# Nikon model comparison needed



## On The Hook (Feb 24, 2009)

Up until now, we have been using a p&s and are now looking to get a dslr. We have been looking at the Nikon D40, D60, D90. Can you give some comparisons. Is one "better" than the others? the 40 & 60 seem to weigh the same, but the 90 is 5-oz heavier. Is the video capibility worth the extra weight? Are there other features that favor or eliminate one of these models? Are there any reliability issues with any of these models? Did any of them loose features or quality as the model # increased? Anyone have a used one that they no longer use and want to sell due to upgading?

Thanks, OTH...................................


----------



## Arlon (Feb 8, 2005)

Video of the D90 is not that good. My $100 P&S takes better video. There is NO auto focus for the video. Have to manually focus when in video mode. I thought it would be cool to have and have used it a few times but not a reason to buy the camera in my opinion. 

Because of the advances in software ann such, I'd stick with the latest model you can get your hands on. They are like computers and what ever you get will be obsolete 3 years from when it came out. 

I have a D50,70 90 and 200. D90 is my favorite. They all have their good and bad points. What kind of subjects do you intend to photograph?

Look at the new D5000 too..

D70s have sensor reliability issues. Others are pretty solid. 
D40/60 have to have new AF lenses with the focus motor in the lens. 
D50/90/200 all have motors in the camera and can use a 30 year old AF lens if you happen to have one of the old ones.


----------



## TheDingy (May 13, 2009)

I am a cannon guy through and through, used to have nikon, but as you advance and want better pictures IMHO go cannon. I have a 5dmkII with various lenses and come up with breathtaking shots.

Also always invest in the best glass that you can. I would prefer to have one L lens and deal with not having two lenses than having two sub par ones.


----------



## idletime (May 11, 2005)

Arlon said:


> D70s have sensor reliability issues.


This. My wife's D70 went down with this issue last week in Cabo, on the first day of the trip. Although, it had been a great camera up until that point.


----------



## On The Hook (Feb 24, 2009)

Great info, thanks. I was thinking about the cannon's but heard good things about the d40 & d60. Light weight, good quality. I'd like to really get into photos, but budget wise it will take a good while. So, that is why I was asking about these models. 

I'd be open to hearing about other high quality low end cameras. Trying to figure out which offers too little or too much is the biggest issue. I have little to no experience. She takes much better pictures than I do, but has taken a few classes years ago. I'm not ready to jump into the deep end, but don't want to start at the bottom either. 

There is so much technology that I don't know where to start. What features do I have to have, and what can I live without. As I learn, I'll figure out more, but currently have no benchmark to start from. I know I don't want something too heavy.

Is it better to buy a new mid level, or a used high level body? I know it is a never ending battle of the latest and greatest, but I just need something solid that I can build from, or that won't loose too much value when we trade up.


----------



## MT Stringer (May 21, 2004)

I'm kinda like Arlon, just on the Canon side of the road. Over the past few years, I've owned a Rebel XT, 20D, 30D, 40D and now a 1D MK III (built for sports shooting). I've tried to upgrade my lenses and finally got to the really high dollar ones. The 300 f/2.8 is $4100 new! GULP!

I like to shoot wildlife, sports (all sorts), and landscapes (vacation type stuff).

I agree with above, "always invest in the best glass that you can."

There are several good classified online like FredMiranda, and for Canon shooters, the POTN. I've bought and sold lenses and bodies to other members of the POTN and never had a problem.

Like mentioned above, the Canon 5D MK II has very good video. A lot of good reviews on that feature.

With all of that said, you might want to look at a used Canon 40D, It has a good feel to it. No video, but it shoots 6.5 frames per second, 10 MP sensor and several auto modes (like the other Canon bodies) plus the Tv, Av, and Manual modes.

A good flash is always a good investment for shooting indoors or for fill flash outdoors when you want to eliminate the shadows on a persons face. A Canon 430 EX II should fit the bill nicely.

Most of the late model cameras, regardless of brand, have more features than you will ever use.

Good luck in your search.
Mike


----------



## Arlon (Feb 8, 2005)

TheDingy said:


> I am a cannon guy through and through, used to have nikon, but as you advance and want better pictures IMHO go cannon..


We've done real well without the mines better than yours garbage on this forum... I used to have a canon, so what? It has way more to do with who's behind the camera than the camera. I have seen a few "breath taking" photos from P&S cameras. I'm still aspiring to that level. )-:}

You need to start posting some of those photos..


----------



## Foxtrot704 (Jan 25, 2008)

I have a Nikon D60 and have been pretty satisfied with it. However, after I bought I continued to research it and it turns out the the D40 is probably the better value for your money. If I could do it over again I would go with the D40 or step up to the D90. JMO. Here is a good website that has tons of info and comparison information. www.kenrockwell.com Good luck!


----------



## camowag (Aug 25, 2005)

I've been using the D40x (not sure it's still availble) for 2 years, no serious shooting, no issues so far. Love it for what i use it for.

M2C


----------



## Gator_Nutz (Sep 27, 2006)

I was thinking the same thing Arlon.
These same questions pop up every month or so. I started with the D40 and really enjoyed it. Arlon is right though. With the D40 you have to buy AF-S lenses that have the focus motor in the lens in order to get auto focus. It takes great pictures but it was not long before I needed more capability. It may be more than adequate to the occasional shooter. It takes great pics right out of the box and the price, if you can still find them, has to be exceptional. The real money will go in the lenses eventually. That is the most important part of the equipment side of things, to me anyway. And as was stated before, it makes more difference sometimes with who is behind the camera and not so much what kind of camera. Get what you can afford to start out. Then, If the bug really bites you, prepare to shed some cash.
James


----------



## On The Hook (Feb 24, 2009)

Fox & Camo,

I have heard good things about the 40 and that it is a good value and easy to use. I have already read a bunch of ken rockwells reviews and he has some good info.

Thanks


----------



## JPEG (Aug 26, 2007)

I started with a D70 and got a D40 as a backup. Ended up using the D40 most of the time. If $ is an issue get a D40 or D60 with the kit lens. If you can afford it the D90 would be a great place to start.

Check out Nikonians.org, it is a great resource.


----------



## On The Hook (Feb 24, 2009)

jpeg,

Thanks for the link, I was looking at that earlier as I found it while doing research. There is sooooooo much information, that it gets overwheming. I'm not in a rush, and will likely spend a bunch more time getting to know the brands and features better. Thanks to everyone for the help and insight.

OTH..............


----------

