-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Do you think Bafana Bafana will win tonight?
ldmelsa + 40D . . D40 . . D90
- Thread starter ldmelsa
- Start date
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Nice one!
stix
Expert Member
// Seconded.
I've back burner'ed the camera for now - this weekend's airshow has put me in the mood for a bigger telephoto - either the sigma 150-500mm or the 50-500mm
Can't give a preference as I haven't touched the 150-500. I'm seriously considering getting a 150-500 "for the missus"I've back burner'ed the camera for now - this weekend's airshow has put me in the mood for a bigger telephoto - either the sigma 150-500mm or the 50-500mm
mercurial
MyBB Legend
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
So when is it arriving, ldmelsa? And what made you go for the 40D over the 5D? Just curious.
stix
Expert Member
I've back burner'ed the camera for now - this weekend's airshow has put me in the mood for a bigger telephoto - either the sigma 150-500mm or the 50-500mm
I need to finish about 5 freelance jobs and then it will come under consideration. Its more a wish list kind of thing as opposed to its on the list
ldmelsa
Executive Member
You lucky fish!
Damn, that is an excellent price dude! Hook me up
Price changes today.
1. Today or tomorrow.
2. The 5D is better in terms of sharpness and lowlight, but the 40D is a better camera in every other way. Functionality, ergonomics, screen, exposure meter and speed. After having used both, the choice was easy for me.
The 5DMKII is what I would get for professional work.
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
I'm with you on that. At the same time, I'm less than convinced about the 5D's low light superiority. I've seen some images from it that was no less noisy at 1600 and 3200 ISO than the stuff that comes out of my 40D. The 40D may have a sensor that's natively more noisy, but it also has a more powerful processor that takes care of a lot of that, *without* losing detail. I'd like to get my hands on both and test them in a controlled situation - see how big the difference really is.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
eish guys
those people made a mistake with that quote - it's actually R12000
but that's so close to nikon d90 (R17k for 18-105 kit)
so now i don't know - go for d90 at that expensive price or get the d40 for R4800 (18-55 kit)
i'm not a pro photographer - all i actually need is that nikon d40
why get the d90 or 40d?
i can just get the nikon d40 (it's all i need)
convince me guys
those people made a mistake with that quote - it's actually R12000
but that's so close to nikon d90 (R17k for 18-105 kit)
so now i don't know - go for d90 at that expensive price or get the d40 for R4800 (18-55 kit)
i'm not a pro photographer - all i actually need is that nikon d40
why get the d90 or 40d?
i can just get the nikon d40 (it's all i need)
convince me guys
ldmelsa
Executive Member
the d40 is better value for money (pretty much the same camera)
R4800 for kit - WOW
R4800 for kit - WOW
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Why not just get the 40D anyway? At 12k it's still good value for money.
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Surely they are obliged to honour their quote? Can't you negotiate a middle ground?
That's a bummer.
I wouldn't buy the D40, I can't remember what it was I didn't like, something to do with the focussing mechanism. Nikon lenses are also relatively more expensive than the equivalent Canon lens, especially at the longer focal lengths.
Also, the C40d is probably closer specced to the Nd300, so you can't really compare the price of the C40d with the Nd40.
I wouldn't buy the D40, I can't remember what it was I didn't like, something to do with the focussing mechanism. Nikon lenses are also relatively more expensive than the equivalent Canon lens, especially at the longer focal lengths.
Also, the C40d is probably closer specced to the Nd300, so you can't really compare the price of the C40d with the Nd40.
mercurial
MyBB Legend
eish guys
those people made a mistake with that quote - it's actually R12000
but that's so close to nikon d90 (R17k for 18-105 kit)
so now i don't know - go for d90 at that expensive price or get the d40 for R4800 (18-55 kit)
i'm not a pro photographer - all i actually need is that nikon d40
why get the d90 or 40d?
i can just get the nikon d40 (it's all i need)
convince me guys
Eish. I thought that price was somewhat speculative. Get the Canon 40D. It's a worthwhile investment. One day there'll be 3 of us with one
Anyway, Canon 40D body only = R11500 at orms.co.za. Nikon D90 body at orms.co.za = R13000. With the D90 you get some advantages like the movie mode which produces excellent quality, but that's only if you really want/need that. The LCD is high-res (4 x more pixels than 40D's LCD). So there are some nice additions, but do you really need them?
Then get the d40 . . . I seriously dont get what the issue is.eish guys
those people made a mistake with that quote - it's actually R12000
but that's so close to nikon d90 (R17k for 18-105 kit)
so now i don't know - go for d90 at that expensive price or get the d40 for R4800 (18-55 kit)
i'm not a pro photographer - all i actually need is that nikon d40
why get the d90 or 40d?
i can just get the nikon d40 (it's all i need)
convince me guys
No matter how you look at it it's infinitely better than the digital camera you have now.
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
why get the d90 or 40d?
i can just get the nikon d40 (it's all i need)
convince me guys
You know I'm a big champion for (amongst others) the Nikon D40 for beginners. But the 40D is just a different class of camera. You've seen what it can do. Its low light capabilities, in jpeg especially. With your Canon glass and EOS film bodies, buying a body of another brand would be silly.
+1