***********************************************
Please visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti

Pentax Lens examples at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti/images_by_lens

Updated November 2007

 

[S Hess]

Canon obviously didn't want to go the route nikon did and have a $900
18-200 IS so they opted for a $200 18-55 IS and a $250-300 55-250 IS
that has quite good glass and all reviews and reports is they give
quite sharp images.

There are folks who don't want to change lenses; they don't mind
paying for an all-in-one solution. I know 'cos I talk to them. And
they end up choosing Nikon PRECISELY because Canon does not offer the
18-200 IS lens.

Notice that Nikon really pays attention to the needs of entry level
consumers with the plethora of lenses available: 18-55, 18-70,
18-135, 18-200 VR, 18-55 VR, 55-200 VR and soon 16-85 VR.

Only 2 of those are considered affordable to meet "entry" level consumers

---------------------------------
Colors of my world:
thw.smugmug.com
---------------------------------

--
http://www.pbase.com/shhe

 

[Fabio Amodeo]

Thom Hogan wrote:
[…]

D40 is IMHO a rather limiting factor.

To existing Nikon users with legacy lenses. Sure. Do they buy a D40? No.

[…]
Thom Hogan
editor, Nikon DSLR Report
author, Complete Guides: D40/D40x, D50, D70s, D80, D100, D200, D1
series, D2 series
http://www.bythom.com

As I said, nice to find your opinions back, Mr Hogan. Some of us thought that you found us members of DPR forums a bit boring.
Fabio

 

[Waldo_O]

Now, here comes the part where I'm going to agree with you ; ). Nikon
should take the D40 and make a second version of it. Imagine the same
size body and same internal digital components, but targeted at an
FM2n user. Most of the "auto" stuff disappears, some manual controls
return (as does metering with MF lenses). Put in a split screen
prism. Beef up the outer body slightly. And, yes, return the
screwdrive. THAT body would sell to existing Nikon mount users.

Well Thom, judging from the many posts on this forum and my own personal experiences, the lack of the screwdrive motor is a BIG deal for many. The 50 1.8d lens was the first lens I acquired after getting a D50 kit, and right after that a couple of 3rd party lenses that I could autofocus with. Is the 50 1.8 generally around at most of the local electronics shops? I doubt it, and even if it were, the average consumer would probably be reaching for another zoom even if they weren't already being nudged in that direction by the salesperson. But my point is, not all D40/D50 buyers were/are compulsive P&S upgraders. Some of us had some plan about future lens purchases.

I see no reason for Nikon to have removed the screwdrive other than it was a business descision to keep the D40 buyers buying Nikon lenses. There are definite advantages to having the AFS lenses as you know but that goes both ways - a consumer grade lens that wears out in a few years, perfect for Nikon.

I would be first in line if Nikon were to produce the camera you have outlined though I would want it about the size of a D50, maybe slightly larger. I have been wanting some sort of upgrade to the D50 for some time, not a more megapixels version with less DR and high ISO performance.

And thanks for all your input here and the great info on your site Thom, it has been very valuable to me.

Keith

 

[pwilly]

Now, here comes the part where I'm going to agree with you ; ). Nikon
should take the D40 and make a second version of it. Imagine the same
size body and same internal digital components, but targeted at an
FM2n user. Most of the "auto" stuff disappears, some manual controls
return (as does metering with MF lenses). Put in a split screen
prism. Beef up the outer body slightly. And, yes, return the
screwdrive. THAT body would sell to existing Nikon mount users.

That would be my next cam, a replacement for my FM.

Well Thom, judging from the many posts on this forum and my own
personal experiences, the lack of the screwdrive motor is a BIG deal
for many. The 50 1.8d lens was the first lens I acquired after
getting a D50 kit, and right after that a couple of 3rd party lenses
that I could autofocus with. Is the 50 1.8 generally around at most
of the local electronics shops? I doubt it, and even if it were, the
average consumer would probably be reaching for another zoom even if
they weren't already being nudged in that direction by the
salesperson. But my point is, not all D40/D50 buyers were/are
compulsive P&S upgraders. Some of us had some plan about future lens
purchases.

I see no reason for Nikon to have removed the screwdrive other than
it was a business descision to keep the D40 buyers buying Nikon
lenses. There are definite advantages to having the AFS lenses as you
know but that goes both ways - a consumer grade lens that wears out
in a few years, perfect for Nikon.

I would be first in line if Nikon were to produce the camera you have
outlined though I would want it about the size of a D50, maybe
slightly larger. I have been wanting some sort of upgrade to the D50
for some time, not a more megapixels version with less DR and high
ISO performance.

And thanks for all your input here and the great info on your site
Thom, it has been very valuable to me.

Keith

Keith
People need to learn to use both hands.
Cameras existed for a long time before AF.
My favorite prime is my 1979 28 2.8 AIS, No AF and No meter on my D70.

If you look at the way Nikon is leading Canon in Japan it is product bracketing. Nikon surrounds Canon's models with something better and something less.

They couldn't have made something as small or as cheep without yanking the screw drive.

--
Paul
Just an old dos guy

 

[pwilly]

--
Paul
Just an old dos guy

 

[Waldo_O]

Now, here comes the part where I'm going to agree with you ; ). Nikon
should take the D40 and make a second version of it. Imagine the same
size body and same internal digital components, but targeted at an
FM2n user. Most of the "auto" stuff disappears, some manual controls
return (as does metering with MF lenses). Put in a split screen
prism. Beef up the outer body slightly. And, yes, return the
screwdrive. THAT body would sell to existing Nikon mount users.

That would be my next cam, a replacement for my FM.

Well Thom, judging from the many posts on this forum and my own
personal experiences, the lack of the screwdrive motor is a BIG deal
for many. The 50 1.8d lens was the first lens I acquired after
getting a D50 kit, and right after that a couple of 3rd party lenses
that I could autofocus with. Is the 50 1.8 generally around at most
of the local electronics shops? I doubt it, and even if it were, the
average consumer would probably be reaching for another zoom even if
they weren't already being nudged in that direction by the
salesperson. But my point is, not all D40/D50 buyers were/are
compulsive P&S upgraders. Some of us had some plan about future lens
purchases.

I see no reason for Nikon to have removed the screwdrive other than
it was a business descision to keep the D40 buyers buying Nikon
lenses. There are definite advantages to having the AFS lenses as you
know but that goes both ways - a consumer grade lens that wears out
in a few years, perfect for Nikon.

I would be first in line if Nikon were to produce the camera you have
outlined though I would want it about the size of a D50, maybe
slightly larger. I have been wanting some sort of upgrade to the D50
for some time, not a more megapixels version with less DR and high
ISO performance.

And thanks for all your input here and the great info on your site
Thom, it has been very valuable to me.

Keith

Keith
People need to learn to use both hands.
Cameras existed for a long time before AF.
My favorite prime is my 1979 28 2.8 AIS, No AF and No meter on my D70.
If you look at the way Nikon is leading Canon in Japan it is product
bracketing. Nikon surrounds Canon's models with something better and
something less.
They couldn't have made something as small or as cheep without
yanking the screw drive.

--
Paul
Just an old dos guy

Paul,

Those are great suggestions, but have you ever tried manual focussing through a D50 viewfinder?

Keith
Just another old dos guy (with fading eyesight)