Nikon D40

[nuttycam]

I bought my first SLR camera last month a Nikon D40 kit.

Totally love my new camera and enjoying getting to know who use it. Was looking to get a zoom lens for it and also possiblly a macro lens. From what Ive been told you can only use Nikon own lenses on this camera. Is this correct? And can anyone recommend what to buy as Im a bit confussed by it all!

Cheers

[Highlander]

AFAIK, you can also use Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses on the Nikon, as you can on Canons. Just make sure it's a Nikon mount. I'm a Canon owner, so am not familiar with Nikon cameras, and certainly can't recommend any Nikon lenses.

Don't know what your budget is, but but a cheap zoom that always get recommended on here (and other places) is the Sigma 70-300mm. And the macro lens of choice seems to be the Tamron 90mm. Don't own any of them so don't give any personal views. I'm sure someone will be along to give their views on these lenses.

[photek]

I think the issue with the D40 is that the is no pin on the lens mount to control focus therefore some older lenses will need manual focusing - although I am sure someone will come along with a more accurate/technical explanation.

[Sprout Crumble]

Yeh, Nikon were cheap gits.

[Tastydirt]

The D40 has no in-body focusing motor, so you can only use lenses that are AF-S (or HSM as Sigma call it) if you want autofocusing.

This limits you for longer zooms to either the Nikon 55-200mm or 70-300mm VR. In terms of Macro, you don't always need autofocusing, but if you did your only choice is either the Nikon 105mm VR lens or the Sigma 150mm HSM lens. If you can live with manual the Tamron 90mm gives the best bang for buck.

[Highlander]

:eek: Didn't know that about Nikon!!
Glad I'm a Canon user :D

[photek]

Agreed - has this been addressed in the D40X?

[Fozzybear]

Nope, the D40x still has no AF motor built-in. Glad my D50 has, I only have one AF-S lens, all the others are standard screwdriver focus lenses. Too many people bought the D50 at the expense of the more advanced models I'd guess.

[nuttycam]

cheers for the info :)

[NickG]

Taken form another forum:

Full list of current Nikon and Sigma lens & teleconvertors that are 100% compatible with the Nikon D40/D40X (including autofocus)

Nikon

Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED AF-S DX
Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX
Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED AF-S DX
Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S DX
Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S DX VR
Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX
Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR
Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR
Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED AF-S
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S VR
Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR
Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED AF-S VR
Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED AF-S VR
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S VR
Nikkor 300mm f/4D IF-ED AF-S
Nikkor 400mm f/2.8D IF-ED II AF-S
Nikkor 500mm f/4D IF-ED II
Nikkor 600mm f/4D IF-ED II
AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II
AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II
AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E II

Sigma

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM
Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC APO HSM
Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG ASP
Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX ASP HSM
Sigma 14mm f/2.8 EX ASP HSM
Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG APO RF HSM
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM
Sigma 80-400mm F4.5-5.6 APO EX OS
Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX DG APO IF HSM
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF HSM
Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6 EX APO IF HSM
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM
Sigma 180mm f/3.5 EX DG APO Macro IF HSM
Sigma 300mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF HSM
Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX DG APO IF HSM
Sigma 800mm f/5.6 EX DG APO HSM

I like my 18-200VR it's a good go anywhere lens, and would recommend it to fellow begginers. As stated you can live without AF on a macro lens, unless you plan to use it as a portrait lens, so the Tamron 90mm is attractive.

[Radiohead]

I like my 18-200VR it's a good go anywhere lens, and would recommend it to fellow begginers.

So it should be for £500+.

[photek]

That's one expensive lens for a beginner :eek:

[NickG]

So it should be for £500+.

That's one expensive lens for a beginner :eek:

Hmm I'm sure you Canon boys are just jealous that you don't have an equivalent. ;)

It's a unique lens, there isn't another single lens that does what it does, I guess you have to pay for that.

It's good for a beginner in the respect that it has a zoom range similar to non DSLR cameras, and you can take it out for a day and not need to worry about changing lenses, whilst covering a good focal range. Beginner does not always = small budget. :)

The idea of an SLR obviously is that you DO change lenses, I get that, but with something the size of a D40 you have a pretty compact and versatile package.

[Tastydirt]

The problem isn't just it's cost (although it is a lot of money for a consumer lens), but that you can get better quality for less money with 2 seperate lenses, which is probably better for a 'beginner'.

If changing lenses phases you as a beginner then maybe an SLR isn't for you!

[NickG]

What lenses offer the same features and better quality for less money?

The 18-200 is good because of what it is, a super zoom, a large focal range with very good image quality, not perfect no one is suggesting that, but it matches the other Nikon consumer zooms, in a single package.

It's not that changing a lens is difficult, it's just you have to carry an extra lens and then make the change (not always desirable or practical), if you are only swapping for focal length and not speed, features or quality you may as well have it in one lens, if it fits your budget.

As a beginner myself I can say that it has been a really good lens to get an understanding of the basics, and a range of focal lengths, I'm sure I have taken pictures when I would have otherwise had the wrong lens on.

With 4 months of use, and the recent addition of a f/2.8 macro lens, I can already see the huge appeal of fast glass and primes.

My next lens will be a 50mm F/1.8, because it will do things the 18-200 can't.

Ultimately I'd like the 70-200VR, but I don't think I would ever ditch the 18-200 simply because of the convenience of when you want one lens.

[Radiohead]

Had one when I shot Nikon. Nice range, ok optics, not worth £500.

[stevejm]

Got one of these last week, needed another camera to complement my IXUS 40 which I've outgrown.

Will use the Nikon for family snaps - nothing else.

Was £280 from Jessops (http://www.thedvdforums.com/jump2.php?url=http://clkuk.tradedoubler.com/click?p(17211)a(60823)g(106115)) including the current cashback promotion.

Quite happy with it, the manual is quite good, all this aperture/exposure stuff is a bit complicated, just using it in 'P' mode for now.

The camera often gives a '?' message to say low light but the photo's have come out great without the flash being on.

Have a 4GB Ultra II card, a case, UV filter. Remote is in the post, along with a book about how to set exposure etc.

Might get a seperate flash, plus perhaps a spare battery.

[puddleduck]

What lenses offer the same features and better quality for less money?


Seeing as you asked, for optical quality the Tamron 18-200 blows it away at 1/3 of the cost.

The D50 18-55 and 55-200 kit lens combo also outperforms it for distortion and CA control at the short end and for sharpness at the long end. About £150 for both if you are canny shopping around.

£500 put its firmly into Pro optic price range, but its even close to Pro glass performance optically. Your £500 would have been better spent on a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM and a Nikkor 18-70 DX.

Well you did ask ;)

[Boink!]

Your £500 would have been better spent on a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM and a Nikkor 18-70 DX.
Which is what I own, tyhough I mostly use my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on the D70, tbh.