Replacement Camera

[wandering]

I had a Nikon F2 and a Nikon D50 which I used mainly for my own pleasure as

well as some weddings for friends. Unfortunately, they were stolen a few

months ago.

 

I'd like to get a new dSLR, but I'm not sure which would be best. I loved the

simple controls and flexibility of the F2. I didn't have a problem with the

D50 controls - I preferred the hands-on feel of the F2 to the wheel, but I

didn't mind only having the one wheel. I did, however, miss a depth of field

preview (and at times the mirror lockup, but I'm aware of how rare that is on a

digital camera). The only other issue for me was that I almost always try to

use natural lighting, and I was often forced to use the flash (although I

realize most of this is in the lens).

 

 

The main issue for me with a replacement is both that I'm very much an amateur

and I don't have much money to spend. I've heard good things about the D40,

but it also doesn't have the DoF preview and only goes to ISO 200. The lighter

weight would also be convenient as I travel a lot, but it's not a big problem

(last March I took the F2 and three lenses with me for a week of hiking and

camping in Iceland, and never regretted bringing it).

 

On the other hand, I would at some point also like to replace my F2 if

possible, and the D200 would allow me to use the great older manual focus

primes. On the other hand, I could probably get a D40 kit as well as a new F2

with various lenses for the price of a D200.

[juanjo_viagran]

I'll say get a D200 and little by little buy the lenses.

[Matt Laur]

If you're the sort of person who actually knows what 'DoF' means, and understands that "mirror lockup" <i>doesn't</i> mean your mirror is somehow stuck... then, the D200 is the camera for you. It's also susbstantially more rugged/sealed, and if you're the sort of person who backpacks cameras around Iceland, there's no comparison between that and its cheaper cousins. And, as you point out, lots of lens flexibility, better image quality. And higher speed, and, and, and. You wouldn't regret the better body and waiting a few months longer to add to your lens collection.

[bruce_margolis]

Wow, the F2. That was my first Nikon body.

 

Matt, FWIW I went with a D80, not the D200. I liked the newer technology et al. I gave up the sealed body, 5 fps, etc, but in the end the D80 felt enough like the F2 that I could live with it.

 

Absolutely nothing against the D200. I could have paid a few hundred dollars more and been at least as happy, maybe more. But there is a world of difference between the D200 and the D40.

 

Bottom line, go with the D200 but if you need to compromise, stick with the D80. I suspect you will be disappointed with the D40 or the D40x. Read the specs on all of them. The D40 just will not give you what you say is important in a camera body.

[sandysocks]

You might want to look at the Fuji S5 as well. You can save so much by finding decades old lenses, that I recommend what you are doing. I have A D80 which I enjoy, but I find autofocus and autoexposure to be somewhat unreliable. Some older manual lenses have a wee bit of CA under certain conditions, (not too objectionable in my experience) but some are just superb.

[hayward]

Honestly, I'd buy another D50 if I were you. You can still find one somewhere, I bet. I shoot with a D200 most of the time, but use my D50 backup from time to time and love it.

 

I prefer the D50 to the D40 because you can't get AF with non AF-S lenses.

[rick_helmke]

You answer is in your last paragraph. You can use any AI or better lens on a D200 and you can buy MF lenses for pennies. I just picked up a very clean 35/2.8 AIS Nikkor for $30 and have 20, 28, 50, 85, 200 and 80-200 all for $75 or less each. All of them work on any of my F2's and the D200 with no loss of function. I'd say you can pick up a D200, a nice F2 and a bagful of lenses for well under $2k. Not chump change but it will keep you shooting for a long itme without having to buy anything else.

 

Rick H.

[elliot1]

I have d200's and a d40. If I needed a pleasure camera only, I would buy a d40 without hesitation. Picture quality is superb! The camera is light, small and easy to use. Focussing is very accurage. Even changing setting is fast and easy. You really need to try it to see if you like it.

 

For me, the viewfinder and monitor are too small on the d50. The d40 also gives slightly better photos and I believe has slightly better overall performance.

[briany]

The D40 isn't limited to ISO 200! I believe it goes to ISO 3200. Any speed film can do, the D40 can do better...