Nikon D40 leaked

[farrukh]

New entry level dSLR from Nikon.

Amazing flash Sync:1/500

More info:

http://www.livingroom.org.au/photolog/reviews/nikon/nikon_d40.php

http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/05/nikon-d40-budget-dslr-pics-leaked/

http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/digital-cameras/nikon-d40-budget-dslr-images-leaked-212644.php

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm

[NAisBEST]

Ugh, Nikon at it again. I would never.....3 AF points?! What a disgrace. The only thing good about it is the MSRP, but id rather have a used XT anyday.

[jiggling_john]

its a nikon and i couldnt care less to be honest!

[DrPablo]

3 AF points?! What a disgrace.

My trusty 10-year old Canon Rebel G has 3 AF points -- and if you think the Tamron 28-75 autofocuses slowly on DSLRs, you should try it on the Rebel G!



I think if this rumor is true, the whole idea is for them to produce a DSLR in the $400 or less range.

If so, then good for them. A decade ago if you were a high school or college student you didn't have to spend too much to get an SLR; my Rebel G was $200 back in '96. But now if you want to shoot digital you have to pay a lot more.

As much as we talk about weather sealing and FPS and MLU and full frame, none of this changes the cardinal features of a bare bones SLR -- interchangeable lenses, through the lens composition, and manual controls. Many people whold never care about more than that.

[MrChad]

I started out shooting the Eos system b/c the Eos line had the least expensive DSLR in the Rebel-Digital (300D).

Had Nikon had this camera back in the 300D days, I know I would be a Nikon shooter today. Most all of the Canon lenses I have upgraded to have an equiv. or close enough Nikon model.

Canon perhaps should think about a Rebel-G digital or Rebel XT-light. A similiar priced Rebel might be the ticket, heck I'm not even above using the same cheap 6mp sourced by all other DSLR mfg. Save the premium price for the digic-CMOS DSLR's.

If the upgrade bug hits like it has on this forum the light weight DSLR will pay hugely.

[Billginthekeys]

nothing id get to excited about, unless it was like under $400. you can get a much more capable XT for that.

[Billginthekeys]

lol i love how they are reviewing it before its even announced. If they do make this model do you think canon would release a camera named the 40D, seems like it would get confused to much.

[CoolToolGuy]

If it does come out as the rumors have it, Ni*on risks a lot of backlash a year or two down the road - The rumor is that it can only use the latest AF lenses. When some of these folks buy it because they have some lenses laying around, or if they see a used lens on eBay or elsewhere, they could be mighty pi$$ed off.

Now I know that we see the questions all the time about FD lenses, but that is a clear difference in the mounts and designation (FD vs. EF). The Ni*on lenses are not so clearly defined, and the market for the D40 is not so tuned in to those subtle model differences.

Have Fun,

[farrukh]

If they do make this model do you think canon would release a camera named the 40D, seems like it would get confused to much.

Im also wondering the same. 50D would be nice and unique name for 30d successor i think.

[MrChad]

If it does come out as the rumors have it, Ni*on risks a lot of backlash a year or two down the road - The rumor is that it can only use the latest AF lenses. When some of these folks buy it because they have some lenses laying around, or if they see a used lens on eBay or elsewhere, they could be mighty pi$$ed off.

Now I know that we see the questions all the time about FD lenses, but that is a clear difference in the mounts and designation (FD vs. EF). The Ni*on lenses are not so clearly defined, and the market for the D40 is not so tuned in to those subtle model differences.

Have Fun,

I don't see this as an issue, the D70 and D50 couldn't use all the Nikon lenses either. The D200 was a big deal because it could use any F-mount lens. Nikon's AF-S glass works like our Eos glass with the motor drive in the lens not the camera body, putting the motordrive back in the camera body would make it difficult to hit that price point.

Anyone with a horde of Nikkor glass likely already owns a D200, this is for the newby. I doubt many first time DSLR buyers will need or want an 80-200mm f/2.8 AI-S lens.

[CoolToolGuy]

I don't see this as an issue, the D70 and D50 couldn't use all the Nikon lenses either. The D200 was a big deal because it could use any F-mount lens. Nikon's AF-S glass works like our Eos glass with the motor drive in the lens not the camera body, putting the motordrive back in the camera body would make it difficult to hit that price point.

Anyone with a horde of Nikkor glass likely already owns a D200, this is for the newby. I doubt many first time DSLR buyers will need or want an 80-200mm f/2.8 AI-S lens.

One of the arguments that is frequently thrown around is that Canon changes mounts "Every 5 years" or some such, while "All Ni*on F-Mount lenses fit any body back to the '50s", and that is a supposed argument to go Ni*on. Ni*on has relied on its name as a reason for increased price points for some time, and many folks go there for the name (After All, Paul Simon put the Ni*on name in a hit song, and nobody ever did that for Canon) :lol: :lol: Now it is Ni*on's turn to take the hit on the change in mounts, and they are no longer Number One - could be a significant event.

