Nikon D40 Vs Canon Rebel XT

[TheAviator]

So the Rebel XT has 8MP's where the D40 has 6MP's. The D40 has a larger screen. They both come with the standard 18 - 55 lens.

I'm coming down to buy my camera(I want to have lots of time learning the camera before I go to Europe), and I'm not sure which to go with. I always hear good things about Canon and the XT, but I've also heard that the Nikon D40 is good as well.

I was wondering if anyone here would have an idea based off their knowledge of these 2 cameras. Suggestions and comments would REALLY be helpful. Thanks guys.

Also, if anyone knows of a camera that is 200 dollars or so more, and will get better results as far as image quality goes, please list it, I would really appreciate it.

[mattdm]

Well, as I mentioned earlier, the D40 is reputed to have a somewhat better kit lens. But I really think the main difference comes down to feel. You need to get into a camera store and handle both of them for a while.

[TheAviator]

Well ya, I did that at Ritz, felt both the Rebel XT and the D40...Both were fine with me. So other than size and feel, they both come down to the same image results, or close to?

[mattdm]

In my opinion, they're in the same ballpark. I'm sure you can find people with very strong technically-detailed opinions arguing for either. I've seen awesome photos from both.

On the technical side, though, dpreview actually did side-by-side studio-sample images from both of these cameras in their D40 review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page21.asp). That may or may not help you decide. (Although note that they're not using the kit lens for that.)

If you're interested in going up $200 in price, you might throw the newer Canon XTi into the mix. But I'd say spend that money on accessories instead.

[Honest Gaza]

Harry Chapin went flying in his taxi.

[BryanMsi]

If you don't have any investment in lenses and are starting from scratch, you can really choose either one. As others have said, it really depends on which you prefer.

This is a REALLY broad generalization, but I would guess the Nikon will handle "better" and get the exposure right more often while the Canon will deliver more resolution and smoother pictures (less noise). As Ken Rockwell often says, the Nikon is the camera he'll use 90% of the time while the Canon is the camera to use if you carry a tripod or shoot prints for lab comparisons. That sounds about right.

You really can't go wrong either way.

[RichNY]

As Ken Rockwell often says, the Nikon is the camera he'll use 90% of the time while the Canon is the camera to use if you carry a tripod or shoot prints for lab comparisons. That sounds about right.


Ken is to Nikon as ___________ is to Tamron.

Don't trust what you read on Ken's site- it is just plain wrong.

Q. Do you know the difference between Ken Rockwell and a used car salesman?
A. A used car salesman knows when he is lying.

[murrays]

Ken is to Nikon as ___________ is to Tamron.

Don't trust what you read on Ken's site- it is just plain wrong.

Q. Do you know the difference between Ken Rockwell and a used car salesman?
A. A used car salesman knows when he is lying.

So Ken must be lying when he states that he chose to take his Nikon in the delivery room with him when his son was born?? :rolleyes:

Yeah, take Ken's advice with a grain of salt, just like anything else you read on the internet. OTOH, don't dismiss an opinion simply because you don't agree with it.

-murray

[some guy]

I'd rather buy a used D50 than touch a D40. 3AF, 6MP, crappy feel.... D40 is marketed to the newbie. It is not scaleable unlike the XT or the D50. 3AF.... geez even my old 35mm EOS had more than 3AF! How low can Nikon go these days? :rolleyes:

[mattdm]

I'm sure they're hoping even lower. It's not a D80, but it's not meant to be.

The D50 is the same 6MP, and while it's got more autofocus points, it's an older generation and slower. I'll take "better" over "more". As for "crappy feel", if you don't like smaller and lighter, okay, whatever then.

[aparmley]

So Ken must be lying when he states that he chose to take his Nikon in the delivery room with him when his son was born?? :rolleyes:

Its my understanding delivery rooms do not allow tripods - OSHA regulations. :D

[forno]

OT, what the hell is he doing with a camera in the delivery room, he should be attending to more important things that taking pics at that junction!:rolleyes:

[Nickcanada]

If you don't have any investment in lenses and are starting from scratch, you can really choose either one. As others have said, it really depends on which you prefer.

This is a REALLY broad generalization, but I would guess the Nikon will handle "better" and get the exposure right more often while the Canon will deliver more resolution and smoother pictures (less noise). As Ken Rockwell often says, the Nikon is the camera he'll use 90% of the time while the Canon is the camera to use if you carry a tripod or shoot prints for lab comparisons. That sounds about right.

You really can't go wrong either way.


I don't understand why Canon's are the cameras to use if you have a tripod:confused: :confused: They have better high ISO performance then Nikon. I thought that was one of the main draws to the brand.:confused: :confused:

[murrays]

OT, what the hell is he doing with a camera in the delivery room, he should be attending to more important things that taking pics at that junction!:rolleyes:

I've got some pictures of my daughter within minutes of her being born. Isn't that what cameras are for, preserving memories?

-murray

[murrays]

I don't understand why Canon's are the cameras to use if you have a tripod:confused: :confused: They have better high ISO performance then Nikon. I thought that was one of the main draws to the brand.:confused: :confused:

From: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/5d-d200.htm

I'll get into the details, but to keep it short, I prefer my D200 for most everything. I only whip out my 5D for ultra-wide and fisheye photography, or for use on a tripod. Of course my favorite images are those I make with ultra-wide lenses, so we have a paradox and I have two cameras.

My D200 works far easier and faster, meaning I get better images of real things. My 5D has higher technical quality, for the few things that wait for me to make adjustments on a tripod.

House on fire? I'd grab my D200, either from my own burning house if I only could grab one camera, or use my D200 to photograph a fire. Test charts, lazy tripod shots or ultra-ultra-wide shots? I'd grab my 5D.

I'd be interested to hear pros vs. cons of this opinion rather than a blanket "it's all just a pack of lies".

-murray

[forno]

I've got some pictures of my daughter within minutes of her being born. Isn't that what cameras are for, preserving memories?

-murray

As long as it doesnt interrupt with actaully experiencing the moment;)

[cpaussie]

OT- I took my camera in the delivery room to, but it took me longer than a few minutes before I took any photos, more like half an hour.

[aparmley]

So the Rebel XT has 8MP's where the D40 has 6MP's. The D40 has a larger screen. They both come with the standard 18 - 55 lens.

I'm coming down to buy my camera(I want to have lots of time learning the camera before I go to Europe), and I'm not sure which to go with. I always hear good things about Canon and the XT, but I've also heard that the Nikon D40 is good as well.

I was wondering if anyone here would have an idea based off their knowledge of these 2 cameras. Suggestions and comments would REALLY be helpful. Thanks guys.

Also, if anyone knows of a camera that is 200 dollars or so more, and will get better results as far as image quality goes, please list it, I would really appreciate it.

What types of photography interest you?

Whats your budget?

Have you considered Nikon and Canon's lens system?

Have you considered Nikon and Canon's Flash system?

You'll be buying into either company's lens and flash system. Its important to do your homework and find out which will fit your style better.

My advice is to save a little more and take a look at the D80 and the 30D. These two cameras are worth purchasing - maybe even the D200 as well. I think you'll feel you got your money's worth having purchased either of those cameras. But will need more information from you before we can be of better assistance.

[Nickcanada]

From: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/5d-d200.htm



I'd be interested to hear pros vs. cons of this opinion rather than a blanket "it's all just a pack of lies".

-murray

Thanks for the link. I'm also interested in getting to the bottom of this debate without all the BS. Have a look at this.... http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28298

It seems to me like Ken is just more comfortable with the Nikon, but I'm sure there are plenty of people equally comfortable with the Canon system.


Andy: Great job of bringing this thread back to the original topic.:o

[murrays]

Thanks for the link. I'm also interested in getting to the bottom of this debate without all the BS. Have a look at this.... http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28298

It seems to me like Ken is just more comfortable with the Nikon, but I'm sure there are plenty of people equally comfortable with the Canon system.


Andy: Great job of bringing this thread back to the original topic.:o

Yeah, both are great systems capable of taking fantastic images. You can pretty much dismiss any strong opinions here since both have advantages and disadvantages.

-murray

[aparmley]

Thanks for the link. I'm also interested in getting to the bottom of this debate without all the BS. Have a look at this.... http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28298

It seems to me like Ken is just more comfortable with the Nikon, but I'm sure there are plenty of people equally comfortable with the Canon system.


Andy: Great job of bringing this thread back to the original topic.:o

No problem Nick. Both Systems are excellent choices. That Rockwell article is for another thread (Auto ISO - no thanks).

[mugsisme]

The OP asked about another camera for a little more. Don't jump all over me, but what about the Pentax camera? Or the new Sony one? How do they compare? I am making myself nuts with which camera to get, and had narrowed it down to the D40, but I am a total newbie.

Leah
Fuji F10 and
??? (in the market)

[zmikers]

It is important to remember that you are not just buying a camera, you are buying into an entire system. Please, someone correct me if I am wrong but it is my understanding that the two systems you should be comparing here are the Canon "Family" and the Nikon "family." This could be a huge generalization, and again please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Canon has the edge on lenses, where Nikon is slightly better when it comes to flash.
And now this is not a Canon push by any means. Many people will try to push what they use and put down the compitition. I am only going to say this because I use canon and that is all. "IF" you are leaning towards the Canon side, I would jump up to the xti from the xt. I little bit more coin, but worth it IMHO. Bigger LCD, more MP and a better camera.
Anyway, just do your research and don't worry about other people's "opinions." Listen to the facts and you will be happy with whatever your decision may be. Oh, and let us know what you decide:D !

[TheAviator]

Yea alot of people and their "opinions" can get really ridiculous. Cmon, think about it, does the Canon Rebel XT take WAYYYY better pictures than the Nikon D40? Or Vise Versa? No, they are very similiar.

Also saving more money to get a better camera is out of the question, as the next paychecks I have go straight to my Europe trip. Also, this is my first DSLR, and I think it'll be a good camera for a beginner in DSLR, And I'm sure it's not going to take Crappy images...it's better than a simple digital camera of course.

But anyway, I think it's kinda retarded for people to STRONGLY be on one side, because every camera has it's ups and downs, the rebel XT is not WAYY better than the Nikon D40. It's all about personal preference, what you like. And just because you dont like it, doesnt mean its a bad camera to someone else.

: )

[aparmley]

Yea alot of people and their "opinions" can get really ridiculous. Cmon, think about it, does the Canon Rebel XT take WAYYYY better pictures than the Nikon D40? Or Vise Versa? No, they are very similiar.

Also saving more money to get a better camera is out of the question, as the next paychecks I have go straight to my Europe trip. Also, this is my first DSLR, and I think it'll be a good camera for a beginner in DSLR, And I'm sure it's not going to take Crappy images...it's better than a simple digital camera of course.

But anyway, I think it's kinda retarded for people to STRONGLY be on one side, because every camera has it's ups and downs, the rebel XT is not WAYY better than the Nikon D40. It's all about personal preference, what you like. And just because you dont like it, doesnt mean its a bad camera to someone else.

: )

Something else to consider when comparing the XT and D40 is the lens choices. IMHO - the lenses are more important than the body. I learned that one the hard way. Having a decent lens arsenal in your bag for your trip is more important than which body you have - and you'll likely need 3x the cost of the body to get that kit together. just my .02

[Nickcanada]

Yea alot of people and their "opinions" can get really ridiculous. Cmon, think about it, does the Canon Rebel XT take WAYYYY better pictures than the Nikon D40? Or Vise Versa? No, they are very similiar.

Also saving more money to get a better camera is out of the question, as the next paychecks I have go straight to my Europe trip. Also, this is my first DSLR, and I think it'll be a good camera for a beginner in DSLR, And I'm sure it's not going to take Crappy images...it's better than a simple digital camera of course.

But anyway, I think it's kinda retarded for people to STRONGLY be on one side, because every camera has it's ups and downs, the rebel XT is not WAYY better than the Nikon D40. It's all about personal preference, what you like. And just because you dont like it, doesnt mean its a bad camera to someone else.



: )

If your main reason for wanting this camera is to take great photos on your vacation keep in mind that it will quite possibly turn your family vacation into a photography vacation... and if it doesn't turn into a photography vacation why not just get an ultra zoom P&S. They are smaller easier to use and can produce some great images without the hassle of lugging a DSLR around on vacation.

Have a look at what the Canon P&S guys are doing with their S3s here (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21728)

[some guy]

Yea alot of people and their "opinions" can get really ridiculous. Cmon, think about it, does the Canon Rebel XT take WAYYYY better pictures than the Nikon D40? Or Vise Versa? No, they are very similiar.

Also saving more money to get a better camera is out of the question, as the next paychecks I have go straight to my Europe trip. Also, this is my first DSLR, and I think it'll be a good camera for a beginner in DSLR, And I'm sure it's not going to take Crappy images...it's better than a simple digital camera of course.

But anyway, I think it's kinda retarded for people to STRONGLY be on one side, because every camera has it's ups and downs, the rebel XT is not WAYY better than the Nikon D40. It's all about personal preference, what you like. And just because you dont like it, doesnt mean its a bad camera to someone else.

: )

XT does not automatically take better pix than the d40. But it had more features should you want to grow your photography skills. The D40 is geared for people who just want to get on the dSLR bandwagon and never stray out of the included kit lens.

[mattdm]

XT does not automatically take better pix than the d40. But it had more features should you want to grow your photography skills. The D40 is geared for people who just want to get on the dSLR bandwagon and never stray out of the included kit lens.

I don't think that's the case. A much more profitable plan would be to get you to buy it and then encourage you to buy more lenses, and then eventually buy a more expensive camera body.

And let's not forget, the XT is Canon's entry-level camera too. It's not necessarily the winner in a features comparison -- for example, it's got a smaller LCD with fewer pixels, and as far as I know lacks front curtain sync flash.

[TheAviator]

XT does not automatically take better pix than the d40. But it had more features should you want to grow your photography skills. The D40 is geared for people who just want to get on the dSLR bandwagon and never stray out of the included kit lens.


Lol, so the D40 is only for people who want to jump on a the "bandwagon" of DSLR's? So wanting to go to DSLR is a "bandwagon" move? Interesting, never heard that one before. Last I checked everyone has gotta start somewhere, and work their way up the ladder....Never saw anything wrong with jumpin to DSLR, or should I say "Hoppin the Bangwagon".

And That's all the D40 is? Just a camera for people who want to jump on the bandwagon? I'm pretty sure that's not the case. It's a good camera for beginners, and you are able to upgrade the lens's on it...Why would you say people who buy that never upgrade the lens...I planned on doing just that..

I swear some people and their opinions....Didnt I just talk about that a few replys up? Oh well : )

[TheAviator]

If your main reason for wanting this camera is to take great photos on your vacation keep in mind that it will quite possibly turn your family vacation into a photography vacation... and if it doesn't turn into a photography vacation why not just get an ultra zoom P&S. They are smaller easier to use and can produce some great images without the hassle of lugging a DSLR around on vacation.

Have a look at what the Canon P&S guys are doing with their S3s here (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21728)


I'm not goin on a "family" vacation...I'm 18 years old and will be traveling for my first time ever alone, in Europe. Everywhere I go, I plan on taking pictures. "lugging" it around is kinda an overstatement....as I'm not gonna have all this luggage with me or anything, just my backpack and my camera. I'm pretty much "backpackin" 5 different countries in Europe, one in which is Austria, I'll be takin TONS of pictures of the landscape there....I dont see why people are still arguing that I shouldnt buy the D40. If you personally know it's a really bad camera for taking decent pictures then ok, but no one has that evidence to bring forth to me, so I see no reason for the argument..And as I've said like 3 times, I've held it and it's totally comfortable in size and feel for me, so thats not the problem

[Nickcanada]

I'm not goin on a "family" vacation...I'm 18 years old and will be traveling for my first time ever alone, in Europe. Everywhere I go, I plan on taking pictures. "lugging" it around is kinda an overstatement....as I'm not gonna have all this luggage with me or anything, just my backpack and my camera. I'm pretty much "backpackin" 5 different countries in Europe, one in which is Austria, I'll be takin TONS of pictures of the landscape there....I dont see why people are still arguing that I shouldnt buy the D40. If you personally know it's a really bad camera for taking decent pictures then ok, but no one has that evidence to bring forth to me, so I see no reason for the argument..And as I've said like 3 times, I've held it and it's totally comfortable in size and feel for me, so thats not the problem


Never said the D40 was a bad choice:confused: :confused: :confused:

Cool so it's a photography vacation, just clearing that up:) No need to get upset.:D

If I was you I'd go Nikon body with the 18-200mm 3.5-6.5 VR. If you like the feel of the D40 then what's the problem? Go get it.

[TheAviator]

Haha ya no worries, I was more less goin at the guy who called getting a DSLR a "Bandwaggon" move....lol. Ya I'm tryin to get over to BestBuy tonight to see if they have the camera there. Thanks for the help

[mattdm]

I'm not goin on a "family" vacation...I'm 18 years old and will be traveling for my first time ever alone, in Europe. Everywhere I go, I plan on taking pictures. "lugging" it around is kinda an overstatement....as I'm not gonna have all this luggage with me or anything, just my backpack and my camera.

I still tend towards the "you should take a really compact camera this time and make thyour second trip around Europe the photo trip" view. This time around, experience. But I know that's not really very helpful since you're pretty decided on this.

Therefore, I think you really need to take a laptop along so you can review your pictures as you go. Not delete, just examine nightly. Otherwise, you may end up very, very disappointed when you come back.

If that's not a possibility, either make sure you get the camera NOW and spend all the time before your trip shooting with it, or else seriously, seriously reconsider the more compact and more automatic cameras. Otherwise, you'll end up with the worst of both scenarios: you'll have spent the whole time focusing on photography rather than on people, places, life -- but your photos will still disappoint you.

[TheAviator]

Ya I'm actually gonna be getting the camera tomorrow if all goes as planned...So I have about 5 - 6 months to use it and know it....But I mean, is it really gonna kill all of my time taking pictures with it? When I go somwhere, I'll probably end up seeing something really awesome or beautiful, so I'll pull my camera out and take some pictures of the area, and so on. Once I've taken pictures, I'll go and just tour the area and enjoy being there. I mean, yes like you said this should be an experience, and it will, and I'm just gonna happen to have a camera on me to take lots of pictures, the Nikon D40....Is it really gonna kill my time and be a huge hassel?

[aparmley]

. . . and as far as I know lacks front curtain sync flash.

Nope, comes with both front and rear curtain sync - compatible with both built in flash and external speedlight.

[mattdm]

Nope, comes with both front and rear curtain sync - compatible with both built in flash and external speedlight.

Huh. Wonder what the person going on about that was thinking, then. But the LCD screen point is still right.

[some guy]

Nikon marketing strategy is to lure the newbies from P&S world with a cheap dSLR. It works remarkably well as once u are hooked to a brand it's unlikely that you switch. So you generally would stick to the brand.
XT is what? 2 years old now.. almost? The fact that it still toe the line against the likes of D50 or the new castrated D40, should have you wonder. ;)
Hey to the OP who wants a D40 go get it. It's your prerogative and your money. I would suggest to get the D50 at the very least. They are so cheap anyways what with the rebates. I just don't see anything advantageous a D40 has over the D50 or the XT other than price.
Without going into a measurebating war b/t Nikon vs. Canon, the XT does have 2nd curtain sync. Look up the Parameter section.

[TheAviator]

Ok, topic is done. I've seen what the camera can do, what pictures it can take, and how it feels in my hand, I have no problem with it. I'm not going into Professional Photography for a career, but I will be taking lots of pictures of some very nice things in Europe. I dont have the money to go higher that the Nikon D40 right now. Simple as that, no more bias opinions please..lol

[coldrain]

The D40 is quite a compromised DSLR though... so why not go for a D50, which should be around the same price? The lesser AF system, the lack of internal motor with prohoibits you to buy most good, affordable 3rd party lenses from Tokina, Sigma and Tamron, and some other annoyances, make the D40 not the camera of choice. And who ever thinks a bigger LCD is an important feature of a DSLR over the tings the D40 lacks has a strange idea about cameras... Do not forget that the LCD is only for review of photos, and will do NOTHING for photo quality what so ever.

Both the Canon EOS 350D/XT and Nikon D50 make a much nicer DSLR to start with. Also the Pentax K100D is a much nicer camera to have than the D40, and offers IS in the body! And if you plan on shooting RAW instead of JPEG, the Canon XTi should be your camera of choice, Canon's RAW software comes for free, where you will have to pay 150$ extra for Nikon's (very good) RAW software.

Do not get the D40, unless you really want it to be a kit only lens camera, also into the future.

[Nickcanada]

Coldie you're back! Welcome!

[TheAviator]

Like I JUST said, topic closed. I puchased the D40 today, its takin awesome pictures, and I'm learnin alot about it. It was a good camera especially for my first DSLR, good size, and takin REALLY good cameras. Thank you EVERYONE for the advice, and no thank to those who are completely BIAS, lol, so anyway, for those just given me the facts and their advice, honestly, I do appreciate.

Also, they are coming out with new lens's that'll work with this camera, I mean, they already have a few out at the moment, but they are releasing more lens's that'll work with the camera. I'll probably end up buying the 55-200 Lens next.

[Kellie]

Congratulations on your purchase. You'll love it.

I'd suggest skipping the 55-200mm and saving for something better unless you need the extra zoom now. If you have several months until your trip, I say get to know the camera and exactly what you want to do with it. The kit lens is wonderful for now.

Have fun shooting with your "castrated" :rolleyes: "kit only lens" :rolleyes: camera!

[mugsisme]

And if you plan on shooting RAW instead of JPEG, the Canon XTi should be your camera of choice, Canon's RAW software comes for free, where you will have to pay 150$ extra for Nikon's (very good) RAW software.


Congrats on your purchase! I am leaning towards the D40 as well. I have held the D50, Pentax, and Sony, and they all feel too big in my hands. I hope you enjoy your camera and your trip. Sounds lovely!

What do you mean that the D40 does not come with software to process the RAW files? Does it come with anything?

Leah

[coldrain]

Congrats on your purchase! I am leaning towards the D40 as well. I have held the D50, Pentax, and Sony, and they all feel too big in my hands. I hope you enjoy your camera and your trip. Sounds lovely!

What do you mean that the D40 does not come with software to process the RAW files? Does it come with anything?

Leah
The XTi and XT should feel smaller in your hands, and they do not have the drawbacks the D40 has (no internal motor meaning you can not use most of 3rd party lenses, so-so AF system, irritating lack of ISO/WB buttons and so on).

About the RAW software, RAW shooting gives you an advantage in colour information, , when you need/want to adjust the photo a lot the extra info gives you a lot more room (12 bits vs 8 bits per colour channel). To use this you will need RAW conversion software that you can actually tweak all aspects of the contrast and colour balance of the photo.
You can use photoshop with a for your camera appropriate RAW plugin, or other software.
Canon delivers DPP with its cameras, Nikon only convertors that do not allow you to tweak much, making the advantage of RAW over JPEG pretty much void. Nikon's very good Nikon Capture NX software which does allow you to do good RAW conversions and adjustments costs an extra $150.

If you need a smaller feeling camera the Canon EOS 400D/XTi is a much better/complete camera than the Nikon D40.

[GaryS]

I'm always surprised that people post here looking for advice, and if they get any that doesn't meet their pre-conceived ideas, then everyone is biased. Then they spend their time arguing with everyone trying to justify what they wanted to do in the first place...

I guess I shouldn't be surprised...

PS: Welcome back ColdRain. I've missed ya!

[Kellie]

What do you mean that the D40 does not come with software to process the RAW files? Does it come with anything?

Leah

Capture NX does cost extra. You can download a free trial and see how you like it or there are third party RAW converters available.

Some people have it out for the wonderful D40 without taking into account that not everyone wants the same thing out of their cameras. Some people like a lot of buttons, while others like the ability to program the function button to do just what they feel they need to access the fastest and not have a cluttered camera body. IME, the auto WB is excellent in almost every situation so I rarely need to fiddle with it and don't miss a dedicated button (I can get to WB control very quickly anyway). The Nikon kit lens (18-55mm II) is quite fast, unlike other kit lenses. So-so AF? Hmm, with AF being driven in the lens it actually focuses amazingly fast. Lack of more AF points has yet to be an issue for me. It might be for others, though.

Not every camera is made for everyone. There are advantages and disadvantages to all cameras. For instance, you won't get spot metering in the XT or XTi. Some people don't ever use that, so it isn't an issue for them. It all depends on what features you think you need and plan to use. You are doing the best thing by testing out all of the cameras and deciding by what feels best in your hands. You can get many opinions on many cameras, but it ultimately comes down to what *you* want. You are going to get wonderful pictures from all of them. Have fun deciding! :)

[Nickcanada]

I'm always surprised that people post here looking for advice, and if they get any that doesn't meet their pre-conceived ideas, then everyone is biased. Then they spend their time arguing with everyone trying to justify what they wanted to do in the first place...

I guess I shouldn't be surprised...

PS: Welcome back ColdRain. I've missed ya!


That's what I was thinking too.....:)

[some guy]

I'm always surprised that people post here looking for advice, and if they get any that doesn't meet their pre-conceived ideas, then everyone is biased. Then they spend their time arguing with everyone trying to justify what they wanted to do in the first place...

I guess I shouldn't be surprised...

PS: Welcome back ColdRain. I've missed ya!

It's called buyers reinforcement.... or something like that. Well it's the OP's money. But I sense imminent upgrade very soon. ;)

[mattdm]

What are you people on about?

The OP originally was looking at the Canon Rebel XT or XTi, and decided to get the D40 based on advice. How's that not listening?

[Honest Gaza]

What are you people on about?

The OP originally was looking at the Canon Rebel XT or XTi, and decided to get the D40 based on advice. How's that not listening?

From my memory....he asked if there was any reason NOT to get the XT or XTI.....he wanted reinforcement that this choice was a good one. All responses (again from my recollection) spoke positively of the XT and XTi.

The OP then chose a D40.

From that you have concluded that he listened to all advice ? :eek:

[mattdm]

From my memory....he asked if there was any reason NOT to get the XT or XTI.....he wanted reinforcement that this choice was a good one. All responses (again from my recollection) spoke positively of the XT and XTi.

The OP then chose a D40.

From that you have concluded that he listened to all advice ? :eek:

Why "Eek"? Are there mice or something?

Your recollection is partial. In addition to comments that the XT and XTi were fine choices, there was also the suggestion to consider the a non-dSLR like the Canon S3, and also the Nikon D40. I think you're confusing "listening to all advice" with "taking only the advice I with which I personally agree".

Kellie's nailed it in her post above, really.

[Nickcanada]

Why so confrontational Matt?

The simple fact is we are just going by experience, when threads like this come up or we ourselves have purchased similar products they/we find our selves upgrading sooner rather than later... call it experience. If you don't agree... that's cool, but there is no reason to get all huffy over it.

[coldrain]

Why "Eek"? Are there mice or something?

Your recollection is partial. In addition to comments that the XT and XTi were fine choices, there was also the suggestion to consider the a non-dSLR like the Canon S3, and also the Nikon D40. I think you're confusing "listening to all advice" with "taking only the advice I with which I personally agree".

Kellie's nailed it in her post above, really.
He did not choose over advice, just read the whole thread. No arguements were given in favor of a D40 except "bigger display" and a nonsense article from Ken Weirdo.

In the end the OP said he had no money for anything else than a D40, that is all he motivated his choice with. And this is strange, since an XT, D50, K100D all are at the same price or lower.

All in all it does seem fair to say that the OP was not really interested in real pro's and cons and real advice.

[mattdm]

Sorry if I'm sounding grumpy. The chain of posts flaming the original poster (starting with the "surprised that people" one) seemed way off base.

[swgod98]

No arguements were given in favor of a D40 except "bigger display" and a nonsense article from Ken Weirdo.

Gee...and everyone wonder's why people claim biased opinions.

[coldrain]

Gee...and everyone wonder's why people claim biased opinions.
Explain what is biased about what you quoted from me?

[Honest Gaza]

Matt....here's why I went....:eek:

Like all "newbies", I asked for advice on which was a suitable camera to purchase when I wanted to "upgrade" from my Panasonic FZ-20. I had no pre-conceived ideas and asked for input from all forum members. Thankfully, I received advice from Canon, Nikon, & Panasonic owners that, while at times was maybe over the top and inflammatory, usually targeted specific qualities of a nominated model...(there will always be the obligatory flame-wars :D ).

For me to disregard all advice that I had asked for would have been discourteous and unappreciative of the time taken by the forum members to reply.

Several things that I believe people should consider when asking for the advice of others :

Do not instigate multiple posts asking the same question
Read responses that have been offered
Have the couteousy to acknowledge responses (you don't have to agree with them)
Do not dismiss people just because they don't agree with you (afterall, you invited their input)


Many people asked the OP why he wanted a particular camera (in one of the other "multiple" threads) and his response was often short, rude and dismissive. Evidence of this can be seen by noting the members who responded to earlier threads....but chose not to respond in the later threads.

So your question on why I went....:eek:

Please review all of the relevant threads that was instigated by the OP....and see if he really did listen to all of the advice.

This is not a Canon v Nikon bashing exercise (from my perspective).....just an observation that if people are courteous enough to respond to a thread....then do them the courteousy of considering their response.

By all means the OP is entitled to make their own decision on the final purchase.....but don't waste people's time if their input will mean nothing to the final decision.

(I figure that's one more BBQ I won't be invited to :o )

[swgod98]

Explain what is biased about what you quoted from me?

Just that nobody has provided any "pros" about the D40 (in general) as you stated. And you, in particular (no offense), really bash on the D40 and seem to go out of your way to pull people away from it...

And it's not cool to bash on Ken (the "Wierdo"?). Much of what he says has truth to it (or is simply opinion)...just like your posts! Yet, I'm not judging you like you do Ken.

[coldrain]

Just that nobody has provided any "pros" about the D40 (in general) as you stated. And you, in particular (no offense), really bash on the D40 and seem to go out of your way to pull people away from it...

And it's not cool to bash on Ken (the "Wierdo"?). Much of what he says has truth to it (or is simply opinion)...just like your posts! Yet, I'm not judging you like you do Ken.
You do judge me, all the time... look at your post above.

And did you actually read the entire thread? Then list the other pros that were given for the D40?

Right, there were none... so, where is the bias? And bias to what?

Which of my points about the D40 are not valid?

And did you actually read that article from Ken Weirdo? And did you actually read why it was linked to? And you find that to have any value? And not weird?

The only one totally biased is you, you always have been and always have been judging my posts in the same biased and unconstructive way.

I do not HAVE to think a D40 is the best choice, when there is so much against it, you know. And there is no bias about it, I actually stated facts about the D40.

[swgod98]

Many people asked the OP why he wanted a particular camera (in one of the other "multiple" threads) and his response was often short, rude and dismissive.

What started this was someone's tripe remark about Ken being a load of crap. Of course...another Canon user.

[coldrain]

What started this was someone's tripe remark about Ken being a load of crap. Of course...another Canon user.
Not only Canon users have the brains to recognize Ken for what he is... a lot of Nikon, Pentax and whatever else users recognize his opinions about lenses and cameras for what they are... biased crap with a lot of wrong information.

Unless of course you can explain why Ken says the Canon EOS 5D is slower in use and why he uses it only with a tripod. Because to none of us all that silly Ken dribble does not make much sense...

Only some Nikon users think he is something special. Like you.

[SpecialK]

Hi all:

Interesting thread, though it went all over :)

Congrats on the OP for getting any DSLR. He seems happy with it and it takes fine pictures. It is not designed to be the heart of a big system. So what?

I've only read 2 things Ken wrote. I think he wet himself with joy after using the Nikkor 18-200 VR (?) lens. Fair enough. However, he had rather insulting and denegrating comments about RAW and RAW users, calling it "twiddling with images" (or "fiddling", I forget) and totally ignores its use as a tool, simply because he is so perfect at shooting jpgs. The End.

I would likely have bought a Canon (had tons of film equipment) or Nikon system if I was spending someone else's money, but I like what I have - hopefully for a few years at least :-)

[swgod98]

Only some Nikon users think he is something special. Like you.

lol...and here I was driving home thinking I would retract my previous post and apologize for my condecending tone (which wasn't intended).

See, now this is why you got kicked out of here last time, coldrain.

[RichNY]

What started this was someone's tripe remark about Ken being a load of crap. Of course...another Canon user.

Those weren't my exact words but I'll stand by them.

While I think Nikon makes some great equipment, has better ergonomics (IMO), and has a superior flash system to Canon that doesn't make Ken a credible source for photography information. He is misleading and I for one don't believe for a minute that it can all be attributed to ignorance and personal bias.

Is everything on his site wrong- no. But then again, even a stopped watch tells time correctly twice a day. The real danger is that unlike this site where individual's comments receive critism from others, Ken's site gives the as-of-yet-informed incorrect information under the false impression that it is helpful, unbiased, and accurate.

I still enjoy the Nikonians site, and Tom Hogan's site so this isn't a Canon/Nikon issue, its a whose site is full of BS issue.

[swgod98]

Ken's site gives the as-of-yet-informed incorrect information under the false impression that it is helpful, unbiased, and accurate.

I think he just reviews things from his perspective. The way I see it: He's not trying to be fair to the reader...rather, he is being honest to himself. An opinion is an opinion.

Now, if he's misleading people intentionally, then ya...I'd be pissed at him too, regardless of who he's supporting.

[TheAviator]

Guys, guys guys, please....lol. Let me just apologize if I sounded "rude" in any of my post, though I'm pretty sure I was just either being sarcastic, or what ever. Anyway, I just hate when I here things that suggest the Canon XT is WAYY better than the Nikon D40. Because in all honesty one is not 100% better than the other. They both have their ups and downs. Canon or Nikon? Both have their up's and downs. It's personal preference. And yes, I did take your guys advice, and heard what you all had to say. I got upset when I was told not to get a DSLR, because that made no sense to me. I am really getting into photography and wanted to upgrade to DSLR, and the Nikon D40 is perfect for DSLR beginners. I also thought it was quite uncalled for to say upgrading to DSRL was a "Bang wagon hopping move"...as it's just an upgrade to better photography. I also went to the store at least 3 times and tried both cameras. In the end, I chose the Nikon D40. I felt it, liked the size, the feel of it. My friend that works at Ritz camera talked to me about it and he owns a Nikon, and says he's always been happy with it. So I got it. It's taking really awesome pictures for me and the resolution is amazing. I went to the same location I took my old Samsung NV10 to, and took the same pictures. They gave me much larger images, no grain(noise), and much better sharpness. So I am happy with my choice, and you guys did help me to decided, though some only fustrated me because some here seem very bias, and will give no positive thoughts to the other product. It's like Democrats vs. republicans, can you really be 100% on one side? Heck no, I dont agree with EVERYTHING a republican says, or a democrat says. Some things stand out that I agree with, somethings dont.


So again, sorry for anything I may have said that was rude...and I did ask alot of questions, I admit, I should have done much more research before coming on here and just "posting" away. So thanks again guys, and I hope this thread can come to an end...lol. Thanks guys.

[Riley]

the thing about Ken Rockwell having an opinion someone doesnt like is just silly. Im happy his site exists, and he does provide another view of equipment, and has been said, his opinion is mostly garnered because of his field in photography, that is i believe fair enough. I expect no-more no-less from high art photographers, landscape photographers, portrait artists etc.

I dont always agree with what he says, but Im as happy to read his stuff as I am at least half the reviews around, I no more or no less have to accept what he says than I do someone like Andy Piper or Michael Reichmann, and neither do you.

What I hope I would never do is denigrate any of them because of their opinions. What we see here is disappointing in that there are some who never hesitate to do just that. Perhaps that says more about them, than Ken Rockwell.

what i do find entertaining is this page

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

it amuses me how well it fits with some of the identities around here

cheers...

[zmikers]

the thing about Ken Rockwell having an opinion someone doesnt like is just silly. Im happy his site exists, and he does provide another view of equipment, and has been said, his opinion is mostly garnered because of his field in photography, that is i believe fair enough. I expect no-more no-less from high art photographers, landscape photographers, portrait artists etc.

I dont always agree with what he says, but Im as happy to read his stuff as I am at least half the reviews around, I no more or no less have to accept what he says than I do someone like Andy Piper or Michael Reichmann, and neither do you.

What I hope I would never do is denigrate any of them because of their opinions. What we see here is disappointing in that there are some who never hesitate to do just that. Perhaps that says more about them, than Ken Rockwell.

what i do find entertaining is this page

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

it amuses me how well it fits with some of the identities around here

cheers...

Just read that page you posted here. I didn't really find it amusing at all. Just seems like a load of crap written by someone that obviously has a massive chip on his shoulder. Or just thinks he's being funny by being a prick!

[Nickcanada]

After reading that I took a look at his home page.... interesting the picture of himself he chose to use....

Isn't it fun to make massive generalizations about people:) :D :D

[swgod98]

what i do find entertaining is this page

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

I was actually enjoying that article, thinking to myself, "Oooh, I want to be a whore!" :) Until I got to the end and realized what an ass he was making of himself, putting other people down.

[murrays]

I think Ken R is spot on a couple items that most photographers could learn:

>Cameras can't be fully evaluated by test charts.

>The camera does not make the photographer.

>A picture taken with a lousy camera is always better than a picture missed while you were fiddling with a great camera.

In the end, buy what feels good to you and what you like. The OP made the right choice IMHO because he seems happy with his choice.

-murray

[Rooz]

realized what an ass he was making of himself, putting other people down.

lol lucky that NEVER happens here.

i found the article pretty funny. there are too many people that take themselves and life in general way too seriously.

[Neptar]

Like I JUST said, topic closed. I puchased the D40 today, its takin awesome pictures, and I'm learnin alot about it. It was a good camera especially for my first DSLR, good size, and takin REALLY good cameras. Thank you EVERYONE for the advice, and no thank to those who are completely BIAS, lol, so anyway, for those just given me the facts and their advice, honestly, I do appreciate.

Also, they are coming out with new lens's that'll work with this camera, I mean, they already have a few out at the moment, but they are releasing more lens's that'll work with the camera. I'll probably end up buying the 55-200 Lens next.

Nooo, you've gone to the Dark Side. I don't think you can really say that people are biased, they were just trying to convince you the reasons they believed the canon was better than the nikon.

In my opinion canon does have better lenses with the L series. But not many people can afford an L series lense. I think the canon was better technically, but it is a bit like the MAC vs PC with windows. People like Macs because they say they look cool and it has style. Yet Benchmarks show that PC's have been outperforming Macs for a long time, yet people still buy Macs for the cool factor.

The nikon is like the mac, people like the ergonomics of the D40, and it is easier for a beginner to adapt to. But i believe the canon is a better manual camera.

P.S. I am also happy that Ken's site exists, it makes cracking comedy! On a serious note, it does not bother me what other peoples opinions are of my equipment. I chose my equipment because out of my own choice. It should be the same for everyone else, they should look at what sort of photography interests them, and what features the camera needs to do it well.

[CanonRex]

From what I've learned and experienced with my XT, and playing around with the D40, i would personally suggest you get the XT or XTi if you can.

The D40 is not bad at all and it's slightly less expensive, but the XT has more features that can carry you to the next level when you're ready, the D40 will stay at begginer level because that's what it's built for as an affordable beginners camera.

On another topic, you must know that once you buy the camera you WILL have to buy another lens, because no matter what both kit lenses are 18-55mm but their quality cannot compare to the actual manufacturer lenses

[critofur]

Yeah, both are great systems capable of taking fantastic images. You can pretty much dismiss any strong opinions here since both have advantages and disadvantages.

-murray
The lack of a focus motor on the D40 means no auto focus on one of the best lenses which also happens to be one of the cheapest: 50mm prime f/1.8. That right there should be a deal breaker for many people. Most SLR lenses are rediculously overpriced.

I spent literally DAYS reading reviews, opinions, looking at sample shots, etc. etc., thought long and hard about which camera to get. I was considering: Pentax K100D, Canon 350D, Nikon D50, D40, D70s (and wishing I could consider the D80), vaguely looking at the Olympus E-500.

It came down to image quality & high ISO performance and in those categories the XT seems to be noticably better than any camera under $1,000. The 400D (XTi) maybe just about equal, but the 350D is a hair better.

I would have really considered the D40, if only it had the focus motor, if I'd gotten the D40 I would have just planed on upgrading the body within a couple years when I could afford it.

What is REALLY dissapointing about _all_ of these cameras is, that a max apeture of 3.5 (std. 18-55mm kit lens) is really pathetic for a camera costing over $500! It's not bright enough for many hand held natural light shots, and if you zoom in it gets worse, f/5.6! For this reason, I was strongly considering the Pentax K100D with it's built in IS (Shake Reduction, they call it), but it's image quality, and particularly, it's high ISO noise levels just couldn't seem to comete with the XT. This might not be the case in actual use, maybe it's just the review photos/lab tests that dissapoint. I wish I'd had the opportunity to use a K100D for a day.

I ended up buying the Rebel XT (350D). I got it with the kit lens because it cost less than $100 more, and for that price I couldn't afford not to get it, otherwise I'd be stuck with only the 50mm f/1.8 (non-zoom) because that's the only other lens I could afford. The 18-55mm zoom range is really quite nice and, although some people complain about it's image quality, it's really not bad at all for daylight shooting when you know how to use it, you can get beautiful shots.

Features that are dissapointingly missing from the XT:

Spot metering :confused: WTH?!?
Focus assist lamp (have to use flash, which is annoying) :(
Auto ISO modes :(
Image Stabilization in the body (like the Pentax K100D)
3200 ISO (though you could just set the EV down and "push it" in PP)
Anti-Dust features for the sensor
"My Mode" settings like on an Olympus (this is a great feature)
2nd Dial on the back for fast settings
Decent LCD screen (the XT screen is small and not usable in bright sunlight)
Place for your last 1 or 2 fingers on the grip (though the small size is also a
feature, means I'll actually CARRY the camera with me)
Decently bright kit lens (comon, give us at LEAST f/2.8 zoom in
the kit!) :mad:

:cool:

[fionndruinne]

When I clicked this topic, I was expecting some manifestation of the Nikon/Canon wars, but this! This is insane.

Personally I'm getting tired of the Rebel XT and XTi being touted as infallible - my friend has an XTi, and there are some problems. Of course there are! Every camera will have a few faults, and which faults one is willing to put up with is a matter of opinion.

That said, I am strongly leaning towards the D40 myself, as the things I have heard are pretty extraordinary (given the newness of the camera - Nov. '06 - and the price), and I'm not going to be able to afford much of a hair above $500-$550. And, truth be told, I think the excellence of the deal offered in the D40 has got some people nigh frantic - look at some of the posts here. Nothing but stubbornness could allow anyone to condemn this piece of equipment.

[coldrain]

When I clicked this topic, I was expecting some manifestation of the Nikon/Canon wars, but this! This is insane.

Personally I'm getting tired of the Rebel XT and XTi being touted as infallible - my friend has an XTi, and there are some problems. Of course there are! Every camera will have a few faults, and which faults one is willing to put up with is a matter of opinion.

That said, I am strongly leaning towards the D40 myself, as the things I have heard are pretty extraordinary (given the newness of the camera - Nov. '06 - and the price), and I'm not going to be able to afford much of a hair above $500-$550. And, truth be told, I think the excellence of the deal offered in the D40 has got some people nigh frantic - look at some of the posts here. Nothing but stubbornness could allow anyone to condemn this piece of equipment.
What makes it so nice then?

*silence*...

The missing internal motor, making a LOT of affordable good lenses incompatible?
The missing exposure bracketing?
The only available through the menu ISO and WB settings?
The only 3 point AF?
The missing mirror lock up?

What is the stubbornness you are talking about... the plain looking at the facts?

The XTi just happens to be a much more complete and not feature cut down camera. With the better image quality at higher ISO settings.

[T06]

When I clicked this topic, I was expecting some manifestation of the Nikon/Canon wars, but this! This is insane.

Personally I'm getting tired of the Rebel XT and XTi being touted as infallible - my friend has an XTi, and there are some problems. Of course there are! Every camera will have a few faults, and which faults one is willing to put up with is a matter of opinion.

That said, I am strongly leaning towards the D40 myself, as the things I have heard are pretty extraordinary (given the newness of the camera - Nov. '06 - and the price), and I'm not going to be able to afford much of a hair above $500-$550. And, truth be told, I think the excellence of the deal offered in the D40 has got some people nigh frantic - look at some of the posts here. Nothing but stubbornness could allow anyone to condemn this piece of equipment.

...... maybe there are some people that just don't do pumpkins:D :D :D :D

[T06]

What makes it so nice then?

*silence*...

The missing internal motor, making a LOT of affordable good lenses incompatible?
The missing exposure bracketing?
The only available through the menu ISO and WB settings?
The only 3 point AF?
The missing mirror lock up?

What is the stubbornness you are talking about... the plain looking at the facts?

The XTi just happens to be a much more complete and not feature cut down camera. With the better image quality at higher ISO settings.
........ here come the pumpki...... 'INCOMI*NG':D :D :D

[Ray Schnoor]

What makes it so nice then?
Maybe the "fact" that it is a less expensive alternitive for someone who has no need or want for any or at least most of the features you list. Sure, if they want those features, the D40 is not the camera for them. My mother-in -law got a D70 2 1/2 years ago because that is what I had. She got it with the kit lens. Not once has she taken the lens off the camera. For the prior 13 years, she had a Nikon SLR with kit lens. Not once in the 13 years had she ever taken the lens off the camera. She has never used either camera in anything but the full auto mode. She is more than happy with both cameras.

I have a neighbor who has had a Canon XT for 1 1/5 years. She has never had any lens but the kit lens on the camera in that time. She has never changed the ISO or used the camera in anything but the full Auto mode. She actually brings it over to me if she has any questions with it. I keep asking her when she plans on getting a better lens. She replys with "Why would I do that?"

I was shooting some photos at a volleyball tourney this past weekend. I saw 2 people with brand new XTi's they got for Christmas also taking photos at the tourney. They asked how I could stand so far back with my D70 to take photos. They also asked if my photos were always dark and blurry. I told them to get a different lens. They said they probably wouldn't.

Point is, not everyone needs, or even wants to upgrade their camera with lenses until it is time to replace their camera. I'm not saying that this is the right thing to do, but I'm not arrogant enough to say they can't. It is what they want.

Although I am not advocating for the D40(X) because it is definitely not for me, but for these people, how is the D40(X) limiting in anything but the 3 point auto focus?

Ray.

Ray.

[Riley]

With the better image quality at higher ISO settings.

i dont for a moment believe thats true
so im asking myself, is this another Olympus analysis

[fionndruinne]

Coldrain, you're kind of funny.

I'm sure that any user of the D40, unlike you who only makes tirades about the superiority of the XTi, would disagree about the quality at higher ISOs - that's one thing I've been looking at, and the evidence is that the D40's pretty high on the quality scale at even 1600 ISO.

I am a migrator from P&S to DSLR, and while I'm still learning, I'm fairly serious about photography. I am not a fish out of water with cameras or finding a shot. That said, I like the idea of the D40's help system, with the explanation for a setting being at the click of a button. I won't need that forever, but I will need it starting out, and after that it's a button I don't have to push.

Remember that the D40 has a programmable button? I shall make use of that, also the D40 has a more customizable menu than any other camera I've seen.

Lenses are not incompatible, just in most cases do not AF. I don't need AF, and sometimes prefer MF, especially for macro (thus I will probably buy a non-AF macro lens). The new DX 55-200mm AF with VR is only $250. So two other much-needed lenses will be in the near(ish) future.

Who needs more than 3 focus points, really? 3 makes for a nice spread over the area of the frame, and anyone can focus then reframe. I'm used to doing that with my P&S anyway.

See, there's very little to complain about with the D40, other than that it isn't the precious XTi. But I don't have $200 more to spend! It's the D40 or one of those wannabe "SLR-like" cameras, and they don't fully convince me with all their bells and whistles.

[Riley]

I'm sure that any user of the D40, unlike you who only makes tirades about the superiority of the XTi, would disagree about the quality at higher ISOs - that's one thing I've been looking at, and the evidence is that the D40's pretty high on the quality scale at even 1600 ISO.



i just had a quick look at some reviews, and i dont see how anyone could reasonably conclude that the XTi is better than D40 at high iso's

[Jalva22]

I love these threads. Not a haiku, but:

The advice was sought,
The camera was bought,
And yet the thread lives on.

Wow, from a meaningless argument over Ken Rockwell (who was actually comparing a 5D to a D200: much, much different than a D40 v an XT) to an argument over whether an 18 yr old OP listened to anyone's advice. Of course he didn't get into all the talk about focus points and "glass". He's 18! Sounds like a perfect fit for a D40 to me.

[fionndruinne]

Right on there, Jalva.

i just had a quick look at some reviews, and i dont see how anyone could reasonably conclude that the XTi is better than D40 at high iso's

Precisely. Some people will just say anything which comes to mind... I know this doesn't say a thing about Nikon/Canon and the debate thereupon, but I don't run into Nikon fans that are this full o' rigmarole about their competition.

[Rooz]

I know this doesn't say a thing about Nikon/Canon and the debate thereupon, but I don't run into Nikon fans that are this full o' rigmarole about their competition.

it's not so much about nikon or canon fans, its more about the individual themselves regardless of the brand of equipment. it's about the fact that some people are happy with their choice, love taking photos and once they have made their decision they don't consider the alternate brand "competition". what exactly is the competition for ? :confused:

another way to describe it is "maturity" or lack of it by some who can't help but be drawn into asinine, ridiculous, idiotic, pointless arguments about which brand is better and the one that kills me the most..."which brand makes more money"....ie: "canon makes more money and are the market leader." WHO GIVES A SHIT. :confused:

i have never understood the debate and never will. equally i fail to understand how non-d40 users are so vehemently opposed to the d40 trolling message boards opposing the purchase of a camera like their life depended on it. the way some carry on, you'd think the d40 and nikon were responsible for the worldwide starvation, global warming and the iraq war. the d40 exists, some people like it. get over it.

[Riley]

it's not so much about nikon or canon fans, its more about the individual themselves regardless of the brand of equipment. it's about the fact that some people are happy with their choice, love taking photos and once they have made their decision they don't consider the alternate brand "competition". what exactly is the competition for ? :confused:

in a sense thats not right, we rarely see canon folk defend the alternative brand, they may or may not disagree, but as they fail to respond, only the detractors are apparent. In some cases there have been blatant inaccuracies and damn right lies, and some of these folk know this, and yet they do and say nothing.

Not a big step to assume theyre happy with the status quo ?


another way to describe it is "maturity" or lack of it by some who can't help but be drawn into asinine, ridiculous, idiotic, pointless arguments about which brand is better and the one that kills me the most..."which brand makes more money"....ie: "canon makes more money and are the market leader." WHO GIVES A SHIT. :confused:

not to mention the "maturity" or lack of it by some who can't help but commit asinine, ridiculous, idiotic, pointless arguments about which brand is better


i have never understood the debate and never will. equally i fail to understand how non-d40 users are so vehemently opposed to the d40 trolling message boards opposing the purchase of a camera like their life depended on it. the way some carry on, you'd think the d40 and nikon were responsible for the worldwide starvation, global warming and the iraq war. the d40 exists, some people like it. get over it.

i think they respond to the campaign of some to discredit the camera, a campaign they dont understand. They dont ask to be baited and bashed, but they likely see this continual obsession, and decide to take a stand. In a sense you are denying a human nature to respond, thats what dialogue is.

fact is, the way this reads, you are blaming those assaulted for being assaulted

Talking about important global events instead would be more worthwhile i agree, but this is a photography forum, that is what we are about, and why we come here

[Rooz]

fact is, the way this reads, you are blaming those assaulted for being assaulted

Talking about important global events instead would be more worthwhile i agree, but this is a photography forum, that is what we are about, and why we come here

not that it matters but i think you missed the point in both your statements here. especially the global events one. lol

[Riley]

equally i fail to understand how non-d40 users are so vehemently opposed to the d40 trolling message boards

see it now lol ?

[Rooz]

see it now lol ?

comprende...i was of course referring to non d40 users trolling message boards ABOUT the d40. :D

[Riley]

yeah thats just it
type the letters D40 and its like its a whacko magnet

i might try it later !

[Ray Schnoor]

comprende...i was of course referring to non d40 users trolling message boards ABOUT the d40. :D
That's just plain silly. Why should non-D40 users be excluded from D40 boards? That would exclude non-D40 users who like to keep up to date on cameras other than their own. How else would you get converts. Oh, and let's also keep people out who are considering the purchase of a D40. They are non-D40 users after all.

I personally like to keep up to date several dSLRs as I like to consider everything when I make a purchase.

From both your signatures, Riley and Rooz, I assume you are not D40 users. What are you doing here?

Ray.

[Riley]

looks like its working already !

[Riley]

That's just plain silly. Why should non-D40 users be excluded from D40 boards? That would exclude non-D40 users who like to keep up to date on cameras other than their own. How else would you get converts. Oh, and let's also keep people out who are considering the purchase of a D40. They are non-D40 users after all.

I personally like to keep up to date several dSLRs as I like to consider everything when I make a purchase.

From both your signatures, Riley and Rooz, I assume you are not D40 users. What are you doing here?

Ray.

well i like to keep up with whats happening across brands
what i saw in a few posts seemed innacurate
and i pretty much commented on that

the rest of my posts aside of that are polite responses to posts that could be assigned to me like this one, not to respond is to my mind somehow rude

exclusion is not the answer, or you might get cut out of a few of these

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1187104

cheers

[Ray Schnoor]

well i like to keep up with whats happening across brands
what i saw in a few posts seemed innacurate
and i pretty much commented on that

the rest of my posts aside of that are polite responses to posts that could be assigned to me like this one, not to respond is to my mind somehow rude

exclusion is not the answer, or you might get cut out of a few of these

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1187104

cheers
I got from the post by Rooz, a D80 owner, that he thinks a non-D40 user posting in a D40 thread is considered trolling. I got from your post that you seemed to agree. I am sorry if I misunderstood. This is actually a thread titled "Nikon D40 Vs Canon Rebel XT". Wouldn't that make it OK for XT owners to post in this thread, at least according to Rooz?

Sorry, but I do not consider Rooz a troll because he owns a D80 and not a D40 or XT. He has as much a right to post in this thread as anyone else. Afterall, I don't own a D40 or XT either. Neither of these cameras are for me, but I do not have a problem with anyone who prefers them, as I have stated in my previous post.

I assume that your link was to point to posts by me, but it doesn't seem to work.

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1187132,

After all, the last 10 posts in this thread seem to be from non-D40 users, as I assume the next few will be, too.

Ray.

[Riley]

no i dont consider you or Rooz trolls
but if you believe trolls are not about, i cant help you

if you believe that exclusion is the best way of dealing with them
i think you are wrong

but in essence we are trying to fix the same problem
if that makes me guilty of something, so be it

[fionndruinne]

I didn't get the sense that he meant every non-D40 owner who posted in such a thread was trolling, just that there are some people who do (for reasons which will be forever dark to me). I'm a non-D40-user, myself, as I haven't made the money to purchase it yet.

I agree, it is only immaturity, perhaps a lack of self-assurance, which would make a person post attacks on another camera just for the sake of attacking it. Partially it may be that what the D40 offers (an affordable SLR with guidance and simplicity for newbies) is seen as bad - like to be an SLR-user you must fight your way up from many years of photography. Sort of like the ways of medieval alchemists.

All said, though, I find it all somewhat amusing. I hope that no one is swayed by dogmatic slanted posts, but I think they'll see through it all. Of course, if I were working instead of chatting here, I'd be able to afford my camera sooner!

... And make sure to bring along an alchemist to deal with those trolls.

[zmikers]

In my experience, and not just in this forum but in real life too, it seems to work both ways. Yes it is true, there are some immature people out there that will say anything bad about a camera, or and entire system on the sole basis that that it is different then their own. We have seen that many times here. Actually, we have seen that many times in this thread alone.

But, let me also say that just because someone says something bad about another camera, that does not mean they don't have reason. I have seen in this forum, a poster (or many) write their honest opinion and get slammed by everyone else for being immature trollers only bashing the "competition."

In short, i think that people posting here should post opinions, which they have every right to do, but try to keep it unbiased and based on experience or fact, but on the flip side, nobody should get upset if others say something bad about the camera that they own. Everyone has the right to post. It is a free world after all.

Sorry for the novel, just my opinion:D

[Rooz]

I didn't get the sense that he meant every non-D40 owner who posted in such a thread was trolling, just that there are some people who do (for reasons which will be forever dark to me).

correctamundo. there are the usual suspects. i didn;t think it was that hard to understand. Ray must be a canon man. :D

[T06]

correctamundo. there are the usual suspects. i didn;t think it was that hard to understand. Ray must be a canon man. :D

oooooooooooooohhh, now you've done it.:D :D :D