Difference between Nikon D40 and Nikon D40X

[neha_gandhi]

Hi,

 

I am new to this forum

I am no professional photgrapher ...or for that matter, not even as good as non-

professionals.

 

Just that I want to buy a gift for a friend and I was confused between what SLR

should I go for.The camera will not be used for any specific kind of

photography.

Just for general use.

 

Can you suggest me some and also tell me the difference between a D40 and D40X.

 

Thanks a lot.

[juanjo_viagran]

the X have few extra MegaPixels..

 

remember, that camera Auto Focus ONLY with AFS lenses.

[elnoralouisa]

the difference is cost :)

The 40 is 6 megapixels, the 40X is 10. If the person isn't into photography, then get the 40. Also, just a note, as I am dealing with this with a friend, make sure the person wants a DSLR, and is willing to do the lens changing all the time (or willing to put out another several hundred for a lens). They might want a p&s better. Also, yeah, there is the lens restriction. You might to want check with the friend first, and make sure this is what they really want. It's not the camera for everyone. Otherwise, take them to a camera store, and say, hey, you have this amount of money to spend........

what lens were you planning on getting with it for them.

[sam_thompson2]

D40 has a better sync speed. 1/500 versus 1/250. Also the D40x goes down to 100 iso the D40 goes down to 200.

[andrew_fort]

I have been looking at the D40 and D40x for the past couple of weeks and have found from a few sources that the D40x is better at high ISO noise reduction, but image quality in general is the same between the 2. The D40x uses the D80 sensor, which takes amazing pics. The D40 takes pics that are just about as good, but you don't have the 10 MP sensor which allows you to crop in quite a bit closer. The difference between 6 and 10 MP is about 1.85x more picture area, allowing for better cropping. If you do macro, this comes in handy.

 

Another difference that we all know by now is the flash sync difference. 1/500 for the D40 and 1/250 for the D40x, because the D40x uses an all mechanical shutter. This is quite a difference, but only when you're using the flash, and 1/250 is still pretty quick. You may not need 1/500. I never did while using my D50. Besides, in a low-light situation, you're using a higher ISO setting which doesn't require a 1/500 shutter speed. I'm sure there are certain situations that would actually require a 1/500 shudder with the flash, most likely involving macro or an action shot.

 

Now, looking at the minimum ISO settings, the D40 being ISO 200 and the D40x being ISO 100, you will likely not see a difference in quality. In fact, if you compare an image from a shot taken from the D40x at ISO 200 (one step up from ISO 100) and a D70 pic taken at ISO 200, the D40x wins in quality.

 

Now, you could save money by getting a D40 and using that to get the 55-200mm VR, but in reality, it's not a fantastic lens and you would want to get a better lens anyway. Why not spend the extra to get the 10 MP of the D40x, use the 18-55mm II lens that it comes with and later on get the 18-200mm VR alone, or the 18-70mm (a fantastic lens), and a used 70-200mm f2.8 (a great lens for action and nature). Remember, VR does NOT stop action like an f2.8 lens can. It only stabilizes it to avoid blur. Using a proper tripod, this shouldn't happen anyway. VR is for the new lazy generation that doesn't want to carry a 30lb tripod. I would go for a 70-200mm f2.8 any day over an 18-200mm VR.

[neha_gandhi]

Thanks a lot Andrew for such a detailed answer.

I am a novice... so dint get much of the technicalities.

 

But,can I infer that if I am getting a D40 with lens type, I am good.

OR do you suggest going for the D40X?

 

18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens

Focal Length: 18 - 55mm

[dave_lee6]

There is nothing wrong with the D40. In fact, a couple of my friends have the D40 and they love it!

 

I'd go with the D40. 6mp on a DSLR is plenty. Use the money you saved to buy an extra lens or external flash. As was said above, the D40x will only offer you more cropping options, not better quality.

[andrew_fort]

The D40x does offer the better cropping options and better cropped enlargements. Say you have a flower you want to get a pic of and want to get a cool macro shot of the Pistils or Stamens (the small parts of the flower located where the pollen is). You will get a much closer cropped shot using a 10 MP camera than with a 6 MP. I used Nikon D50 which has 6 MP and I was occasionally frustrated by the limitation of 6 MP due because I wanted to get a closer crop.

 

10 MP isn't just nice to have when doing macro, it is also nice to use when doing nature shots of, let's say, birds or Squirrels, or any small creature. Using the 55-200mm lens would be nice, but there is in fact a significant difference in a close-cropped subject from 6 MP to 10 MP. That's almost (almost, not quite) twice as close of a crop.

 

Many people say that it's not about the MP, but I say "why isn't the D200 at 6 MP then? That's a great camera, isn't it?" If megapixels didn't matter then all of Nikon's cameras would be 6 MP. You can't say that it has nothing to do with megapixels but when it comes down to it, you will appreciate 10 MP over 6.