The reason I imply a delayed reaction is that Joe Sixpack might be buying a D40 with the intent of getting some of that Ni*on glass, which is very good quality, and find out the myth is no longer true. The reaction could be to bail on the D40 and join the Canon fold, find this site, and catch "L" fever. :lol: :lol: Of course, by then he may have gone the D200 route so who knows. :confused:

All of which is one man's opinion (This is, after all, the rumor forum).

Have Fun,

[silverhalide]

The reason I imply a delayed reaction is that Joe Sixpack might be buying a D40 with the intent of getting some of that Ni*on glass

Joe Sixpack doesn't buy a camera "with the intent of getting some that glass." Joe Sixpack might buy the D40 kit with the 18-200, but chances are he's not going to buy much else. If he's buying the D40, he's really not going to make his decision based on plans for getting some of that legendary glass. (He may "know" Nikon makes good lenses, but that's a slightly different motivation.)

E.

[CoolToolGuy]

Joe Sixpack doesn't buy a camera "with the intent of getting some that glass." Joe Sixpack might buy the D40 kit with the 18-200, but chances are he's not going to buy much else. If he's buying the D40, he's really not going to make his decision based on plans for getting some of that legendary glass. (He may "know" Nikon makes good lenses, but that's a slightly different motivation.)

E.

Oh, I don't know - I'll bet there are a few folks on this board that started out as a "Joe Sixpack", and now find themselves swimming in Red rings. . .

But I could be wrong. . .

Have Fun,

[MrChad]

Oh, I don't know - I'll bet there are a few folks on this board that started out as a "Joe Sixpack", and now find themselves swimming in Red rings. . .

But I could be wrong. . .

Have Fun,

Didn't those red ringers also buy a 1D's to go with them there rings too?

Canon also had the claim that any Eos lens would fit any Eos body, EF-S shot that one in the foot. :)

I suspect if you own a D40, the 17-55DX and 70-200mm VR will both work just fine. Most of the glass that won't fit the D40 isn't still readily sold or too popular. The Nikon lineup has been upgrading slowly too. So buy in large most of the lenses I would say are popular from our end are already available as an AF-S Nikkor as well.

Again if Canon could re-sell (re-body) the guts of the original 300D, or Drebel engineer the original D60 if need be, or use an off the shelf Sony chip to make a $400 or lower D40 fighter I think it would be a good think. Since unlike the Nikon all Canon lenses would fit the new body.

[davidfig]

This is a strange turn of events. A Nikon less expensive then canon.

[JaGWiRE]

This is a strange turn of events. A Nikon less expensive then canon.
I was at my local camera store today, apparently it was officaly released today or something and will only take some certain lenses or something, I don't know as I'm not a Nikon user. I don't know though, who cares about the size of your DSLR, all of the Canon ones below their professional line are pretty small imo, and I mean you can't put an SLR in your pocket anyway cause the lens is too big.

[MrChad]

I was at my local camera store today, apparently it was officaly released today or something and will only take some certain lenses or something, I don't know as I'm not a Nikon user. I don't know though, who cares about the size of your DSLR, all of the Canon ones below their professional line are pretty small imo, and I mean you can't put an SLR in your pocket anyway cause the lens is too big.

It will take all the Nikkor F-mount glass, it will only AF however with AF-I and AF-S type lenses. This isn't that big a deal.

This camera's man goal is to look more tempting then the Rebel XT or XTi on the shelf at Best Buy and other large box stores. And IMO it will do that for the first time DSLR user.

[canoflan]

Those that know a little about dSLR's however, will count this as a big deal since the Rebel's can take all Canon glass, essentially.

[JaGWiRE]

It will take all the Nikkor F-mount glass, it will only AF however with AF-I and AF-S type lenses. This isn't that big a deal.

This camera's man goal is to look more tempting then the Rebel XT or XTi on the shelf at Best Buy and other large box stores. And IMO it will do that for the first time DSLR user.
I don't think you should be an SLR user if you are not willing to go on the net and research what to buy, before buying, heh. SLR isn't a point and shoot, whatever company you go with, your sticking with more or less.

[MrChad]

I don't think you should be an SLR user if you are not willing to go on the net and research what to buy, before buying, heh. SLR isn't a point and shoot, whatever company you go with, your sticking with more or less.

I've been shooting SLR's long before the internet or digital existed. My main criteria in equipment was always system convenience.

I have a closet full of Pentax K mount and Canon FD mount glass because other friends of mine had that gear which allowed us to change lenses. Had I known more Nikon users when I went AF I might have been more tempted to go that direction. As is I knew more EF users, most had Rebel gear. Likely inpart because the Rebel line was very affordable.

Nikon might be on to something here. I know quite few folks shooting D50's because they had the lowest on the shelf price at one point when getting into DSLR's. The D40 likely will only go to re-enforce that position. Do you really think most Rebel digitals sold ventured much past the kit lens and a cheap second tele?

[Billginthekeys]

Those that know a little about dSLR's however, will count this as a big deal since the Rebel's can take all Canon glass, essentially.
actually its the complete opposite. nikon has never changed its mount, so they can still use the same lenses they always have been able to. canon on the other hand can only nativly use EF glass, so therefore nikons can actually use a lot more glass.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Still re-inventing the entry level 6mp DSLR ?

[CoolToolGuy]

actually its the complete opposite. nikon has never changed its mount, so they can still use the same lenses they always have been able to. canon on the other hand can only nativly use EF glass, so therefore nikons can actually use a lot more glass.

Not quite true - the lens may mount, but AF will only work with the latest Ni*on lenses. For the large majority of D40 buyers, the older lenses would be "broken", and they would not know how, or care, to use them.

The D40/Rebel analogy, however, is otherwise valid.

Have Fun,

[MrChad]

Not quite true - the lens may mount, but AF will only work with the latest Ni*on lenses. For the large majority of D40 buyers, the older lenses would be "broken", and they would not know how, or care, to use them.

The D40/Rebel analogy, however, is otherwise valid.

Have Fun,

You think someone with a large collection or even a small collection of older AF type F-mount Nikkor lenses is only now looking at the D40 for the first time? If you have any appreciable amount of older glass I'm sure the D200 was actually the water shed mark for those users. Given all the content the D200 had for supporting older so called "classic" Nikkor glass.

None-the-less, these new lenses are not broken, they will meter and function perfectly well. The camera body simply lacks the AF drive motor gear needed for these older lenses to AF. They should MF just fine.

Most all new 3rd party digital specific lenses should work great on the D40, which given its price point isn't unexpected that a great many value shoppers might not look to those types of lenses.

[radiohead]

Well Sigma's HSM glass will, but wrt to Tamron and Tokina I'm not aware of them having any anything other than screw-drive glass. So, pricier Sigma HSM and any Nikon AF-S are fine - but how many D40 owners are going to look further than, say, the kit 18-55/18-70/18-135 lenses? And how many D40 owners will pony up £500 for the Nikkor 18-200mm (IMO probably the ideal match for the body).

I'm still far from convinced that leaving out the AF motor was wise - if they are dropping the D50 (which would be madness) - that leaves a large number of fine Nikkors that won't AF, and how many D40 buyers are seriously going to want to MF, particularly if as many suspect this body is to clean up some P&S shoppers?

If I was still a Nikon owner I might have looked at this for street and low-light work, but I'd be less than impressed to find out my 85/1.4 or 135DC were MF only.

[MrChad]

Well Sigma's HSM glass will, but wrt to Tamron and Tokina I'm not aware of them having any anything other than screw-drive glass. So, pricier Sigma HSM and any Nikon AF-S are fine - but how many D40 owners are going to look further than, say, the kit 18-55/18-70/18-135 lenses? And how many D40 owners will pony up £500 for the Nikkor 18-200mm (IMO probably the ideal match for the body).

I'm still far from convinced that leaving out the AF motor was wise - if they are dropping the D50 (which would be madness) - that leaves a large number of fine Nikkors that won't AF, and how many D40 buyers are seriously going to want to MF, particularly if as many suspect this body is to clean up some P&S shoppers?

If I was still a Nikon owner I might have looked at this for street and low-light work, but I'd be less than impressed to find out my 85/1.4 or 135DC were MF only.

Do you think $1000+ /each lenses are the reason for this camera? I guess you could always snag a D50 or D80 while supplies are still available then, right?

[radiohead]

No, but does that mean that Nikon was right to exclude owners with them? I don't think so.

To be honest, with the lack of features compared to the D50, and the crippled body, I'm struggling to see the reason for the D40 at all. The D50 aces it and, for now, is cheaper.

[CoolToolGuy]

You think someone with a large collection or even a small collection of older AF type F-mount Nikkor lenses is only now looking at the D40 for the first time? If you have any appreciable amount of older glass I'm sure the D200 was actually the water shed mark for those users. Given all the content the D200 had for supporting older so called "classic" Nikkor glass.


My point is that the majority of D40 buyers don't have any knowledge of what an "AF-S" or an "AF-I" lens is, but may wind up buying or inheriting a used Nikkor under the mistaken belief that "all Nikkor lenses work - back to 1959". Then when it doesn't autofocus it is "broken." ;)

Have Fun,

[MrChad]

No, but does that mean that Nikon was right to exclude owners with them? I don't think so.

To be honest, with the lack of features compared to the D50, and the crippled body, I'm struggling to see the reason for the D40 at all. The D50 aces it and, for now, is cheaper.

I'm not sure that you can say the D50 is cheaper since we are comparing a D50 (street price) to a D40 (MSRP price).

I guess I fail to see the lack of a motor drive as a downfall, the lenses can and will work. I can't say that about my FD glass. Seeing that Canon doesn't have a body this cheap I'm not sure I will call this a sham either. This camera is a good idea most of them sold likely will see nothing but the kit lens. And 99% of the lenses now in stock at most stores will work just fine with the D40.

[radiohead]

Then I guess we agree to disagree.

:)

[MrChad]

Then I guess we agree to disagree.

:)

Well fine then, I think we were the only two keeping the thread going anyhow. :lol:

[radiohead]

:mrgreen: