why would anyone want AF on a macro lens anyway?

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Mar 8 2007, 03:54 PM

I cannot imagine how many stock of D40 she could have had behind the shop

So that it can be used as a general telephoto?

Perhaps.

unless it's AF-S, i dont bother with AF normally...

They have to cash in on the noobs, their blood is sweeter and they are the ones most willing to spend spend and spend and if you notice, they are the one taking the slow step up, buying body after body, lens after lens and buying more as they move up the learning curve.

Now that is MONEY to big companies like Nikon! Who cares if some lenses become AF-S or not, I make good money elsewhere!

aiya... those without "x", go to nikon service centre upgrade it lor or ask them for D40x sticker and change it... hehe

kidding only la.. dont shot me ok soli soli.... *cabut*

Quick general focus, then manually adjust to perfection. With ring type AF-S this is so sweet.

Shooting portrait with AF-S using 105mm VR Micro really syok...
Who said macro lens only use to shoot macro???

henry: Dude...post some pics please....

How much u got it for ??

I am quite curious on how to take macro at 105mm. Whats the min range ?

Dont know what to talk ..
someone sound like fighting ...

don't know what to say , being nice to cut n paste from nikon.com.my to share the info for all forum kaki oso kena shoot.....

How many of D40 user here is complaining where D40x launching too fast ?? Especially those just bought D40 couple day before D40x lauch....pity man but too bad cannot compare a 10MP with 6MP camera...no way man

Seriously, I cannot predict what Nikon does sometimes. I kena hit by the Nikon D70s announcement last time when I was still selling cameras. Customer came back and screw me up telling I 'conned' him into buying the D70 weeks before the D70s came out, worst thing is ... he's got money and dun mind waiting for a better model to come out and he accused me of cheating him.

In the end, I had to dig out 'bad things' about a camera that I have not even seen myself to convince that the D70 was a better buy ... sigh ...

Camera models are designed and conceived months before they finally announce it and I really dun understand why would Nikon push out the 6MP version when the 10MP is well on the way UNLESS there is a major problem with the D40. Still, it won't justify changing the model to 'D40x'. So for those of you who think that 'I dun need 10MP' then you've made your cash worth, use your camera to the max, you've worked hard for it so be the best you can ... after all it's not about Nikon or Canon, it's about photography.

agree to the max!!!

Please click HERE for my 105mm macro shoot...

Min range? 0.3m...

---

Added on March 9, 2007, 9:49 amIf bought D40 why bother about D40x?
These 2 bodies is different...
They not like D70 and D70s...

D40 cheaper than D40x, bought D40 sure bcoz of the budget...
Nothing boh song ma...
Buy 1st syok, buy later save...

This post has been edited by HenryLow: Mar 9 2007, 09:49 AM

dun care if d40x got 10mp n iso100. if dat ppl is suck, the picture dat he produces sucks also...

i bought my d40 just 5 f***ing days ago bought it then came here to check the nikon thread and found d40x...

looks like me no luck... gonna stick with d40 (me beginer in dslr)... then upgrade later lor....

u bought D40 bcoz? budget rite?
then why say no luck?
u bought earlier mean u learn earlier...
i bought my D70s also a couple days b4 D80 announced...
chill...
coz sooner or later u still will upgrade even u bought D40x...

That very right Shiinkuro, its the photographer, not the camera. There is absolutely NOTHING (okok, u can print nicer BIG posters and shoot an additional half a frame per sec) a D40x can do that a D40 can't, so dun feel bad about ur purchase. In fact, feel good that u've saved USD200. Would u want a ~28% more real resolution (which u'll never notice until u start printing posters or billboards) for a whopping RM700 (at our current rate) more? In more fact, there are things u probably can do with a D40 than a D40x.

BTW.. ISO 100 in the D40x has the same noise as ISO 200 in the D40. Hence the reason why there is no ISO 100 in the D40 in the 1st place.

Wan an upgrade? 18-200 VR (note: ur 18-55 is already superb). SB-400 for indoor shots of people. Next upgrade? D200. Skip the rest.

its different in pricing, so whats there to complain? if nikon named it d60 or sth else, i'm sure it won't raise as much flak. in the end both are 2 different cams