hello pros there,

i m now using nikon d50 , mainly i help people to shoot photos ( my hobby ).

recently , thinking of upgrade to 10 mp cam .

nikon d80 / d40x / eos 400d

which u guys recommend .

thanks .
.

the d80 is way out of the league of the other 2 i think.

but anyway, this is what i think about them.

the d40x,
its a really good camera for beginners i think, cos got a lot of information, built-in help, abit smaller. but the only thing is that it doesn't support autofocus on lenses other than AF-S or AF-I lenses. and it also doesn't have AE- braketing. so, if you currently have some AF-S or AF-I lenses, no problem on manual focusing, not doing HDR photography, have a tight budget, you may consider the d40x.

the d80,
although it's made out of plastic, it feels really tough. i've tried it b4 and trust me, the ergonomics are fantastic, at least for me. it feels nice to hold on, but its a little on the heavy side compared to the other 2 but you should get used to it eventually. to be short, this camera has more than everything a beginner and a hobbyist need, i think. if you have the budget to get a d80 and since you are currently using a d50, why not get this?

the 400d,
i've never tried this cam b4 but from what i've seen in the reviews, its more or less the same with the d80 only that it weight abit less, measures abit less, use different memory cards, dun have a secondary lcd, and most importantly, it has a sensor cleaner. in fact the only thing not so good abt this cam is that i've heard alot of ppl complaining abt its kit lens.

canon and nikon,
well, by comparing a lot of samples taken by canon and nikon dslrs, i think that i can come into conclusion that canon takes razor sharp pictures across iso ranges, good for sports i think while nikon manages better with colors,good for portraits and landscapes i think. so in the end its really up to what you emphasis more on.

the 6mp to 10mp jump,
in practice, it doesn't really make much of a difference unless you are printing poster sized prints. if you're just planning to have a 4x6 print with 300 dpi, 6mp is more than enough.

if mp count is really that matters, my recommendation for you is that since that you are considering the d80, currently using a d50 and might have some nikon lenses, why not get it?

this is just my recommendation to you. get more advice and then consider more.

Comparing D40x , D80 , 400d .

I can say that if you got the budget , get the D80 or if possible , get a second hand D200.
If you do alot of indoor shotting , yet going to rely on the kitlens first , go ahead with the 30D/40D.

You'll never go wrong with the D80 , D200 , 30D & 40D.

Why you wanna change your camera? If its to get higher MP, dun do it unless you are using your pics for printing anything bigger than an A4 size. My opinion is, stay with your D50 if its still working well for you and spend the money on buying other lenses.

D80 is not a very big improvement unless you want a bigger LCD screen, faster fps,and not wanted in-camera editing. Does this matter to you? I doubt it.

Dun go for D40x, I considered it downgrading rather upgrading since you've own D50. Its good for beginner due its small size and weighed lesser. The main point is it dun have built-in focus drive motor, so you cant AF with all your Nikkor non-AFS and Sigma non-HSM lenses. Dun think bout Tamron or Tokina either as they hardly have any lenses that can AF with D40x.

D200? Unless you are making money from your photos, other than that, its not worth the upgrade for normal shooter.

Canon 400D? Slightly better than D50 but smaller in size. I doubt you'll get comfortable in handling smaller camera after you've handle the bigger D50. ISO handling for both this camera almost on par with each other but the 400D have slightly upper hand.

Canon 40D? Obviously better than D50, no doubt bout it. But the price for its body only is roughly equals to the price of your D50 kit + 2 or 3 lenses. Who knows how much you can get from selling your D50 and the whole system off?

Just my 2 cents!

2nd your view..
that's what i told my friend who owns D50, and planning to upgrade.. apparently, the only choice that will show him obvious improvement in performance would be the D200, but it'll be overkill for normal shooters.. and jumping from nikon to canon, or canon to nikon after u invested in lens is definitely not worth it.. so think properly before buying a system..

Unless you want the freedom to crop a lot or you print up to A0 sizes.
There's no need for 10mp.

Don't get taken away by the camera manufacturer's MP marketing gimmick.

thanks a lot , i realli appreciate views from u all .

in fact , i print quite a lot of group photos in 8x12 size & possibly quite a number of family photos in 12x18 size .

so far , my d50 , can be said better than old time negatives result , coz it doesnt hav grains ,
but when i print some family photos in 12x18 size , it appeared not sharp la in areas especially 'eyes' ,

is it d MP matter or less of sharpening ?

but i doubt it is d MP matter
.

what lens are u using?
lens do make difference in terms of sharpness and overall quality of photos..

Yes. U definitely need more pixels.
8MP at least.

And b4 u print, increase one more degree of sharpening (after the u did the ori PP with desired sharpening level).

thanks for advice.

anyway, i didnt catch wat u meant by :"after the u did the ori PP with desired sharpening level" .

pls explain wats tat 'ori pp' . thanks.
.

i think he means "increase the sharpness 1 notch after whatever post processing before u print it"..

thanks.

i face d problem of lake of pixel / details eventhough i sharpen it.

anyway, in photoshop , wat setting of USM u guys familiar using ?
.

if u sure it's lack of pixel, then no other way than to get a better body..
there's no "1 setting for all" in USM, i adjust them based on what i see..

lolz...since you are oding 12x18 prints, MP DO play an important role here...get a d80 should be enough since all you are looking for is its MP as the main priority..dont get d40x. its a downgrade, not an upgrade

why lots of ppl say like tat le ???

eventhough its body / d look / features ...... not as good as d80 , but ..... it stil carries 10 mp CCD ba !

pls share yo opinions.

thanks.
.

anyway , wat price is d80 now ? with 18-135 lens ka ? wat bout body onli ?
.

This post has been edited by kvkk: Nov 4 2007, 11:37 PM

one main drawback is that d40x doesnt have internal focusing motor, which means any lenses that are not Nikkor AF-S/I and Sigma HSM, will have to manual focus on this camera... d50 is a better camera than the d40x...

do u know why it's named as D40 instead of D60? because nikon place it lower than D50. if it was an upgrade, it could be named as D60 instead. 10MP is another story.

get a Sony alpha lar.... nice quality also, and good ergonomics. why lar everybody must C or N.

check my multiply page for pictures (poison...lol!)

soulfly go everywhere to poison people with sony...

i am poisoning him with nikon

yeah, sony has good built, and good ergo, but i went C because of the ISO performance and the abundant of accesories available in the used market, and the bodies that i can possibly upgrade into when i feel the need. Sony on the other hand is still considered relatively new in the DSLR world(although they took over KM), with alpha 100 being their only body back then when i made decision. if alpha700 was launched earlier, maybe i'll have a second thought on which system to get.. N's ISO performance doesnt impress me either back then..

ya wo ,

makes sense oso a .....

then , i think d60 is probably d next model lo !

like tat , then i wait for it lo
.

lolz...he was trying to say that d40 IS d60...before d40 was out, there was rumours saying that d60 will be out..but in the end d40 came out... dunno whether they will come out with another d60 or not...

Instead of the usual nikon and canon, try K10d from pentax..a semi pro camera that won prestigious awards for being the best cameras in it s class.

I don't need to poison u or anything..try reading any reviews about k10d and found out why.

I agree with ya. The good part is it's priced almost the same with entry level DSLR. The not so good part is the extra lenses later on.

i second you

---

Added on November 6, 2007, 6:00 pmyup he is

i really think nikon is better, more flexibility
flexibility is the cause why slr invented with removable mount, isnt it?

This post has been edited by AbangCorp: Nov 6 2007, 06:00 PM