| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/11/2009 02:48:27 PM · #1 |
First I must say I've learned a lot reading through the forums and have really enjoyed the advice. Now I am in need of my own.
I am an animal keeper, which means: 1) I have regular opportunities to take beautiful animal photos and 2) I don't make much money. I've taken a lot of great photos over the years with my Panasonic Lumix P&S, but I've finally reached its limits. From reading the forums, I think I've decided on buying an inexpensive Nikon D40 and some decent lenses, like a Nikor AF-S VR Zoom70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G or 18-200mm VR.
I guess my question is: will the D40 be quick enough with these lenses for decent "zootography" and occasional wildlife photography? I'd love to buy a camera I could grow into, but I just can't afford it--am I wasting my time with this combination?
If this is a decent combo for animal photography, is buying a D40 as cheap as possible (off of craigslist, etc) a bad idea? How important are accutations? Should I just spend the $ and buy a brand new kit off B&H?
Thanks for the help, advice, admonishments, whatever you can provide. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 02:56:45 PM · #2 |
It's a good camera which many members here own, or have owned. Roughly equivalent to my Rebel XT, and an excellent first SLR. The Wolf/Ritz cameras in my area have been advertising new D40's with an armload of extras for about $450, so if you are paying that or more for a used one, it's not a good deal.
Biggest thing to be concerned with is that once you get some accessories, they can move to another camera body, as long as you stick with Nikon.
Message edited by author 2009-06-11 14:57:54. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 03:54:40 PM · #3 |
I think you'll be fine with the D40 ($430 both B&H or Adorama new; Adorama has em for $375 refurbished). I would say just get the camera with the kit lens for now, then buy other lenses if you feel you need them. I have a friend who has shot 30K pics with his D40, still works great. If you go the used route (CraigsList), I'm thinking a fair price would be <70% of retail since you can't return it and there's no warranty. Personally, I'd just go new (or refurbished) from B&H or Adorama. They have a reputation for excellent customer service if you have problems with merchandise.
I think you will find it "quick enough" with those future lenses. I think you can shoot for years with the camera and be happy. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:22:25 PM · #4 |
First off, omg you are so lucky to work as an animal keeper at a zoo. You must get the opportunity to shoot amazing stuff without perimeter barriers etc being in the way!
I own the D40, got it with the kit lens (18-55mm) which works great for indoors. However, my go-to lens is the 18-200, and it is a pretty expensive chunk of glass, mine cost $700 off of ebay, but it's so versatile. I'd also suggest a really good camera bag!  NikonJeb loves his 18-200 so much that he sold all his other lenses.
Anyway, I've had mine for going on 2 yrs now and have yet to outshoot it. The instruction manual is pretty clear, it comes with all kinds of useful modes (I shot on Auto for several months, just to see what settings the camera chose to use). Now I shoot almost exclusively manual.
All in all, I do strongly recommend the D40. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 06:07:17 PM · #5 |
Lindsey,
Okay...here are my two cents...for animal photography my impression is that a good lens will get you where you need to be far faster than your choice of camera body. So, you want to decide how to maximize your options whilst sticking to your budget. Personally, I put my money in my lenses and am waiting to upgrade my camera body. I know I will have my lenses for a lifetime (unless I drop and break it...YIKES!). But, the camera body will be upgradeable every few years.
Should you decide on a D40, here a few things you will have to think about:
1. As the D40 does not have a motor, you will have to buy lenses that do have a motor OR you will have to learn to manually focus your lenses. Lenses with motors cost more money. Lenses without motors are highly usable but you have to be willing to learn how to manually focus on animals that move which makes manually focusing a lens more challenging (as opposed to taking a still life photo for example). I'm sure you will learn it quicker than I did, but for me...I spent alot of time learning to manual focus a panning shot. For me, it's alot of fun, but alot of work too.
2. Also, if you buy lenses with motors to go with your new D40, then should you upgrade your camera body later on to any model higher than a D60, then you will end up with motors in BOTH your lenses AND your new camera body which adds extra weight. Not a big deal...but something to think about.
3. For animals, I'm sure you will want to go with a strong telephoto to get that clear focus and scrumptious bokeh effect. I hope you but much more thought into the right lens for that type of spectacular shooting.
Good luck and I look forward to seeing all of your animal photos!
How lucky you are to have such close contact with these exotic creatures of our Earth!
;-)
|
|
|
|
06/11/2009 10:55:01 PM · #6 |
Just want to offer up some thoughts hoping to offer different perspective, not trying to contradict....
Mae's work speaks for her touch and experience......8>)
Originally posted by hihosilver:
1. As the D40 does not have a motor, you will have to buy lenses that do have a motor OR you will have to learn to manually focus your lenses. Lenses with motors cost more money. Lenses without motors are highly usable but you have to be willing to learn how to manually focus on animals that move which makes manually focusing a lens more challenging (as opposed to taking a still life photo for example). I'm sure you will learn it quicker than I did, but for me...I spent alot of time learning to manual focus a panning shot. For me, it's alot of fun, but alot of work too. |
I *hate* third party lenses.....just haven't had good luck with them, and don't feel the quality's there.
I use Nikkor lenses. Period.
ALL Nikkor DX lenses have motors and work beautifully with the D40.
Many of the terrific older lenses have the motors, too.
I'm also lazy and like the technology taking a lot of the work out of it for me as well as enabling me to get shots I'd miss if it was solely dependent on my skills.
Originally posted by hihosilver:
2. Also, if you buy lenses with motors to go with your new D40, then should you upgrade your camera body later on to any model higher than a D60, then you will end up with motors in BOTH your lenses AND your new camera body which adds extra weight. Not a big deal...but something to think about. |
When you get past the D40/D60, the d@mn things are fairly heavy anyway and the motor isn't an appreciable concern.....(Says the 6'4", 265 lb. guy.....)
Also, I'm not so sure why the D40 is seen as anything but a terrific camera....it takes terrific pictures, as Mae can attest......I got my daughter one, and I use it every now and then and love it. It's a terrific unit. If it gives you good service and you don't find yourself wanting more, great!
Originally posted by hihosilver:
3. For animals, I'm sure you will want to go with a strong telephoto to get that clear focus and scrumptious bokeh effect. I hope you but much more thought into the right lens for that type of spectacular shooting. |
As Susan  snaffles pointed out, I have an 18-200.....and sold all my other lenses. I have since accvumulated another body, and I got a fabulous deal on another VR zoom 24-120, so I have a little more, but the 18-200 will always be the one I grab first. I'll show you how much fun I had at the zoo with it after Sunday. Had I not had the 200 focal length, I'd not have gotten the entry I did.....and I *LOVE* it.
Anyway, you can hardly go wrong with a D40, the packages that have the 18-55VR and 55-200VR are really a heck of a deal IMNSHO, and you will find that 55-200 to be a sweet lens.
Good luck with your decision.
If you were closer, I'd just let you grab our D40 for the weekend and go with it.
Orlando's a big town with lots of tourists.....perhaps a rental?
|
|
|
|
06/11/2009 11:04:17 PM · #7 |
Hmmmm...I just wanted to point out that all of my lenses ARE Nikon lenses. I do not have any third party lenses and have never used any third party lenses. I cannot recommend any because the ones below are all I have.
Here is my list of lenses:
All around lens: Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
Portrait / Macro lens: Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D - no motor
Telephoto (good bird lens): Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR - no motor
Kit Lens: Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED
As noted above, two of my NIKON lenses DO NOT HAVE MOTORS that are underlined and in bold and have to be manually focused on my D40.
Yes, it's alot of work to manually pan a flying bird at 400mm or shoot a surfer...but it can be done AND it's alot of fun.
All I can say is that for those of us on a budget...the quality of an excellent lens will count far more than the camera body. So, that's where I will put the majority of my pennies.
You might also considering renting a lenses from a camera store for a day or two to try out what will work for you. Some camera stores will deduct the rental feel if you end up buying the lens.
Now, tonight, I'm going to put my little D40 into a bowl of squishy spinach...and tomorrow?...my camera will turn into a big strong camera just like... NikonJeb's D200! ;-)
Well, I'm out of pennies now...so that's the rest of my cents. ;-)
Edited: To add just one more cent that I found!
Message edited by author 2009-06-11 23:20:51. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 11:21:44 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
All around lens: Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
Portrait / Macro lens: Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D - no motor
Telephoto (good bird lens): Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR - no motor
Kit Lens: Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED
As noted above, two of my NIKON lenses DO NOT HAVE MOTORS that are underlined and in bold and have to be manually focused on my D40. |
The S & I are the tip-offs.....they all have motors.
All the AF-S & AF-I lenses will autofocus on a D40.....that encompasses roughly forty different lenses that can pretty much cover your needs.
And This Lens generally considered to be on of the best in the world, will work on a D40.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2009 11:32:20 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
And This Lens generally considered to be on of the best in the world, will work on a D40. |
Oh yeah! But, wouldn't we have to manually focus that one? It's the AF version. Hmmmm.
I'm saving my pennies for this version...YUMMY!
Message edited by author 2009-06-11 23:33:24. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 11:44:22 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
And This Lens generally considered to be on of the best in the world, will work on a D40. |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Oh yeah! But, wouldn't we have to manually focus that one? It's the AF version. Hmmmm. |
AAARRRGGGHHH!!! Yes, wrong one.....
This Link has the correct one.
Originally posted by hihosilver:
I'm saving my pennies for this version...YUMMY! |
Whimper......
Unlikely that'll happen for me.......8>(
|
|
|
|
06/12/2009 12:23:58 AM · #11 |
Ahhh...the 80-200 looks good. I want to price that one.
Here is another one to consider:
Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED
Lindsey? Just give us your credit card...and we'll do all of your shopping for you! ;-)
Message edited by author 2009-06-12 00:24:54. |
|
|
|
06/12/2009 09:11:54 AM · #12 |
Thank you all for your detailed and thoughtful responses--i really appreciate it. I do consider myself one of the lucky few who loves their job and photographing the animals is the icing on the cake, to use a cliche.
I really like the idea of using the 18-200 and not having to switch out lenses, especially since I will be using it at work--I won't have to carry as much and sometimes I get very close to the animals and don't need much zoom.
Jeb--I think I read somewhere in my extensive internet travels that the 18-200 focuses a bit more slowly. Is it quick enough to catch animals running/birds in flight?
And, another riddle for you all: for about the same price point, I could get both the 18-55mm and 70-300mm. Is it worth switching out just to have the extra 100mm?
I may just go cheaper and get the 18-55mm & 55-200mm--don't know if I've earned the good stuff yet! ; )
Thanks again,
Lindsey |
|
|
|
06/12/2009 10:34:20 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by RhinoStar:
I think I read somewhere in my extensive internet travels that the 18-200 focuses a bit more slowly. Is it quick enough to catch animals running/birds in flight? |
LOL I can answer that question for you... The D40 and the 18-200 caught a combined total weight of 3600 lbs of galloping Clydesdales! :-)
ISO 400, aperture 1/200, f7.1.
Message edited by author 2009-06-12 10:35:11. |
|
|
|
06/12/2009 11:25:34 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by RhinoStar:
Thank you all for your detailed and thoughtful responses--i really appreciate it. I do consider myself one of the lucky few who loves their job and photographing the animals is the icing on the cake, to use a cliche. |
I love my job, too, and get to use my camera at work often......and I am constantly being hit up for images for the company newsletter. I love that!!!
Originally posted by RhinoStar:
I really like the idea of using the 18-200 and not having to switch out lenses, especially since I will be using it at work--I won't have to carry as much and sometimes I get very close to the animals and don't need much zoom.
Jeb--I think I read somewhere in my extensive internet travels that the 18-200 focuses a bit more slowly. Is it quick enough to catch animals running/birds in flight? |
I love having the 18-200 as "my lens"....
I have used it for soccer shots for my daughter's soccer team, I use it in low light, high ISO situations, and since I carry my camera with me everywhere, I am often grabbing it and shooting quickly for those, "Just 'cause I was there" shots.
I really have zero complaints with the lens. I had a Tamron 28-300 before the 18-200 and I thinks it's a much better lens all 'round.
Originally posted by RhinoStar:
And, another riddle for you all: for about the same price point, I could get both the 18-55mm and 70-300mm. Is it worth switching out just to have the extra 100mm? |
I "sacrificed" the 28-300 range for 18-200 when I broke the Tamron.....I like the slightly more wide angle and don't miss the extra focal length. I had trouble with the 28-300 at the longer focal lengths because of stability, and I feel that with the VR, and the better build quality, I'm getting better long focal length images.
Originally posted by RhinoStar:
I may just go cheaper and get the 18-55mm & 55-200mm--don't know if I've earned the good stuff yet! ; ) |
Bad atitude and concept......you deserve the good stuff.....
I wish I had gotten the 18-200VR when I first wanted it instead of screwing around trying to be fiscally resonsible and compromising. I spent more money buying lenses I wasn't truly happy with and still ended up with what was the lens I wanted in the first place.
I have *ZERO* compunction about telling you that IMO, the D40 and the 18-200VR is a combination that is an out-and-out winner....
|
|
|
|
06/12/2009 11:26:51 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Ahhh...the 80-200 looks good. I want to price that one.
Here is another one to consider:
Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED
Lindsey? Just give us your credit card...and we'll do all of your shopping for you! ;-) |
We're such thoughtful and responsible, caring folk that we'll test everything first to make sure it all works properly, right guys?
(Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.....)
|
|
|
|
06/12/2009 03:13:05 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I wish I had gotten the 18-200VR when I first wanted it instead of screwing around trying to be fiscally resonsible and compromising. I spent more money buying lenses I wasn't truly happy with and still ended up with what was the lens I wanted in the first place.
|
That's what I've been telling my husband! Seriously though, my "dilemma" may seem like splitting hairs to some, but when you don't have much $, it pays to do as much research as possible and hear from someone who's been there & done that.
Went to BestBuy (Ugh) to try out the 18-200mmVR firsthand and they told me that Nikon pulled them off the shelves (at least at that BestBuy)...interesting. He didn't know why. He also told me that Ritz is filing bankruptcy. Haven't looked into that, but if they do, wonder if they'll have good deals coming soon? Naturally, BestBuy's prices were steep.
So, I didn't get to try that lens, but I tried another 200mm and the 70-300mm. I must say I liked that extra 100mm. I'll let you know what I decide on, but it looks like I'll be going with the "good stuff" either way.
Cheers,
Linds
And yes, I would let you all buy it and test it out for me if I thought I would ever get the equipment back ; ) |
|
|
|
06/12/2009 03:40:51 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I wish I had gotten the 18-200VR when I first wanted it instead of screwing around trying to be fiscally resonsible and compromising. I spent more money buying lenses I wasn't truly happy with and still ended up with what was the lens I wanted in the first place.
|
Originally posted by RhinoStar:
That's what I've been telling my husband! Seriously though, my "dilemma" may seem like splitting hairs to some, but when you don't have much $, it pays to do as much research as possible and hear from someone who's been there & done that.
Went to BestBuy (Ugh) to try out the 18-200mmVR firsthand and they told me that Nikon pulled them off the shelves (at least at that BestBuy)...interesting. He didn't know why. He also told me that Ritz is filing bankruptcy. Haven't looked into that, but if they do, wonder if they'll have good deals coming soon? Naturally, BestBuy's prices were steep.
So, I didn't get to try that lens, but I tried another 200mm and the 70-300mm. I must say I liked that extra 100mm. I'll let you know what I decide on, but it looks like I'll be going with the "good stuff" either way. |
Yeah, funny that.....
Nikon pulling stock would be a pretty good indication that they're not much interested in getting zipped by the mass merchants that have been going belly-up right and left.
Canon & Nikon both have gotten stung to the tune of MILLIONS of dollars in uncollectible debt from those warehouse whores.
I have heard no rumors or stories concerning any kind of quality issues whatsoever with that lens......and I would think that with the plethora of widespread users we have here at DPC that we'd have heard something if there was an issue.
Message edited by author 2009-06-12 15:41:20.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2009 03:54:26 PM · #18 |
So, while NikonJeb and I fight over who gets to test your new lenses first...
Just remember, Lindsey, you can rarely go wrong with any Nikon lens that has "F2.8" somewhere in the title! ;-) |
|
|
|
06/12/2009 04:01:01 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
So, while NikonJeb and I fight over who gets to test your new lenses first...
Just remember, Lindsey, you can rarely go wrong with any Nikon lens that has "F2.8" somewhere in the title! ;-) |
They're easy to spot.....they're the ones with the four-digit price tag! LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
06/12/2009 04:09:23 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by hihosilver:
So, while NikonJeb and I fight over who gets to test your new lenses first...
Just remember, Lindsey, you can rarely go wrong with any Nikon lens that has "F2.8" somewhere in the title! ;-) |
They're easy to spot.....they're the ones with the four-digit price tag! LOL!!! |
Oh yeah...I guess I did leave out that minor detail, didn't I?!!! Haha! |
|
|
|
06/12/2009 04:27:00 PM · #21 |
|
|
|
06/12/2009 05:23:19 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by raish:
heh. |
That's just RUDE!!!! LOL!!!
I'm bettin' that be a terrific wildlife lens, Linds.....8>)
|
|
|
|
06/12/2009 05:24:59 PM · #23 |
All the lenses on This Page are AF-S except the first one.
Just trying to help!!!
|
|
|
|
06/13/2009 02:33:38 AM · #24 |
Limitation is a reality.
(I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
... ) |
|
|
|
06/13/2009 07:37:16 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by raish:
Limitation is a reality.
(I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
I will stop being rude
... ) |
But then.......
You wouldn't be.......YOU!!!
LOL!!!
|
|