 

I build and use gaming computers, which use very expensive hardware. If I took 2 video cards and paired them up side-by-side and said "why does this video card have better specification and this one doesn't? They both play Half-Life 2 without lagging at all, so why is this one $550 bucks and this one $250?" In both cases, camera specs and video card specs, the numbers tend to not lie about the performance. A $550 video card with 768 megs of video memory with 128 stream processors will outperform a video card running with 320 megs of video memory and 96 stream processors. The better card will run that same game at higher framerates than the $250 video card, and this can be seen by just looking at the numbers. "Higher numbers are better" doesn't mean that a product with higher numbers instantly qualifies a product to be better, but if the quality associated with those numbers evinces better performance, then why not go with the product that does in fact outperform?

 

Then there's the "price/performance ratio" kind of thinkers, myself being included, that wonder if the [up to] $250 dollar difference between the 2 cameras justifies the results. Almost twice the megapixels for far better close-crops? The same sensor used in the D80 on the D40x (which gives spectacular image quality that is the same if not better quality than the D50 I sold)? Sure that extra amount of money saved could go towards the 55-200 VR, but wouldn't it make more sense to get the D40x and then get the 55-200 VR too? You don't regret the $250 dollar upgrade in the camera sensor.

 

Both the D40 and D40x lack the internal focus motor, so you're limited by lens choice with either decision for now, but Nikon will be steadily releasing more entry/budget-level AF-S lenses as time goes on. Why not go for the camera that produces excellent-quality pics with far better close-crop capability and just get the 55-200mm VR later? It comes with the 18-55mm II, and with a significant close-crop, you may not need the 55-200mm VR right away anyway.

 

Here is one single example picture of the D40 vs the D40x, showing the obvious gain in those extra megapixels. "6 MP Good enough"?

[andrew_fort]

Here's the D40 vs D40x pic, in reference to 6MP vs 10 MP (this isn't a quality-oriented pic but about crop value):<div></div>

[dave_lee6]

Andrew, he won't see any difference in quality between the D40 and D40x unless he is printing an image at poster size. Using your logic, he should buy a D300.

[andrew_fort]

My explanation isn't necessarily geared towards image quality but close-crop performance.

[sam_thompson2]

"Many people say that it's not about the MP, but I say "why isn't the D200 at 6 MP then? That's a great camera, isn't it?" "

 

That's pretty much what a Fuji S5 is, a lower megapixel D200 and its a very popular camera among certain circles especially wedding photographers.

[douglas_knisely]

The D40 is a bit more forgiving and I would fairly strongly recommend it to your friends over the D40x. While on the surface the 10 MPixel D40x would appear to offer better image quality and potential for cropping, in practice the resolution of recorded images will generally be less than 6 MPixels. In order to get sufficient sharpness to match the 10 MPixel sensors, you need to be using very good technique (including a good tripod) and probably better lenses than the consumer lenses that you are likely to use with the D40 or D40x. My opinion is that anybody interested in pursuing very high image quality is probably going to be looking for higher end features such as mirror lock up (or at least the D80's delayed exposure mode) and depth of field preview.

 

More importantly, the 6 MPixel cameras (D40 and D50, in particular) offer much better high ISO performance than any of the 10 MPixel cameras. Therefore, in practical shooting, they are much more forgiving because you can just turn on Auto ISO mode and forget about it. The results will be more keepers that look better without a lot of complex processing. Getting extremely good higher ISO images out of the 10 MPixel cameras requires more careful post-processing of RAW images. Getting low noise on the 10 MPixel cameras also requires much more accurate exposure, while the D50 and D40 provide pretty good image quality when significantly under-exposed (with less fussing in post-processing).

 

I would strongly recommend going with the D40 and putting the money into lenses, which will provide much more shooting opportunities.

 

By the way, I use a D50 and a D80, but for very different purposes. I reserve the D80 for serious shooting, RAW only with tripod, and with careful post-processing. The D50 is my clear choice for casual, walk-around and travel photography due to it's wonderful high-ISO (which is even better on the D40!).

[chrissy_mitchell]

Hi,

After reading some of your comments, I am worried that this may not be the camera for me.. almost intimidating. I basically wanted a camera that took wonderful quality pictures and would be able to capture action pictures. My brother and sister play sports and I would like to take good action pictures without being blurry. After ready some reviews I am almost worried that I purchased the wrong camera. Here is the package that I bought: "Nikon D40x 10.2MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm AF-S DX Nikkor Lens Outfit + Nikon 55-200mm ED AF-S Lens + Transcend 4GB 150x SecureDigital Card + High Speed USB 2.0 Card Reader + Nikon SLR Gadget Bag.