Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 54
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    540

    Nikon D40, 60, 80 owners

    I was at my local camera shop (LCS) and was asking about the Nikon D series. When I told him i was going to take action shots of people biking he showed me the Cannon Rebel XTi and the new XSi(which i love by the way) because the Cannon autofocusing was alot quicker.
    Nikon owners do feel that your DSLR is slow focusing? I would think mtn biking is not blazingly fast and that the Nikons can take it.

  2. #2
    Noob
    Reputation: Downhillin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    140
    Bring on the Canon v. Nikon debate # 4,583,450!
    MTB Blog

    There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    75
    I am a mountain and road biker as well as a photographer. I shoot biking, kayaking and adventure race events. I have several Nikon DSLR's including the D50, D80, and D200. I switched from Canon because of the ergonomics of the Nikon bodies is significantly better than Canon. The Nikon bodies hold better and it is easier to rapidly change settings, including focus points, with the Nikon bodies. In addition, the Canon flash system does not have the consistency that the Nikon does. You may not think the flash is important outdoors but the get proper exposures on high contrast sunny days and also is shadowy woods, you need to use fill flash. As far as focusing speed goes, unless you are shooting Formula 1 races, you shouldn't have any problems with either Nikon or Canon. Both systems have great lenses.

  4. #4
    skillz to pay billz
    Reputation: nOOby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,554
    well they weren't formula 1 but still damn fast. Indy cars at infineon. Nikon d1x.







    focus speeds weren't really an issue though. Pretty short lens at infinity. And fast shutter speeds(1/2000+, the camera goes to 1/16,000). What you're going to want is a fast lens(low fstop) so you can open it up in low light conditions and fill flash as mentioned above.
    Last edited by nOOby; 05-28-2008 at 09:01 AM.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    29
    My D50 focuses plenty fast for me...

    The only body which I could see being "slower" is the D40...due to it's lack of AF motor.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    30
    Im a canon user, 30d, and never used a nikon, so cant say for sure, but i know, with the canon, Autofocus is very dependant on the lense. My "L" USM lense is very fast, even in almost no light. On the other hand, The kit lense that came with my old D.rebel is noisy and slow...

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    88
    The short answer is: You'll be fine.

    Longer explanation: the AF modules on Nikon bodies start with the fastest in the flagship models (D3 and D300) and trickle down to the consumer models. So the AF in the current D300 is bit better than the D200. I think the D200 shares AF modules with one of the consumer cams, if memory serves me correctly. I have a D200 and have not been disappointed.

    Ask yourseld why, beyond AF capabilities, the salesperson is steering toward Canon products. Maybe there's market influences at work. I was at a big box store yesterday shopping for a pocket camera and the salesperson directed Every customer to the same two models of Sony cameras, regardless of what their request was. Bigger markup, more stock to clear....?

    And though you didn't ask this: do you really need an SLR to ride with or are you going to hike in with the camera to photograph? I've been shooting seriously for years with the full range of Nikon kit and recently concluded it's a major drag humping a DSLR on the bike. Yes, I get good pix but carrying it and worrying about taking a spill just takes the fun out of it for me and so I'm going with a good quality P&S. Just my two cents.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobonli
    T

    And though you didn't ask this: do you really need an SLR to ride with or are you going to hike in with the camera to photograph? I've been shooting seriously for years with the full range of Nikon kit and recently concluded it's a major drag humping a DSLR on the bike. Yes, I get good pix but carrying it and worrying about taking a spill just takes the fun out of it for me and so I'm going with a good quality P&S. Just my two cents.
    A good point. I dont shoot professionaly, just seriously and passionatly. I have $2500 worth of camera gear in my backpack bag. Yes, I could ride with it. But I'd rather not crash with it! Nor do I want to carry that weight on a long ride! So I just bought a olympus P&S. I acctually bought it for my trip to hawaii, because its waterproof to 10 feet. And rated to withstand a 5 foot drop to a hard surface. For $220. Now, its not a fast, not as flexable, not the same picture quality, and I wouldent trade it for my 30D for anything...but...if its in my pocket while the 30D sits in the bag at home or in the car, its taking better pics than the 30d's not taking! If I'm going to print, or try to sell stuff, I'll work with the 30d, even if it means hiking it out. And another plus to a P&S, video! I got some pretty cool vids underwater of the reef in hawaii! Nothing to show on the big screen, but great for web posting or sending to friends!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trekmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    835
    If someone claims the AF is slow, maybe the settings can be changed. Doesn't the D40 and others have the ability to adjust for shutter priority and focus priority? If your camera is set for shutter priority it may give you the impression that the AF isn't quick enough because the shutter won't wait for the AF to finish before the shutter is released.

  10. #10
    Aquaman
    Reputation: G_Blanco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    419
    My wifes says get a Nikon...Just not the d40..she told me why but alll I heard was "dont get the D40 because (insert camera geek speek here).

  11. #11
    XCfosho15
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by trekmike
    If someone claims the AF is slow, maybe the settings can be changed. Doesn't the D40 and others have the ability to adjust for shutter priority and focus priority? If your camera is set for shutter priority it may give you the impression that the AF isn't quick enough because the shutter won't wait for the AF to finish before the shutter is released.
    Huh? As far as I know, there is no such thing as "focus priority", just "shutter priority" (marked as TV), and "aperature priority" (marked as AE). These are not giving "priority" to how the shutter or anything else operates. It just means that when in TV, you select a shutter speed and the camera will select a suitable aperature setting. When in AE, you select the aperature, and the camera selects a suitable shutter speed.

    The only "focus priority" I could think of might be in the lense, and that would just be governing what method the lense uses to autofocus. I wouldn't call that focus priority, just "autofocus control", but what do I know...

    EDIT: yeah... my camera (Canon S2 IS, not an SLR), has "AF (autofocus) Mode". Options are "continuous" or "single". Continuous is when it is always focusing on what ever the lense is pointed at, single is when it only focuses when the shutter button is depressed halfway.

  12. #12
    don't thread on me
    Reputation: Roswell52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by lawndart
    I was at my local camera shop (LACS) and was asking about the Nikon D series. When I told him i was going to take action shots of people biking he showed me the Cannon Rebel Ti and the new XSi(which i love by the way) because the Cannon autofocusing was alot quicker.
    Nikon owners do feel that your SLR is slow focusing? I would think MN biking is not blazingly fast and that the Nikon's can take it.
    Never believe sales guys in retail stores. He probably got a sales spiff for selling Canons last week. Next week he will be telling customers the Nikon is faster.

    There is virtually no difference between focus speeds between these two manufacturers. Focus speed is irrelevant unless your MTB is going in excess of Mach 1.
    sign here ________________________

  13. #13
    Keep pedaling...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    281

    Gear doesn't matter

    Don't listen to this milkshake at the camera store.

    Get the D40. Its cheap as hell, and made of plastic so it is light. Also nice and compact. It takes excellent photos, but the most important piece of equipment is about 6" behind the viewfinder.

    Auto-focus is for suckers - manual with burst-mode is the shizznit.

  14. #14
    XCfosho15
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by paulster2626

    Auto-focus is for suckers - manual with burst-mode is the shizznit.
    you got that right!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    540

    Thanks everyone

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobonli
    The short answer is: You'll be fine.

    Longer explanation: the AF modules on Nikon bodies start with the fastest in the flagship models (D3 and D300) and trickle down to the consumer models. So the AF in the current D300 is bit better than the D200. I think the D200 shares AF modules with one of the consumer cams, if memory serves me correctly. I have a D200 and have not been disappointed.

    Ask yourseld why, beyond AF capabilities, the salesperson is steering toward Canon products. Maybe there's market influences at work. I was at a big box store yesterday shopping for a pocket camera and the salesperson directed Every customer to the same two models of Sony cameras, regardless of what their request was. Bigger markup, more stock to clear....?

    And though you didn't ask this: do you really need an SLR to ride with or are you going to hike in with the camera to photograph? I've been shooting seriously for years with the full range of Nikon kit and recently concluded it's a major drag humping a DSLR on the bike. Yes, I get good pix but carrying it and worrying about taking a spill just takes the fun out of it for me and so I'm going with a good quality P&S. Just my two cents.

    Bobonli and everyone,
    you bring up very good points. My main goal with the DSLR is to take pics, where ever i go day hiking, into the city, vacation, etc. and hopefully print ones i like enough to put on my walls.

    I frequent the local mtb race series that my shop/store sponsors so thats where my main concern with the focusing when my friends zoom by me. When the saleman started showing me the Canon becuase I told him i was also interested in taking 'action shots' as biking I thought to my self how fast does he think bikers travel?

    Im coming from an old Minolta A5 which was in between a point n shoot and a DSLR. This will be my first DSLR. What I really dont like is the shutter lag which Im used to on my GF's PnS.

    So I should feel comfortable in saying the Nikons will do just fine tracking and shooting pics of my friends at the races. I didnt mean to make this into a Canon vs Nikon debate, just wanted to know how well Nikon's autofocus is.

  16. #16
    rjd
    rjd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    39
    The 40/60 nikons only have 3 focus points, which will man a lot of focus & recomposing which is iffy.

    Wont autofocus with only AF lenses, which mostly limits your prime selection, theres some good f2.8 zooms.

    Also canons AF and tracking of the new cameras will be better, btu I get on fine with the old 350d stuff. Canon will shoot larger RAW sequences too, but still only 3/3.5 fps.

    IMo the D60 lacks a ton of stuff that I find important, mirror lockup, bracketing, Depth of field preview , ISO 100 etc, your milage may vary but I think the D40/60 is a limited tool.

  17. #17
    rjd
    rjd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by XCfosho15
    Huh? As far as I know, there is no such thing as "focus priority", .
    Canons focus priority is when it will refuse to take a picture unless it knows its in focus. Its switchable.

  18. #18
    rjd
    rjd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by ffwlwhite
    My wifes says get a Nikon...Just not the d40..she told me why but alll I heard was "dont get the D40 because (insert camera geek speek here).

    The dxx series is lacking a lot (as I said above), takes a great picture though.

    The D80 is old and due replacement, the D300 is a STUNNING camera and if its in your price bracket get it, its still not as good for noise as the 5D (or D3) but for everything else its great - the 40D actualy focuses faster but doesnt have the colour AF tracking stuff etc so the D300 can be better in some situations.

    D300 is though almost twice the price of the 40D and definatly isnt twice the camera. I'd be happy with either.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    663
    On one side he was right, but not about equipment you two were talking about. Canon af system is better then Nikon, but this is when you are talking about pro cameras. With low end cameras it's pretty much same thing on Canon or Nikon, so no matter which way you will go, you will do fine.
    But one thing... anyone telling any camera and their af system is good enough for "slow" things like mtb is, is plain wrong. Before someone jumps at me, let me explain few small things. First of all, I know what I'm talking about. I shoot pro sport as shooter for few of biggest European photo agencies for quite some time. I shoot everything from basketball through skiing to cycling, so I know what is fast and what is not fast Personally I use Canon 1d cameras, but this doesn't really matter here.
    So now to few basic things... One thing is to say af on low end cameras is fast enough for shooting some Indy cars from spectators stands, where car is 10% (or less) of whole photo, and even preferably when moving across the photo (basically not movement where af should work hard). Other thing is to shoot it when it's coming straight at you, and your frame is filled, for example like this. This way af of anything but pro cameras (no offense but in this case pro cameras are Canon 1d and Nikon D3, not Canon 40/30/20D and Nikon D300/200) will handle this.
    Now when considering just mtb. When you are tracking biker who is coming straight down at you at speed of 70 or 80km/h, low end cameras will fail. So no matter what you buy, Canon or Nikon, you won't see difference. If you will be shooting different way, it will go. Of course you can always prefocus and shoot, but then af has nothing to do with this. And of course, when you are shooting so, that frame is not filled, you can get away with much worse camera, but I'm too long already to start explaining why

    So my advise to you is to get camera which you like better. There's not much difference between same class cameras from one or another manufacturer.
    Primoz

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by lawndart
    This will be my first DSLR. What I really dont like is the shutter lag which Im used to on my GF's PnS.

    .
    Take a look at this, about coping with shutter delay:
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/shutter-lag.htm

    Just to reiterate, at the price point you are investigating, both brands are going to perform about the same. It will come down to ergonomics and what you prefer to work with. Also consider which system has accessories (lenses and flash) that better meet your needs.

    And I forgot, in my previous post, my standard answer to these questions: RENT. Find a place that rents gear and take each out for an afternoon and see how they perform. Most larger cities have an outlet that rents gear to pros; better camera shops may also loan you a demo model. You'll likely find that renting a body and lens for $45 is cheaper than shelling out $800 and making a mistake.

    Good luck
    Bob

  21. #21
    XCfosho15
    Guest
    ahhh, i know what you are talking about. thanks for cluing me in.

  22. #22
    desert dweller
    Reputation: mattbikeboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,643
    I shoot with a D80 and I like it. Faster lenses will make a huge difference with focus speed (a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 will like to hunt if you lose you're focus point causing you to lose your shot -- on the other hand a nice 70-200 or 80-200 f/2.8 lens will focus very fast (even if you loose your focus point)).

    Either way you'll learn to adapt to your camera. Pre-focusing in difficult lighting situations will allow you to get the shots you want. I shot at a night cyclo-cross and a night crit last year and was getting as good of shots as any I saw published anywhere. I just had to learn what would work with riders flying by in the dark (prefocus and flash). My shots were good enough that Velonews bought a few.

    I'm already planning on buying a D300 this fall when sports season picks up again. A D3 would be my dream camera (but I'd have to sell $3000 more images to get that past my wife).

    mbb

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trekmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    835

    you got it!

    Yeah, that is what I was thinking...

    Quote Originally Posted by XCfosho15
    Huh? As far as I know, there is no such thing as "focus priority", just "shutter priority" (marked as TV), and "aperature priority" (marked as AE). These are not giving "priority" to how the shutter or anything else operates. It just means that when in TV, you select a shutter speed and the camera will select a suitable aperature setting. When in AE, you select the aperature, and the camera selects a suitable shutter speed.

    The only "focus priority" I could think of might be in the lense, and that would just be governing what method the lense uses to autofocus. I wouldn't call that focus priority, just "autofocus control", but what do I know...

    EDIT: yeah... my camera (Canon S2 IS, not an SLR), has "AF (autofocus) Mode". Options are "continuous" or "single". Continuous is when it is always focusing on what ever the lense is pointed at, single is when it only focuses when the shutter button is depressed halfway.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trekmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    835

    Ask her

    Can you ask her why not the d-40?

    Quote Originally Posted by ffwlwhite
    My wifes says get a Nikon...Just not the d40..she told me why but alll I heard was "dont get the D40 because (insert camera geek speek here).

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,431
    I work with both professionally. Both are good. It's like the bike brand fights, Ford vs. Chevy etc.... I can think of one lens I own I own that is a reason for Canon but that lens alone is more money than most will pay for a kit. I also think of flash systems and most who engage in the arguments are not spending sereious $ on multiple flash units etc.... Thus, get what you like. It's completely non-technical, but I have had better dealings with Canon customer service but both major players are fine.

    The ergonomics argument does not get me because I still use gear decades old where that was not an issue and even with new stuff some product revisions are better than others.

  26. #26
    Keep pedaling...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by trekmike
    Can you ask her why not the d-40?
    Sounds like an uneducated wife.

    I bought a D40 as my first DSLR and I absolutely love it. Its got everything I'd need, and then some. Takes great photos.

    I'm just an average dude who likes to take some good pics now and then. If I were working for National Geographic or something then of course this would not be the right tool. But, sometimes less is better.

    I think the OP would be more concerned with price, weight and portability than having all kinds of crazy features that he's never used before. The D40 rocks, I have yet to hear someone say they regret getting one. Or any of the big name-brand cameras, for that matter.

    Dude just go buy a camera and start taking photos. Nikon and Canon do a good job of keeping each other honest.

  27. #27
    rjd
    rjd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by paulster2626
    Sounds like an uneducated wife.
    Yep because picking the least competent, least featurefull camera on the market is a mark of ignorance?

    I know people who miss not having the AF screw, or MLU , or bracketing, or more than 3 focus points etc. It does take a good picture, but then they all do that, if your prepaired to manual focus with a crop sensor viewfinder and no split prism then mebe its the right camera. It is a good camera but it is about the most basic you can buy.

    Theres a whole ton of similaly priced cameras with more.

  28. #28
    Keep pedaling...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by rjd
    Yep because picking the least competent, least featurefull camera on the market is a mark of ignorance?

    I know people who miss not having the AF screw, or MLU , or bracketing, or more than 3 focus points etc. It does take a good picture, but then they all do that, if your prepaired to manual focus with a crop sensor viewfinder and no split prism then mebe its the right camera. It is a good camera but it is about the most basic you can buy.

    Theres a whole ton of similaly priced cameras with more.
    Sometimes, less is better. Its his first DSLR. I say, best to get something that is easy to use, as when learning anything that is new.
    Also, the D40 cannot be beat for its small and lightweight design. He'd be more likely to take it with him when he's out and about. I know that I have my camera with me way more than my friends who got sucked in to all that razzle-dazzle B.S. that's meant for the professionals.

    No bracketing? I simply adjust the exposure a couple clicks to the right or left and take some shots. I can't imagine it being any easier.
    AF screw? What is this? Perhaps I have the benefit of not having ever seen this before! All I know is that I don't need it to take a picture.
    What is MLU? Either you're mistaken and the D40 does this, or its yet another 'feature' that I don't need and would just get in the way of me actually pressing the shutter-release?
    Focus points are overrated. I get along fine with 3. Actually, I rarely even use the two outside ones - easier to just focus with the middle and recompose.
    And the auto-focus works perfectly. I've never had a problem.

    The lack of a split-prism would only be a problem if you've been using it for years. The Nikon's have a little green light that indicates when your subject is in focus. Works marrrrrvelously.

    You make the poor 'ol D40 sound like its some piece of junk that nobody should consider. It has ended up to be exactly what I need, and I feel sorry for my buds who spent way more money and bought cameras with too many features and heavy bodies.

    Just check it out, that's all I'm sayin'. You could save yourself a lot of money.

    Edit: At least I think its his first SLR camera - that's the impression I got. If not then my points are moot.
    2nd edit: Looked up AF Screw and MLU - no big deal. The first one isn't an issue if you buy the right lenses. MLU is only a bummer when shooting >300mm at speeds of 1/30 to 1/4 of a second. Sounds like these issues would only be a problem for someone going from a $1500 camera to the $500 D40.
    Last edited by paulster2626; 05-29-2008 at 08:06 PM.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    52
    according to roswell52, you should not trust me, but i make a living selling cameras. if you want, hit me up with a pm, and i'll do my best to help you figure out which one will work best for you.
    the short answer- whichever one you like holding in your hand. they are far to evenly matched for anything other than semantics to make a huge difference at the level of camera you are talking about.
    although roswell and a few others here seem to think i'll lie to you to make more money, there are those of us that actually want to sell a customer the right tool for the job, rather than what might pay the most. your generalities are an insult at best, and a show of your true character at worst. think before opening your mouth to slag someone you have never met. maybe, just maybe, the guy he spoke to owns a canon, and really believed it to be the best camera for the op's needs, rather than an attempt at selling what pays the most.
    anyway, op, if you want to pm me, i'll be happy to help in any way i can, one rider to another.

  30. #30
    less is more
    Reputation: venus1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    823

    I have a D70 & D80

    Read up on the focusing mechanisms of D40 or D60 vs D80. Unless you want to spend >5,000 you wonít get any camera/lens that can focus on a bike coming strait at you in your face. Technique is required here in anticipating the object moving into a determined area of focus. Also the more you pay, the more fps (frames per second) a camera can fire, increasing your odds of getting one in focus shot in a burst.
    Finesse is everything.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6
    As previous posters have said, D40 is only compatible with AF-S type lenses, meaning you get no AF using older Nikon compatible lenses. This may be an issue for some, but if you have no old glass, then maybe less so.

    D40 is obviously a fine camera for some folks on here, no need to get defensive if it works for you

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    31

    The D40 works great for mountain biking

    Much in the same way it's the rider not the bike it's the person behind the camera not the camera. Your money is better spent on nice glass than the camera body. I own a D40 with a 18-135mm lens and the auto focus is plenty fast enough for mountain biking even when the rider is coming at you head on.



    If you don't believe that than here is something moving even faster shot with the same lens and camera.

    Warning roadie content.
    http://gallery.mac.com/cianci66/100013/DSC_1839/web.jpg

    In the original full res version you can see the carbon weave on the frame.

