I did a search and found some older information on here --

For an amateur photographer, which of these two would be better and why?

11/23/2007 9:40:12 PM

Flip a coin. That's the best answer you will get.

11/23/2007 10:11:24 PM

You will probably buy the one you can afford to get the best lens for.

11/23/2007 10:13:03 PM

owning no other photo gear? toss up

The D40x can't autofocus with a decent number of lenses on the market, especially older ones, so that could be a downside.

I'd get the D40x kit w/ 18-55 and 55-200 lenses.

11/23/2007 10:13:39 PM

Check this thread. That question gets asked a lot (in a slightly more general sense)

Basically, if you haven't invested in lenses or other manufacturer-specific equipment, you're free to choose, and specs are very comparable. Similiarities and differences.

The only two cameras I'd ever had were Canons, and I love them both, but the only lenses I have are FD mounts. Since the rebels take EF mounts, lenses were not something to consider, and I ended up going with Nikon (d70)

11/23/2007 10:16:09 PM

bttt

11/25/2007 8:14:35 AM

Lenses have a big impact on quality, so factor that into the equation. A good camera body will be limited by a crappy lens. FYI, the kits don't come with good lenses. The two cameras you listed are very similar for all but mostly esotaric features. Buy the one that fits your hands the best and that lets you have the best access to all the camera controls. I like Canon, but that's based on my personal preferences, equipment I already own, and my familiarity with Canon functionality.

11/26/2007 2:05:55 AM

^ cept the 5D + 24-104 f/4L IS kit lens...

Both are pretty much equal. I'm a bit biased towards Canon since I used the XTi and own a 30D with about 5 good glass. It's actually better to invest in good glass rather than a body if you are new. Hell, you should get a D40, original rebel or the rebel xt to start off on.

As one pro told me:
Glass will last, bodies go fast.

Besides good glass, it's only as good as the person behind it.

11/26/2007 2:30:52 AM

Quote :

"Besides good glass, it's only as good as the person behind it."

which is one reason he might go with a kit lens first, learn all the features of his camera and picture taking, then upgrade.

11/26/2007 2:52:58 AM

ok so not knowing a whole lot about SLR/DSLR history - which of the two traditionally produces a better lens: canon or nikon?

or are they pretty similar in quality?

11/26/2007 7:54:54 AM

on the true kit lens level, nikon is better. on the mid-range and pro level, both have the upper hand across various segments and focal ranges. They each have lenses that the other doesn't offer.

11/26/2007 9:47:42 AM

Canon has a larger lineup of lens, but Nikon is catching up. What Nikon or Canon doesn't have, Sigma will supplement. You really can't go wrong with either.

Best advice is to go into a camera store and test them out. See how they feel when shooting. I know the XTi is a bit annoying with the clunky controls, but I'm used to my 30D now, which is vastly easier in terms of ergonomics. I can change the settings easily while looking through the viewfinder and the controls are very intuitive (30D).

Also, I'd also suggest sticking with the kit lens till you learn how to use the camera and to figure out what kind of style of shooting you enjoy most. When you know what you want to shoot, then you can get more specialized lens, such as a nice telephoto for long distance, macro for close up, and so on.

[Edited on November 26, 2007 at 12:06 PM. Reason : ]

11/26/2007 12:03:16 PM

i just picked up the D40 nonX kit and im really impressed with the changes they made from the D50
D50 was bigger and heavier / didnt have a black&white shooting mode nor did it carry a menu for on camera touch ups

the D40 is a lot smaller and lighter. they removed the digital window that has the camera settings and moved it to the LCD screen which takes some getting used to.

love all the new, user friendly options with setups and the black / white settings

[Edited on November 26, 2007 at 12:12 PM. Reason : sdf]

11/26/2007 12:06:25 PM

^yeah, my friend got the D40 with two lens and other accessories on black friday for 600. Felt like a good beginner SLR camera with I played around with it.

11/26/2007 12:10:26 PM

yeah, i picked up the same deal
my D50 and all my gear got stolen so i wanted something i was fam. with and with the 2 lenses that came with this kit was nice

11/26/2007 12:16:46 PM

At the price point your considering, you'd want to look at a Pentax K10D. It has more features (it's more semi pro) and costs less than either of the Nikon and Canon you mentioned. All Canon, Nikon, and Pentax systems have very decent glass.

If you intend to rigorously pursue photography as a professional career, then you'd probably want to invest in Canon or Nikon because they have muy expensive upgrade options. As for just being an amateur/serious/pro-on-the-cheap, Pentax easily beats others in value. Lots of reviews on the internet if you want to read up.

A couple nice features of the Pentax is image stabilization built into the body - which works with any lens. The K10D is backwards compatible with all Pentax lens, although requires a few tricks for the really really old ones. Also, I've heard in general that the 18-55mm kit lens for the Pentax is a lot better than the ones that come with the Nikons/Canons. I've never put them to a test, but the kit lens is only a starting point anyway.

11/26/2007 2:08:18 PM

im going to test each camera soon, hopefully. i'm leaning towards the nikon so we'll see how everything turns out

keep posting helpful advice if you have any - thanks!

11/26/2007 10:56:10 PM