dominic_jones

<p>If you go back and read the post I post directly above yours you would see why I'm ready to switch bodies. This has nothing to do with megapixels.<br>

Low light capabilities <br>

Faster FPS<br>

Better body build<br>

Better focus points<br>

Gaining AF motor</p>

<p>and such other things. The D40 is a beginner camera. I'm no longer a beginner. That's why I need a new body.</p>

<p>My mom offered me her 400D because she knew I wanted to get rid of my D40. I have used the 400D and enjoy it immensely over my D40. But I haven't really pushed it to its complete limits like I did with the D40.<br>

<br /> I could by a L lens and throw it on the 400D and still have some money left over. It's just undecided if that's a better upgrade rather than going for a D90 + 50mm f/1.8 or kit lens. I've also been looking at going the 40D/50D route instead which would end up being very similar to the D90 route.<br>

<br /> I just made this to get some input. While I know the 400D is great camera I know it's still on the lower side of Canon's line of cameras. So I was getting some input if I should make a medium jump or try to make a bigger one by going to the D90.<br /> I guess it's a preference of having a good body and a great lens *17-40 f/4 lens* or a great body and a good lens. Was seeing what people think is a better decision to help sway my choice.</p>

<p>Also like stated before the D40 is just not capable in lowlight. I shoot a lot in lowlight. That right there is enough reason for an upgrade for me. Also the D40 only has 3 focus points, another reason I want to upgrade. No AF motor in the D40 is another downfall.</p>

<p>I've used the D40 for about 3 1/2 years which has been far too long. I just feel as if my skills have outreached the D40 and time for upgrade. I'm not saying it's a bad camera. There just comes a point where it's time for change. I'm sure everyone knows that feelings.</p>

<p>Huh? The original question was a 400D and a<strong> Nikon D90,</strong></p>

<p>I had a Nikon D40 and now I'm replacing it.</p>

<p>With the 400D I would have the 18-55 kit lens, 55-200mm f/4.5 given to me. If I take the 400D I would buy probably 50mm f/1.8, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, and maybe a Rokinon 8mm Fisheye f 3.5 depending on funds. I'd be buying the Tamron to replace the kit lens.</p>

<p>With the D90 I would have just the kit lens.</p>

<p>The issue with an ISO over 200 with the D40 I meant is that unless it's the middle of the day I got less than favorable shots. The D40 just is not good at lowlight. Image quality on the D40 isn't horrible by any means. I just noticed it wasn't the best all the time.</p>

<p>I'm realize why the D40 doesn't focus certain lenses and which ones it doesn't. I had a 50mm f1.8 with my D40 and it was a good lens. Just constantly having to manual focus gets tiresome. Having the benefit of being able to autofocus is a nice feature. I'm not saying the D40 isn't a good camera. It just has many limitations and I met many of those limitations in my couple years of owning the camera. I'm ready to move onto something else.</p>

<p>The menu system and button layout on the D40 didn't bother me. So the 400D being similar is not a problem.</p>

<p>Another example of why I was ready to get rid of the D40 is that it does not support vertical battery grips. Having to switch to the infrared setting in the menu to use the vertical shutter release on my grip then switch back to use it normally was very bothersome.</p>

<p>At this point it just seems like deciding if the lowlight capabilities of the D90 are worth it over having the 400D and some glass.</p>

<p>First off let me start by saying I realize that they're two completely different cameras. I've just been put in a situation where I really don't kno what to do.<br>

Up until recently I had a Nikon D40 which I was completely tired of. I outgrew it and really dreaded using it. It wasn't up to standards with what I want to do. So I sold it now I have some money to play with. I originally intended on buying just a D90 with the kit lens which can be had for around 850 dollars. I was ready to make this decision until my mom offered me her Canon 400D with a kit lens and some normal type zoom lens. Now if I took that body I would have a lot more money to spend on some glass and accessories. Selling the 400D is not an option.<br>

I'm just wondering how big of a difference is the 400D over the D40? I mainly wasn't happy with image quality over an ISO of 200 and the fact that it couldn't autofocus lenses. <br>

So would you guys suggest a 400D with 2-4 lenses and all the accessories I would want. Or a D90 with just the kit lens, completely bare.</p>