    But here is the rest of the photos I took at the BUMP race this morning.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,649
    agree with the above comments. both are great systems and anyone can be happy with either. i shoot nikon because i like the ergonomics better as well as the build quality. i have a d300 which is an amazing camera, but as was said above it's also a premium priced camera. whether it's worth the extra money relative to the canon equivalent 40d is a judgement call. you get a lot more but it costs more, seems like a fair game to me.

  34. #34
    banned
    Reputation: urinal mint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by PhysicsGuy
    I own a D40 with a 18-135mm lens and the auto focus is plenty fast enough for mountain biking even when the rider is coming at you head on.



    If you don't believe that than here is something moving even faster shot with the same lens and camera.

    Warning roadie content.
    Some facts:

    -Both riders are moving relatively slowly so of course there aren't focusing issues.

    -You have some serious white balance issues with the first pic and of course it's going to be in focus, you were shooting at f5.6! That's a pretty deep DOF considering the subject. The photo would have been much more dramatic if you shot wide open and isolated the lead rider with a shallow DOF(and you could have captured him in better quality/less noise by shooting at a lower ISO).

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    540

    thank you everyone

    Quote Originally Posted by twostowe
    As previous posters have said, D40 is only compatible with AF-S type lenses, meaning you get no AF using older Nikon compatible lenses. This may be an issue for some, but if you have no old glass, then maybe less so.

    D40 is obviously a fine camera for some folks on here, no need to get defensive if it works for you
    I'd be starting from scratch...I inherited my dad's old Canon FTb 35mm SLR w 50mm and 200mm lens from the late 60s so I highly doubt they'd work.

    I like the idea of 'renting' each one so i can tell which one i like. I did go to Best Buy just to mess around with them They had both Canons and Nikons and I can tell right away that I like the Canon's shutter release and ergos than the Nikon's.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tductape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,359
    Use a D40x DSLR and a Powershot SD600 when I have concerns about bulk, weight, and protecting my DSLR from damage. Love them both (anyone want to buy my old no longer used darkroom equipment). Check out the latest Consumer Report mag for their latest review of lower priced DSLR's and point and shoots.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by urinal mint
    Some facts:
    -Both riders are moving relatively slowly so of course there aren't focusing issues.
    Bikes don't move much faster than that. Point being a D40 is fast enough for mountain biking.

    -You have some serious white balance issues with the first pic and of course it's going to be in focus, you were shooting at f5.6! That's a pretty deep DOF considering the subject. The photo would have been much more dramatic if you shot wide open and isolated the lead rider with a shallow DOF(and you could have captured him in better quality/less noise by shooting at a lower ISO).
    f5.6 is wide open for the lens I was using. I would like to get a faster lense but that's all I have for the moment. I'm saving my money for a f1.4 50mm and a f2.8 70-200mm. Again like I said money is better spent on lenses than camera bodies I would have had the same result on any other camera body.

    As far as the white balance issue I'm still trying to figure that one out the light kept changing every time a cloud would come over head. But this was only the second time tried to shoot a mountain bikes so I'm still learning. Still trying to figure out a good white balance for the woods.

    There wasn't enough light to keep the shutter speed fast at lower ISO and I didn't want to use the flash.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,419
    Olympus E420 is definitely the best Iíve had so far, from my experience none of those you guys mention even come close, Iím not a photographer so youíll have to take my dads word for that but itís a really great camera and I wouldnít recommend any of Nikonís DSLRís apart from the D300, Iíll ask my dad later what the problem was but the D80 had some serious malfunctioning problems.


  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,419
    There was a band of yellowish colour across the top of every photo with my dads D80, that’s not a big problem when I come to think of it because you can just take the camera back and it's probably a rare problem.

    I’d also recommend the Pentax K10D for moving pictures cos not only is it a brilliant camera but it has image stabilisation built in and comes out with truly brilliant photos.

