P&S vs. D40 and the future and 6MP Nikon DSLRs

[shuo_zhao]

Hi everyone,

 

I currently need to get a camera that's small and light enough to be easily carried around while riding a bike and hiking. I

have a D300, but it's too heavy (if not also too big) for this purpose. Now I have to choose between buying either the D40 or

some sort of relatively compact mid-grade P&S. From most perspectives, I think the D40 is a far better choice comparing to

P&S with their much smaller sensors. But the D40 is a 2 year old camera, and I think I will be paying to help Nikon clear out

their old inventory. I once owned a D40x (which I later sold to finance the purchase of a lens), I liked the camera overall,

and most of its shortcomings were compensated with the purchase of the D300.

 

As of now, I think 6MP is all I need in this lighter camera. But with Nikon's recent introduction of newer models such as the

D90, I'm wondering whether a smaller camera (D40's successor) with the newer sensor and processing technologies will

soon be announced, and whether it will remain at 6MP. If the new cameras all have 10/12+ MP, then the D40 is obviously

the best choice for me available (it's cheap, good, and doesn't have too many useless pixels for what I want it for), and I

should go ahead and buy it. But if more 6MP cameras will be introduced with the newer generation electronics, perhaps I

should wait or buy a P&S (for now).

 

Since I got the D300 for serious work and applications that require more MP, all I really want is a good light weight 6MP

camera for snapshots while on the go.

 

So should I just go for the D40? or wait for its low MP successor (it's probably not going to happen)? or just get a P&S?

 

Thanks for your educated comments and suggestions.

[craig_gillette]

I wouldn't expect any new 6 mp dslrs from Nikon. The D40x replaced the D40 and the D60 is replacing it. While in a technical sense, 6 mp may be all many people need, it's not going to sell in the current markets. There are a lot of digicams out there which will do reasonably well and have a lot of zoom range that will be lighter than dslrs and especially a dslr with similar focal length range. But the digicams will also require compromises over higher iso noise, focus speed, shot to shot speeds, etc. While most of the power behind any given picture comes from the photographer's skills, etc., there are some subjects or conditions that really are more suited to dslr capabilities.

[dave wyman]

Check out the Panasonic Lumix TZ6 - small enough to fit in a bike jersey pocket, and it comes with a zoom far greater in reach than the 18-200mm VR Nikon.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

My son has a D40 that I've used on multiple occasions. It's a great camera for the price.

 

I wouldn't worry about what Nikon may, or may not, launch in the coming months. The image quality of the D40 is way beyond what you'll get from the tiny sensors on p&s cameras. And you can always sell it if, at some future time, you want the latest and greatest small Nikon DSLR.

[ronald_moravec1]

MP is an advertising number. 6 is more than enough for 8x10 prints.

 

Unless you are care and do your own printing and retouching, a D40 is all the quality you can take advantage of.

 

For a light weight vacation/outing camera, it is perfect.

[Peter_in_PA]

I also think that 6MP cameras are all in the past. So get a D40 (great small size and great in low light) while you can!

[photo5]

I'd second checking out a Panasonic point and shoot. I've just bought a 10mp one and love it. Granted, it's no Nikon DSLR, but it's tiny and has a 25mm wide angle lens (4x zoom out to 100mm) and can shoot HD (720p) video.

[shuo_zhao]

>> "I also think that 6MP cameras are all in the past. So get a D40 (great small size and great in low light) while you can!"

 

See that's what I been thinking, but I'm just too sure whether the 6MP DSLR will be updated with the newer D300/D90 generation of technologies.

 

The problem w/ P&S right now is that I don't feel comfortable using them anymore.

[eric_arnold]

have to agree with Peter. 6mp cameras are a thing of the past. the d40 is destined to be a cult classic like the D70. it wouldnt be a bad idea to get one now while there's still stock left.

[StuartMoxham]

I would doubt that Nikon would make anymore 6mp cameras but your guess is as good as mine. I personaly feel that 6mp is a good figure for normal average photography if you don't want to print too large. I still get good prints from my 2.75mp Nikon D1h so if you want a d40 then why not get one while you can.

[b_c12]

Yes, indeed, if you have any interest in the D40, get one now. It is not just a superb camera for the price, it's a

superb camera period. The 6MP sensor is an advantage in many respects.....fewer pixel sites crammed on the

sensor (which is the same physical size sensor as any other DX Nikon), leading to very respectable high ISO

performance, simple user interface, smaller file sizes, compact size, as much automatic or manual control as you

want to have, and great IQ.

 

I've only printed up to 8X10 on mine, but I don't see how one could ask for better performance at that print size. I

suspect that one could go somewhat larger and that *most* of the population would find the prints more than

satisfactory. However, I doubt many have frequent occasion to print larger anyway.

 

There is an argument about higher MP giving more latitude in cropping, and that's certainly true. You can still do

reasonable cropping with D40 files. It's not a big concern for me, however, because I crop the old fashioned way -

compose properly, cropping in the viewfinder before I press the shutter release!

 

Get one before they're gone!

[shuo_zhao]

It's upsetting that Nikon seems to be caught up in the MP frenzy just like almost all other manufacturers. If they just slightly refresh the D40 with the newer technology, the camera may continue to "sell like hot cakes"; and a price point around $300 for the new camera may still be profitable for Nikon.

[b_c12]

Well, Nikon DID "slightly upgrade" the D40 with some new technology...twice already. The first was the D40x which

increased the sensor to 10MP. The latest is the D60, also with 10MP and a few other tweaks like dust reduction,

etc. All three have the same compact body size, and all are great cameras. The D40x is pretty much gone now,

however, leaving the D40 and D60 from which to choose. The virtues of each can be argued back and forth, but in

reality they are essentially the same camera from a practical standpoint....except the D40 kitted with an 18-55 non-

VR lens is about $150 less expensive than a D60 kitted with the VR version of same. I don't think you can go

wrong with either, frankly, but the price of the D40 puts it in the "phenomenal DSLR bargain" category IMO.

 

As for a $300 pricepoint, heck, the D40 kit is within spittin' distance now @ $440.

[ptkeam]

Well, as far as 6mp is concerned --- I'm really happy with my good ol' "cult" D70. I've made beautiful 16x20's from well exposed images.

I think that other considerations such as proper exposure, good camera handling and good glass can be just as important as megapixels.

I'd LOVE to have a D3 -- who wouldn't -- but I think I'll hang on to my $5,000 instead -- especially in today's economy.

I've looked at the D80 and now the D90 and except for the extra megapixels don't see a really compelling reason to junk my two D70's just yet.

Heck, I've seen D70's go for $250. on eBay lately -- this is for a body that cost $1000 just four years ago.

[shuo_zhao]

Thanks guys.

 

I just got a D40 for $445.