larrytusaz
Veteran Member
Great little d-SLR, though I prefer D50 in most ways.
I disliked the specifications of this camera when introduced, but all reviewers from here to DcResource to Ken Rockwell to Thom Hogan sung its praises, so I bought one in June 2007 as a "portable alternative" to my D50. After all, I was able to sell other "bits & pieces I wasn't using to finance most of the purchase, so why not.
I ended up liking it quite a lot. In fact, at first I sold my D50 because I wasn't using it much anymore and finances were tight. I later regretted this, though, and reacquired the D50 while still keeping this D40.
Its image quality is great. It is as responsive as you want an SLR to be, and while it is a small SLR it has a much better grip/feel than the Canon 350D/400D Rebel XT/XTi.
Glad to see that Nikon kept such Nikon d-SLR standard features such as quick-access to flash exposure compensation, the AE-L/AF-L button (great for turning it into a release-priority camera on the fly), the green-dot reset system, spot meter, ability to create folders in-camera, the quick "double-pump" method of deleting images.
It does improve on the D50 in that
*LCD at 2½" is better (obviously)
*Viewfinder is a bit better
*4-way feels more robust, OK in better location too
*Zoom-in/out during playback more straightforward
*ISO is always seen as long as "fake" status panel is active
*"Fake status panel" easily seen in dim lighting
*My Menus, to eliminate "menu clutter" from items you never use
It is a pleasant to use d-SLR, a perfect compliment to the D50. As a more advanced user, as opposed to "soccer mom" type, I'd choose the D50 over it if I had to keep only 1 (why I sold my 1st D50 and kept the D40 is beyond me), but as a secondary to back-it-up it's ideal.
Problems:
Any problem encountered have been things that I knew about going in.
First-on, the main/far & away drawback of this camera is, of course, the AF-S only lens issue. Nikon acted way prematurely, as fully half their CURRENT lineup at the time still consisted of non AF-S lenses. I used to manual-focus all the time without issue, but once you've had autofocus you have no desire to go back.
Forget about the excellent Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, the Nikon 50mm, Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, or the Tamron 18-200 if you want a "walk-around" on a budget (obviously the Nikon 18-200VR is better if you can afford it), or the Nikon 70-300G or Sigma 70-300 DG as affordable tele-zooms.
Yes, at the time, I only had the 50mm as a non-AFS lens (and I later sold it anyway) and later on got the 18-135 which is AF-S, but it still was a premature omission. Nikon should've waited until all the lenses out there were now AF-S (or HSM in Sigma-land, etc).
Also dislike the lack of hot buttons. While the info-nav system isn't as bad as I thought, it still is no match for direct access buttons like the D50 has. I also dislike that f-stop/shutter-speed and exposure compensation is fixed at 1/3 steps. I prefer ½ steps (I know, I'm probably the only one who does).
I disliked the specifications of this camera when introduced, but all reviewers from here to DcResource to Ken Rockwell to Thom Hogan sung its praises, so I bought one in June 2007 as a "portable alternative" to my D50. After all, I was able to sell other "bits & pieces I wasn't using to finance most of the purchase, so why not.
I ended up liking it quite a lot. In fact, at first I sold my D50 because I wasn't using it much anymore and finances were tight. I later regretted this, though, and reacquired the D50 while still keeping this D40.
Its image quality is great. It is as responsive as you want an SLR to be, and while it is a small SLR it has a much better grip/feel than the Canon 350D/400D Rebel XT/XTi.
Glad to see that Nikon kept such Nikon d-SLR standard features such as quick-access to flash exposure compensation, the AE-L/AF-L button (great for turning it into a release-priority camera on the fly), the green-dot reset system, spot meter, ability to create folders in-camera, the quick "double-pump" method of deleting images.
It does improve on the D50 in that
*LCD at 2½" is better (obviously)
*Viewfinder is a bit better
*4-way feels more robust, OK in better location too
*Zoom-in/out during playback more straightforward
*ISO is always seen as long as "fake" status panel is active
*"Fake status panel" easily seen in dim lighting
*My Menus, to eliminate "menu clutter" from items you never use
It is a pleasant to use d-SLR, a perfect compliment to the D50. As a more advanced user, as opposed to "soccer mom" type, I'd choose the D50 over it if I had to keep only 1 (why I sold my 1st D50 and kept the D40 is beyond me), but as a secondary to back-it-up it's ideal.
Problems:
Any problem encountered have been things that I knew about going in.
First-on, the main/far & away drawback of this camera is, of course, the AF-S only lens issue. Nikon acted way prematurely, as fully half their CURRENT lineup at the time still consisted of non AF-S lenses. I used to manual-focus all the time without issue, but once you've had autofocus you have no desire to go back.
Forget about the excellent Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, the Nikon 50mm, Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, or the Tamron 18-200 if you want a "walk-around" on a budget (obviously the Nikon 18-200VR is better if you can afford it), or the Nikon 70-300G or Sigma 70-300 DG as affordable tele-zooms.
Yes, at the time, I only had the 50mm as a non-AFS lens (and I later sold it anyway) and later on got the 18-135 which is AF-S, but it still was a premature omission. Nikon should've waited until all the lenses out there were now AF-S (or HSM in Sigma-land, etc).
Also dislike the lack of hot buttons. While the info-nav system isn't as bad as I thought, it still is no match for direct access buttons like the D50 has. I also dislike that f-stop/shutter-speed and exposure compensation is fixed at 1/3 steps. I prefer ½ steps (I know, I'm probably the only one who does).