    Just two alternatives in the Olympus and Pentax for you.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,412
    Ive been shooting with an Olympus 510- its been working out really well.
    http://picasaweb.google.com/rsdmag/5thStX
    <a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/rsdmag/5thStX/photo#5136975092321869634"><img src="http://lh3.ggpht.com/rsdmag/R0ozoS3f30I/AAAAAAAABHY/sCHMasE9yyc/s144/5thStX%20053_filtered.jpg" /></a>
    Last edited by dankilling; 06-02-2008 at 02:12 PM.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,649
    i'm a big fan of the nikon dslr's. we have a d70 which my wife now uses for her business, a d200 which i loved and now a d300 which is truly a wizard machine....the d200 went to africa with us and we had amazing results with it. the d300 gets on its first road trip in a couple of weeks up in oregon, and i'm looking forward to the images. there are always a few with problems, but the general read is that the nikon dslrs (and canon) are the overall best thought of systems. we have had zero issues with any of our nikon equipment...

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by PhysicsGuy
    Bikes don't move much faster than that. Point being a D40 is fast enough for mountain biking.
    Bikes by themself really don't move at all, but when bikers push them, they do In reality this on your photo was pretty much slowest possible moment. In every other part of track they would move a lot faster. Speed around 70 or 80km/h is nothing that impossible on bike races. But of course it depends what you are shooting. Some Sunday rider on uphill race is really moving slowly, some World Cup guys, not to mention even downhillers, move A LOT faster

    Quote Originally Posted by PhysicsGuy
    As far as the white balance issue I'm still trying to figure that one out the light kept changing every time a cloud would come over head. But this was only the second time tried to shoot a mountain bikes so I'm still learning. Still trying to figure out a good white balance for the woods.
    Clouds don't change all that often. Personally I always shoot with custom WB, and you just need to check from time to time. Even if clouds suddenly cover sun, difference in color temperature is still not so great. But it does matter if you go from clear sunny place under trees and shadow. For that, you need to change settings. But it doesn't take more then 5 seconds to do this.


    Quote Originally Posted by PhysicsGuy
    There wasn't enough light to keep the shutter speed fast at lower ISO and I didn't want to use the flash.
    Take this advise as you wish... I have no idea why are all newbies (or even not so newbie hobby shooters) so scared to dial higher iso. Years ago, when I was still shooting original Canon 1d, which had crappy results with iso 1250 or 1600, I never had problems shooting with iso 1600 if conditions required this. Nowdays there's virtually no noise with iso 800-1000, and very little noise with iso1250-1600, or even 3200 with cameras like Canon 1Dmk3 and Nikon D3. So why are you so scared to push iso up.
    And one thing about flash... with cycling photography flash is must... if you like it or not. It's only way to get rid of ugly shadows which helmets cast. So use it next time And it doesn't bother riders either, if you were scared of this.
    Primoz

  43. #43
    Nu-School Trail Rat
    Reputation: The_rydster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    249
    Nikon are the Specialized of the DSLR world

  44. #44
    3327333
    Reputation: edemtbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,856
    Quote Originally Posted by primoz
    Clouds don't change all that often. Personally I always shoot with custom WB, and you just need to check from time to time. Even if clouds suddenly cover sun, difference in color temperature is still not so great. But it does matter if you go from clear sunny place under trees and shadow. For that, you need to change settings. But it doesn't take more then 5 seconds to do this.
    If the picture's not balanced in the camera you can tweak WB in post-processing, especially flexible with RAW images. Gotta love digital.

    Ed

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueTrain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    321
    also check the Sony A200 out, which is in the same price range. i picked one up as all of my old Minolta glass works on it, including my 70-210 beercan, which is a fantastic lens. It also felt better in my hands than the canon and the nikon.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by primoz
    Clouds don't change all that often. Personally I always shoot with custom WB, and you just need to check from time to time. Even if clouds suddenly cover sun, difference in color temperature is still not so great. But it does matter if you go from clear sunny place under trees and shadow. For that, you need to change settings. But it doesn't take more then 5 seconds to do this.


    Take this advise as you wish... I have no idea why are all newbies (or even not so newbie hobby shooters) so scared to dial higher iso. Years ago, when I was still shooting original Canon 1d, which had crappy results with iso 1250 or 1600, I never had problems shooting with iso 1600 if conditions required this. Nowdays there's virtually no noise with iso 800-1000, and very little noise with iso1250-1600, or even 3200 with cameras like Canon 1Dmk3 and Nikon D3. So why are you so scared to push iso up.
    And one thing about flash... with cycling photography flash is must... if you like it or not. It's only way to get rid of ugly shadows which helmets cast. So use it next time And it doesn't bother riders either, if you were scared of this.
    I have no problem with shooting even at 1600 ISO. I only notice the noise if I'm looking at 100 % crop. But I definitely need to learn how to do custom white balance. Or at least figure out which of the pre build in setting works best for the woods.

    As far as a flash? So many toys I want so little money. So for the moment I'm limited to the build in flash which cycles way too slow and kills my battery.

  47. #47
    Look at the time!
    Reputation: lelebebbel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by PhysicsGuy
    Point being a D40 is fast enough for mountain biking.
    The D40 doesn't have an internal focus motor, which means that if you have autofocus, you must be using a Nikkor AF-S lens with a built in ultrasound motor (or a sigma HSM, same thing).
    With AF-S lenses, the focus speed depends a lot more on the lens than on the camera, and all current AF-S lenses are plenty fast, no matter what body they are mounted on.

    Focus speed can be an issue when using older lenses without the internal ultrasound motor (in Nikon terms: "AF" without the "-S") on lower end bodies, for example try a D50 or D70 with an older "AF" telephoto lens on it. The focus motors of the pro or semi-pro Nikon bodies (D200 and up) are faster with those lenses, but AF-S lenses are still the way to go if you want really fast focussing.
    wanted: Cannondale Lefty w/ V-brake studs

  48. #48
    rjd
    rjd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    39
    "Focus
    Auto Focus (4.5)
    The Nikon D40 has 3 auto focus sensor sites, arrayed in a row across the center of the frame. This arrangement is inferior to the auto focus systems on previous Nikon DSLRs that have 5-11 sites. It's unusual to see a manufacturer take a backward step like this. Many DSLR users of even very advanced cameras focus, then recompose, which is what D40 users will have to do. The difference is, with more sensors, the shifts can be smaller, and in cases where that is impossible, such as when the sensors should be tracking a moving object, it doesn't work at all.

    The auto focus system is accurate but slow. We found that it handled dim indoor light, as long as the subject was contrasted. The D40 is noticeably inferior to the D70 and D80 in focusing on our low-contrast subjects.

    Manual Focus (7.0)
    The Nikon D40's focusing screen is bright and contrasted. We found it easy to focus with the D40 even in subdued light. The kit lens is mechanically sloppy, so it's not as easy to focus with it as it would be with a better-quality Nikon lens."

    http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/con...ol-Options.htm

    Though others (Steves digicam etc) say the focus is quick entough. Cant find any info on the type of sensors (verticle, cross type, higher accuracy for fast lenses etc) on the D40's focus system.

    One problem witht he lack of screw drive motor is that its a budget camera, but your 'forced' into buying expensive AF-S lenses instead of the budget ones, even Sigma charges more for its HSM equiped 18-50f2.8, and its a poor place to be if you want an autofocusing prime.

    I thought Nikon was very premature in selling a screwdrive less camera without updating a bigger chunk of its lenses, but they've sold enough of them.

  49. #49
    Look at the time!
    Reputation: lelebebbel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,137
    the middle sensor is cross type, the outer two are vertical. In my experience, focussing using the middle sensor is snap-on, not any slower than on a D80 using the same lens, and with no hunting except in some dim-light low contrast situations.
    The outer two sensors don't work so well, probably because they are vertical only. Tracking mode (tracking objects between the sensors) is pretty much useless.
    I do agree, more sensors would be the #1 item on my wishlist for the (non-existant) D40 MKII (I completely fail to understand why anyone would spent the extra money on a D60 over a D40.)

    The lack of an internal focus motor has been discussed hundreds of times... I'm still torn on that one.
    The small camera size is awesome for biking, i've taken it with me many times with the kit lens on rides where i wouldn't have carried anything bigger or heavier.
    Nikon needs to come out with a 50mm/1.8 AF-S. The AF-S drive can't be all that expensive - after all, the D40 kit lens has it, and that thing goes for $150 or so.
    wanted: Cannondale Lefty w/ V-brake studs

  50. #50
    banned
    Reputation: urinal mint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by PhysicsGuy
    Bikes don't move much faster than that.
    False.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •