DailyTech - Nikon Announces D60 D-SLR Camera

Submit News

Gadgets Nikon Announces D60 D-SLR Camera
Shane McGlaun (Blog) - January 29, 2008 3:27 PM

35 comment(s) - last by The Irish Pati.. on Jan 31 at 2:16 PM

Nikon D60 D-SLR Camera (Source: Nikon)

(Source: Nikon)

Nikon announces its latest D-SLR camera called the D60

Nikon is one of the largest and most successful makers of digital cameras on the market and has made a full line of D-SLR and point-and-shoot digital cameras for years.

Today Nikon announced the newest member if its D-SLR line called the Nikon D60. The camera will sit in the line between the D40x and the D80 in both price and features. While Nikon has declined to comment on pricing at the moment, we can get an idea of the price range the D60 will retail in be looking at the D40, D40x and D80. The Nikon D40 sells for $549.95 in kit form, the D40x sells for $699.95 in a kit and the D80 sells for $999.95 all with a kit 18-55mm lens. That would likely put the new D60 in the $800 price range.

The New D60 has a 10.2 megapixel DX-format CCD sensor and exclusive EXPEED image processor. The kit ships with an AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR lens. The lens features vibration reduction for image stabilization. The camera also has the ability to shoot at up to 3 frames per second in continuous bursts.

Other features include an active dust reduction system with airflow control. Eight Digital-Vari automatic shooting modes are included allowing for automatic usage like a point-and-shoot camera. Nikon says the D60 is the smallest D-SLR camera ever with a weight of only 16-ounces. To ensure accurate colors the D60 uses Nikon 3D Color Matrix Metering II to evaluate a scene for color, contrast and sharpness.

A built-in Speedlight with i-TTL automatic flash control provides for lighting in dark environments. Three area autofocus provides improved focus tracking. The D60 also has in-camera image editing and enhanced retouch menu. The camera allows you to create a stop-motion video from a sequence of images. Nikon says the rechargeable EN-EL9 battery is good for up to 500 images per charge. The D60 is set for availability in March of 2008.

Nikon's main competitor, Canon, announced its own new D-SLR camera last week called the Digital Rebel XSi.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

In the market

By masher2

(blog) on 1/29/2008 5:34:05 PM , Rating: 2

I'm in the market for a new DSLR and woefully ignorant on the topic. Would any of you camera-fiends care to recommend this vs. the new Rebel XSi ?

RE: In the market

By Brandon Hill

(blog) on 1/29/2008 5:40:08 PM , Rating: 3

**Hold on, stop the presses, lock up your daughters, zip up your flies**

A topic that masher2 has no clue about? The same Michael Asher that seems to know AT LEAST a little something about EVERYTHING?

Man, I'm gonna go out and buy a lottery ticket :D

That being said, the XSi seems like a MUCH better camera feature-wise.

Parent

RE: In the market

By masher2

(blog) on 1/29/2008 5:50:48 PM , Rating: 3

I skipped camera day in omnipotence school.

Thanks for the heads up on the XSi...care to recommend a telephoto lens for it also?

Parent

RE: In the market

By Fyl on 1/29/2008 6:00:43 PM , Rating: 2

70-200mm L f4 if you want to spend this much
the entire L series is good at Canon

Parent

RE: In the market

By alifbaa on 1/29/2008 6:24:02 PM , Rating: 2

Masher-
I'm a canon guy myself, but that's only because I already have a number of EOS lenses dating back to the film days. I think you'll find that most professionals will go with Nikon, but I also think that is due more to tradition than anything. You honestly won't go wrong with either brand. They're both very high quality brands.

Looking at the feature set of the D60 vs. xsi, I'd recommend the xsi since it will give you better resolution at the same sensor size. The rest of either system's features are more or less fluff that you will either never use or will be duplicated in some form on both models. If the resolution doesn't matter to you, I'd buy solely based on price so long as the Nikon's sensor is APS-C sized like the Canon's.

As for the telephoto lens, I have a 70-300mm zoom which I LOVE. I'd recommend going with the ultrasonic lenses, as the auto focus will be much faster and less noisy. The speed of focusing is worth the extra money, and the smooth quiet motor gives a much higher quality feel. The other main lens I use is a 28-80mm. Between those two, I have just about every shot I'd ever want to take covered. When I bought mine, they were offering a kit with both lenses on B&H. If you want to do a lot of low-light candid shots (birthday party type shots), I'd spend another $80 and pick up the basic version 50mm lens they make.

As for where you buy your camera, I'd stick to very reputable places and spend the "extra" money beyond what the no-name places will sell it for. The no-name places literally make their business by selling you stuff you didn't ask for. You'll never get the camera you order for the advertised price. They'll overcharge you, send you a lesser product, or pressure you into buying extra crap you don't need, but they will NEVER send you what you order. Beware.

Stick with B&H (cheapest around), Wolf, and non-photo companies like Newegg.

Parent

RE: In the market

By Lord 666 on 1/29/2008 6:46:29 PM , Rating: 2

Even better is buying it in the B&H store if you don't care about the tax. Took my family there over the holidays; the efficient assembly line is a sight to see along with the knowledgeable staff.

Parent

RE: In the market

By feraltoad on 1/30/2008 2:26:48 AM , Rating: 2

I've bought two cameras from BuyDig.com because they had the lowest prices each time. They offer those silly packages with cases and mem cards for too much money online, but they have never called me to sell any upgrades. I can't say I've tested their customer service because the cameras arrived in perfect condition. Just wanted to throw my 2 cents in to do justice to the good deals they gave me.

Oh, and their line workers are all mentally disabled so if you get a package someone took a dump in, just ignore it. OK, that last part was a lie.

Parent

RE: In the market

By masher2

(blog) on 1/29/2008 9:37:55 PM , Rating: 2

Thanks. A lot of good information here. I won't be purchasing till March, so still time for me to absorb it all :)

Parent

RE: In the market

By GreenyMP on 1/30/2008 11:02:14 AM , Rating: 2

If you plan to wait until march, then you will find all the info that you want (including comparisons between the two cameras that you mentioned) at dpreview.com.

Parent

RE: In the market

By TechLuster on 1/29/2008 6:50:50 PM , Rating: 3

masher,

A very common (and very unfortunate) mistake people make when choosing a DSLR (and often more importantly, choosing the brand they'll be using for a very long time) is to just compare camera "specs." There are generally many much more important factors that can't be easily quantified. I'll list a few here:

(1) how quickly and easily you can adjust key settings (e.g., ISO, white balance, exposure compensation)
(2) comfort of the grip (go to a local camera shop to check this out)
(3) quality/accuracy of automatic white balance (and metering).
(4) size and brightness of the viewfinder (this is much more important than you might think)
(5) and perhaps most important, LENS SELECTION!

In particular, DON'T WORRY ABOUT RESOLUTION/MEGAPIXELS!!!! Unless you're a professional landscape photographer using very expensive lenses and a tripod, megapixels rarely matter that much. Oftentimes, lens sharpness, focus accuracy, depth of field, camera shake, subject movement, and diffraction will be the limiting factors in resolution/sharpness.

I definitely wouldn't count out the D60 for several reasons. First, it has a VERY bright viewfinder (I know--I've taken THOUSANDS of shots with a D40). Second, it has very good auto white balance, especially in tricky indoors situations (I'm of course assuming here that they didn't tweak the processing much from the D40X). Third, the 18-55 kit lens is very, very, very sharp (much better than most kit lenses), and I assume the new 18-55 VR is just as good. Fourth, if you want a better lens, the (pricey) 18-200 VR is much, much better than Canon's 17-85 IS, which is optically just about the worst lens currently produced by any namebrand manufacturer period.

That said, the D60 probably can't autofocus with older non AF-S lenses (or some excellent third-party lenses, such as Tamron's 17-50 2.8), so your only option for a fast prime would be Sigma's 30 1.4 (which I own and use all the time--it's not too sharp, but it gets the job done).

On the topic of telephotos, Nikon's 55-200 VR (which I own), is an amazing bargain--it's only ~$200, it's pretty sharp, the VR works astonishingly well, and it's reasonably fast for its size (e.g., at 150mm equiv., it's only f/4.5).

Parent

RE: In the market

By masher2

(blog) on 1/29/2008 9:42:22 PM , Rating: 2

> "In particular, DON'T WORRY ABOUT RESOLUTION/MEGAPIXELS!!!! "

My current SLR spends more time attached my to telescope than in my hands, so I'm definitely looking for a low-noise sensor. I've actually been waiting for cameras with full-frame sensors to drop down in price, but finally gave up and decided to go with the current crop of prosumers.

Parent

RE: In the market

By Lord 666 on 1/29/2008 9:48:21 PM , Rating: 2

Why give up? The Canon 5D has excellent low noise and is full frame and is affordable.

Or pony up some money and get the Nikon D3.

Parent

RE: In the market

By pattycake0147 on 1/29/2008 7:50:10 PM , Rating: 2

I believe the word you're looking for is omniscience (all-knowing), not omnipotence (all-powerful). Looks like you skipped vocab day too.

Parent

RE: In the market

By masher2

(blog) on 1/29/2008 9:37:11 PM , Rating: 2

Such comes from the lack of an edit button...and typing a repy in a couple seconds.

Parent

RE: In the market

By emoser96 on 1/29/2008 7:59:54 PM , Rating: 2

masher... are you planning on stalking somebody. Or did you miss that day in omnipotence school too.

Parent

RE: In the market

By soydios on 1/29/2008 5:59:03 PM , Rating: 2

yep, but the XSi competes in the D80's price bracket. the D60 will replace the D40x at a slightly higher price point.

Parent

RE: In the market

By Lord 666 on 1/29/2008 6:41:27 PM , Rating: 2

I'm going to disagree about the XSi recommendation. We are talking about masher here; appreciates quality and willing to pay a bit more for it where it counts. There is a certain build durability (metal frame) that is missing from the Canon's in my opinion and the 3" LCD on the XSi is pitiful. You get what you pay for. My D300 dropped about four feet from a stroller and landed on its base into hard packed dirt/sand with no ill effects. Other non-Nikon cameras that are recommended are the Olympus E-3 and the Sony A700 for the industrial grade qualities masher prefers as do others that recognize quality.

Granted, I am Nikon biased (also own a D70 and D80), but I would still recommend the D300 even as a first camera. While he might have missed that day in class for cameras, I would say he could figure it out and maybe even get published in a short period of time.

Parent

RE: In the market

By TomZ on 1/29/2008 7:06:33 PM , Rating: 2

I agree completely - D300 is the right camera, not some watered-down DSLR wannabe like the Canon. :o)

Parent

RE: In the market

By Sxotty on 1/29/2008 10:24:40 PM , Rating: 2

Type in digital photography review into google. Go to DPReview and look what cameras meet your needs.

I have an XTi personally.

Parent

RE: In the market

By Richlet on 1/30/2008 12:26:10 AM , Rating: 2

dpreview is good, I prefer dcresource because a night photo is part of their main review criteria (including shots at night using different ISO's, from 80-up). Being into night photography and caring about having long shutter speeds'n'all, that's why I go there first, but dpreview is top-notch as well.

Parent

RE: In the market

By kinnoch on 1/29/2008 11:25:06 PM , Rating: 2

I have a Nikon D70s. I've been very happy with the camera. I've never used any other nikon's or canon's, but I'm a happy customer.

Parent

RE: In the market

By InsaneScientist on 1/30/2008 4:01:47 AM , Rating: 2

I wrote all this, and it doesn’t seem to want to let me post it as one thing, so I’m going to try to post it as multiple parts… but if this looks weird, that’s why.
Also, there seems to be an effective character limit on posting here (whether intentional or not), since I tried several times to post this as one block and couldn’t.
If someone who can do something about it sees this, it would be nice to know what that limit is (unless it’s posted somewhere and I’m blind, in which case I never said this.)

Oh man, that's a question that could open up a can of worms...

With that said, I went through this question (what to get) just a few months ago, so I'll throw in my 2¢ worth. Maybe it'll help you.

Keep in mind, when you buy one of these cameras, you're effectively buying into either the Canon system or the Nikon system. Even if you change the camera, you'll still have all your lenses and other accessories that you will still want to be able to use, so take your time in deciding and do your homework.

Realistically, the first question to ask is this: just how much money do you think that you're going to want to put into this?
Is this going to be a hobby? A side job? Just a good camera for when you're with your friends or on vacation?
The follow up question (that's obviously related) is: What types of pictures are you most likely to use this for?

If it's something that you're going to put a lot of money into (I'm guessing not, otherwise you wouldn't necessarily be asking about the lowest models), Canon's high end definitely goes up higher than Nikon's (though not by much anymore).
On the flip side, often Nikon's cameras tend to be priced lower than their Canon equivalents (feature and ability-wise). (I.E. I got my Nikon D80 for not much more than the price of an XTi, and for far less than a 30D would have been, yet the D80 is roughly comparable to the 30D).

If you're going to be shooting a lot of sports, however (for whatever reason), that'll probably swing things in Canon's favor, as they tend to function better in low light - high speed conditions than Nikons do.
The caveat there is tied in with the point above, often you can get a better Nikon camera for the same price. (like I said, I have a D80, which I got for roughly the same price as the Canon XTi, and the D80 has the XTi beat to dust in focusing speed.)

Another consideration is: if you have friends with DSLRs, what systems do they have? Are you likely to wander around taking pictures with them?
I have a good friend who got a Nikon D50 about 18 months before I got my D80, and it was a major deciding factor in my getting the Nikon system. This way we can share accessories, lenses, etc… when we go out in the field looking for pictures together. We’re also learning the same system, so if one of us develops an interesting trick it easily transfers to the other person.

My main recommendation to you is this: go find a camera store with the two in stock (when they’re actually released, obviously - though you could play with the XTi and D40 as they’ll have a similar feel) and hold them. Take some pictures with them in the store or of things outside through the windows. (Most good camera stores will let you do this. If the one you go to doesn’t, find another store.)
As weird as it sounds, having a camera that is comfortable in your hands is probably the most important factor in how your pictures come out.

Parent

RE: In the market

By InsaneScientist on 1/30/2008 4:02:40 AM , Rating: 2

Continued from above

From my experience, if I had to break it down into percentages, I’d say that how your pictures come out is about:
70% you (the photographer)
20% the quality of the lens you are using (and if you’re using the right lens for the right job)
5% the camera body
And 5% goes to all the other misc variables that I’ve forgotten.

The main point is that the most important part of how a picture comes out is what you do with it and how comfortable the camera is for you is a very large part of that.

The second most significant factor is probably the lens that you are using. Both Canon and Nikon have excellent lenses, and just going by that it is difficult to choose, but for the most part, if you have a choice between a good camera and an okay lens, or an okay camera and a good lens, you’re almost always going to want the better lens over the better camera. So if you have a certain amount of money that you’re going to put into this, try to figure out what the best lens(es) that you can get for your money, and get a camera to match.
Canon’s “L” glass is the nice stuff, and Nikon’s equivalent is “ED” glass.
The “L” glass is a little better than the “ED”, but Nikon puts the ED glass in much less expensive lenses than Canon does, so at the lower end, the Nikon stuff will sometimes have better optics, but if you can pony up for the L stuff, Canon is the way to go.
Oh, while I’m on the subject of lenses, image stabilization technology is a wonderful thing and has been around for a bit. It’s incorporated into many modern point & shoot cameras; however, in the case of Canon and Nikon’s DSLR lines, it’s built into the lens rather than the camera. These lenses are rather more expensive, but unless you’re planning on shooting nothing but daytime outdoor shots, they’re worth every penny. You’d have to try one out to believe the difference that it can make. (Image Stabilization – IS for Canon and Vibration Reduction – VR for Nikon)
Nikon has an amazing lens out that zooms from 18-200mm (it’s a DX lens, so it’s the equivalent of a 35mm 27-300mm zoom) without much distortion and it’s got VR and ED glass. Canon, unfortunately, does not have an equivalent. That was another factor in my decision towards the camera I got.
The major catch was that it costs a rather hefty $750 (which is actually a very good price for what it does, but for someone just getting into the field, it was a bit steep. It was definitely worth it, though)

As far as the actual body is concerned (I know… I’ve written this much already without directly addressing your question. Anyhow…), quite frankly, if you can, I’d go up to the 40D or whatever the successor the D80 will be. Though, like I said, the body should not be your first priority, the bottom tier of DSLRs are very much so entry level cameras.
Going up just one rung on the pricing ladder gets you the vast majority of the professional features that are excluded from the bottom tier (the major exception being full frame support).
When I was making my decision on a camera, one of the things that I considered is that there isn’t much that a D2 (then Nikon’s top end DSLR) can do that a D200 can’t, and there’s barely anything that a D200 can do that a D80 can’t, there is, however, a ton that the D80 can do that cannot be done with the D40, so I went for the D80. The scaling works similarly on the Canon side of things.
I know you’re not a professional (else you wouldn’t need to ask this question), so it may not sound like any of those features are worth it, but I’m not pro, by any stretch of the imagination, either and I would not want to have to make do without some of the features that are on my D80 that are missing from the D40 (and presumably the D60). (such as the ability to use a wireless flash. Sounds over the top, but really is a wonderful feature)

Between the D60 and the XSi, though?
I would likely give the edge to the D60 (just barely), overall, for a few reasons:
First, Nikon camera grips, in my experience, seem to work better for a lot of people. This is not to say that the Canon ones are bad, it’s just been my experience that people tend to prefer the Nikon grips. However, I know a lot of people (myself included) who did not like the grip on the D40 (which the D60 presumably is based off of) at all. But, by the same token, the XTi’s grip was equally horrid, if not worse. Hopefully the two companies have sorted this out, but Nikon seems to have the better track record here (though neither is particularly good).
Second, Nikon tends to not strip their low end cameras down quite as far as Canon does. I know someone with an XTi, and I was aghast at the vast gulf separating what he can do on his camera and what I can do on my D80. The D40 doesn't compare very favorably with the D80 either, but it wasn’t as bad as the XTi, in my experience. (though it is limited on what older lenses it can use... but since you're buying new stuff, that should be an issue)
Third, the D60 is only a 10MP camera versus a 12MP camera in the case of the XSi. I know that sounds like it’s a win for Canon, but it’s not… trust me.
10, 8, or even 6MP is plenty for average size prints (think about it… at 300dpi, standard photo quality, a 3x5 photo would only be 900x1500… or 1.3 megapixels). So, unless you’re planning on printing photo quality banners, 12MP is not going to help. However, since the physical size of the image sensor stays the same, having more pixels jammed into the same space means that each sensor receives less light to work with. Less light hitting the sensors means more noise in the picture.
Canon’s noise reduction is better than Nikon’s, but it’s no substitute for simply having less noise in the first place. Too, Nikon’s image sensors are bigger than Canon’s (on their cropped frame models, which these are), which means that the 12MP on the XSi are packed into a smaller area than the 10MP on the D60 are. Again, though… the next step up from these two is a huge improvement.

I’m going to wrap this up now, though I could write more, this has gone on long enough. An important point, though. As I look back over this, it sounds (to me at least) like I’m recommending Nikon all the way down… I’d like to stress that I’m not trying to do that at all… I simply have more experience with Nikon because I own one. But the two are so close that you could argue for months and not have a winner (heck, I just argued with myself for half an hour while writing this).

If you give some more information, I.E. budget range and what this is going to be used for, we can probably help you start narrowing down your choices. In the meantime, start reading up from as many places as you can.

Good luck, and let us know what you do!

Parent

RE: In the market

By masher2

(blog) on 1/30/2008 10:35:46 AM , Rating: 2

> "Canon's favor, as they tend to function better in low light - high speed conditions than Nikons do."

Definitely a lot of good information above, thanks. Which brand do you think does better in low light, long-exposure situations? In my ignorance, I thought Nikon's CCD sensors would have the edge, but it seems Canon and CMOS tech has moved faster than I thought.

Parent

RE: In the market

By InsaneScientist on 1/31/2008 3:29:44 AM , Rating: 2

Long exposure?

I'm guessing this has something to do with the telescope that I think I saw you mention somewhere else in this discussion?

The longer the duration of your exposure, the more noise there will be in the picture. Obviously you're going to want to do as much to counter that as possible.
In that case, a camera with a larger pixel pitch (larger sensor site per pixel) is going to be the better route...

The D60 is definately going to have a larger pixel pitch, as the image sensor is (physically) larger than the XSi and it's got fewer pixels.
I wouldn't even consider the XSi if what you're doing is night photography. You'll get way too much noise.

If you can go up a level, though (as I mentioned above... it's worth it.), Canon's 40D is probably just about perfect for what you want to do. It's only 10.1MP, so it doesn't have the same problem that the XSi has, and Canon cameras have had better noise reduction capabilities than Nikons, (I say had because, from the rumors and specs, it looks like the D3/D300 has finally caught up, but I haven't seen any actual pictures from it, so I can't say for sure) though usually you're going to want to off the in-camera noise reduction for night photography and do it in post processing. Noise reduction takes time to complete... roughly equivalent to the length of the exposure. If you take a 20 minute exposure, it's going to take another 20 minutes to process before you can take another picture... and if your camera runs out of power during that process, you're not going to be happy.

Overall, Canon definately has the edge in low light conditions. If I were in your shoes, I'd probably try to get a 40D and go from there.
Either that, or I'd get one of the older Canon DSLRs, as they'll have fewer pixels and therefore less noise... Technology has improved, though, as the pixel counts have gone up, so there probably won't be an enormous difference between them... and the 40D will be better at everything else (besides low light photography) you might use this camera for, hands down.

A few recommendations about low-light, long exposure shooting (some or all of which you may know, but I'm going to say anyway, as they bear reiteration):

First, try to keep the camera (specifically the image sensor) as cold as possible. Silicon performs better when it's cold. When you're talking about exposures measured in minutes, the reduction in noise from the lower temperature really adds up. Also, if the temperature is sufficiently high (summer nights, depending on where you live) you can get stuck pixels on the image sensor during the exposure (not good).

Second, you generally are going to want to try to get lenses with as few glass elements in them as possible in an attempt to minimize lens flare (caused by the high contrast resulting from points of light against a completely black background.) Generally, that's going to mean prime lenses (lenses that don't zoom).
Along the same line of reasoning, don't use UV filters at night.

Third, even under the best of conditions, you're usually going to get some measure of noise in your image with low light photography. The best way to counter this is to (if possible) take 3 or 4 shots of the exact same thing, at the exact same exposure length, and then blend them together in post processing. Generally, that'll reduce noise to nil.
If you can't take another picture of the same thing (like if you were shooting at the night sky and left the shutter open for a couple hours to get star trails), then you can achieve a similar, though not quite as good effect, by taking another picture of the same duration, with the same settings, with the lens cap on and blending that in, to give you a noiseless background.
There are tutorials on how to do both of those scattered around the web, if you don't already know how.

Parent

RE: In the market

By The Irish Patient on 1/30/2008 11:39:14 AM , Rating: 3

Are you definitely locked into a choice between Canon or Nikon products?

You state that your camera spends most of its time attached to a telescope. For that reason, and others, take a look at the new Pentax K20D when it hits the market. The K20D (and the current K10D) are unique to this price range in having interchangeable focusing screens. This was a standard feature back in the Nikon F days. AFAIK, no one makes a ground glass screen for the Pentax yet, but you could probably fabricate one yourself. A DSLR so equipped would trump the competition for astrophotography.

I currently own a Canon XTi and don’t particularly recommend it. I had to buy it at a particular time because a couple of friend’s weddings and my own vacation were coming up. The K10D had been announced but was not yet available.

The K10D would have been a much better choice for me than the competition. It is larger and fits my hands better. The body is more rugged and is far better sealed against dust and weather than the Canons and Nikons mentioned here. The viewfinder is based on a glass pentaprism, again a throwback to the Nikon F days, whereas everything mentioned in this forum uses a cheaper pentamirror system.

The K10D and K20D use in-body image stabilization, potentially saving a ton of money on lenses.

The K20D upgrades the sensor from a CCD manufactured by Sony to a brand new CMOS manufactured by Samsung. The initial press is very promising, but nothing specific has been written yet about the noise characteristics. You should be able to get some good information in time for your planned purchase in March.

Another new feature for the K20D is live view to the LCD screen, again a plus for astrophotography. It also adds one f-stop of in-camera dynamic range expansion. (Really, dynamic range compression, but I guess “expansion” sounds better than “compression” in the advertisements.) This will be a truly exciting and revolutionary feature, assuming it works. The Canon XSi will have this, but my XTi does not.

Parent

RE: In the market

By intokkabire on 1/30/2008 12:40:46 PM , Rating: 2

*I will preface this by saying that I am a Canon user (Rebel XT).

In my opinion, if we are talking about the value of the upgrade offered by the D60 vs the XSi, the XSi wins hands down. The D60 is hardly an upgrade in my opinion which wouldn't be a problem other than it will be at a relatively high price point.

Three main reasons:
1 - Larger and brighter viewfinder.
2 - 3" screen
3 - Spot Metering

Other reasons include the improved grip, the switch to SD media, and live view.

Two things that may be of most interest to you since you said you like to attach to a telescope are live view and tethered shooting. I don't believe the entry level Nikons include live view (neither did the Canons till the XSi) and you get tethered shooting software for free with a Canon camera.

These are just my interests however in the comparison of the new cameras. As others have said, nothing beats holding one in your hands and playing with it. Both companies make great bodies and lenses so it really is just a personal preference.

Parent

RE: In the market

By Samus on 1/31/2008 1:08:04 AM , Rating: 2

Only camera's worth getting are 6MP unless you're an absolute professional. You'd be just as happy with a Pentax K100D or Canon EOS D60. Both are mature 6MP CMOS sensors, probably better/less ISO distortion than a finicky 10MP sensor, and Pentax has excellent CMOS Stabilization (not in the lense like the Nikon, which is inferior) and I should stress: both cost HUNDREDS less, even than the Nikon D40.

Entry level Nikon's are rip-offs. If you need a $1000 body and a $1200-$1800 lense, and know how to use them, then consider one. If you are an amatuer, a Nikon is a stupid choice. The saved money with a less expensive alternative can be spent elsewhere, like on filters and additional lenses (like FishEye's, etc...)

Parent

RE: In the market

By DeepBlue1975 on 1/31/2008 12:34:56 PM , Rating: 2

If your main interest lies in astronomy / night photography using a telescope, you should consider getting yourself one of those specially dedicated cameras which were built just for that kind of use (though they usually won't do any bit else, at least not good enough), and a DSLr of your choice for anything else.

I like the pentax k110d very much, it's not expensive and mostly every reviewer finds its high ISO performance and general noise level to be as good as they get.

As was said above, pixel count is not important at all, unless you wanna compete with nude female model photographers, in which case a lot of megapixels can give a much detailed view of certain body parts... hmmm...

Parent

i 2nd sony

By andrewrocks on 1/29/2008 8:53:53 PM , Rating: 2

either the a200 or the a700

both are extremely easy to use

both have built in IS

this is a pre-emptive comment: in body IS is just as good as in lens IS. this is fact.

RE: i 2nd sony

By The Irish Patient on 1/31/2008 2:16:25 PM , Rating: 2

As you can see from a post I wrote in this thread on 1/30, I favor the Pentax K10D (and soon to be released K20D). A part of my preference is due to the in-body image stabilization on the Pentax. You can potentially save a ton of money on lenses.

However, an informed buyer should understand that in-body stabilization will not equal the performance of in-lens stabilization for long telephoto lenses. The point is that in-body stabilization is good enough for just about anyone, including me, while saving a lot of money. In other words, more bang for the buck even if not quite the equal in theory.

The problem is that the amount of in-body sensor shift that is needed increases with increasing focal length. In-body stabilization is just as good in the wide angle to normal lens range. Its effectiveness then tapers off, and is not really useful at all past 300 mm.

Canon likes to point out in its white papers that a 400 mm telephoto would need 1/4 inch of in-body sensor movement in both planes to compete with in-lens stabilization. This is not possible with current technology. The problem only gets worse at 600 mm. There is a very good reason why I see all of the professional photographers at NFL / NBA games using $2,000 to $6,000 Canon telephotos.

The reality is that I need image stabilization the most for indoor shooting, where wide angle to normal lenses will be used. I’ll probably never buy a telephoto in excess of 300 mm. The image stabilization for the 300 mm will not be fully optimal, but the shooting is likely to be outdoors where a fast shutter speed can be used.

“Good enough” that I can afford trumps “perfect” that I can’t afford.

Parent

from the Nikon camp.

By wwwebsurfer on 1/29/2008 9:09:28 PM , Rating: 2

I'm a Nikon user, just throwin' that out from the get go. However I also get to use 'the other' stuff working for the paper.

In all honesty the features of the lower end Nikon are cream of the crop for people just wanting to capture awesome family shots. If you're wanting something that will shame any P&S, but don't plan on carrying 2-3 lenses and a tripod most days, you can't go wrong with the D40 or D40x. Canon has some nice gear in this price range, but things that matter to this price range like the LCD on the back, lens range straight from the box and simple editing software included it's Nikon all the way. Toss in VR compatibility and it's worth $750-$800, NO MORE.

Anything more than that and it's time to man up to the D80. And this is like going from an S10 to a Sierra. They really don't compare. Yes, they're both Nikon cameras, they're both similar in features on paper, but the D80 can do things the D40 aspires to do - it's meant for a completely different crowd. Things like autofocus on the $100 nifty-fifty 50mm f/1.8 start working again and you forget about why they built a flash into the thing to begin with. Shots at concerts, dances, extremely low light all move from 'forget it' to the realm of possibility. Add on the free 1-2 stops from VR and it's hard to top.

In short, if you're a serious dad, D40/D40x/D60. If you're a serious semi-pro with $400 more and the time to learn how to use it, D80 all the way.

RE: from the Nikon camp.

By Lord 666 on 1/29/2008 9:35:32 PM , Rating: 2

While I like the size of my D80, in normal indoor lighting, the metering is very inconsistent. This is not me repeating what I read on other camera sites, I actually own a D70, D80, and D300.

If I take 10 indoor pics of the same subject with slight variations (xmas for instance), the D300 will nail down all 10 without issue. The D70 will maybe have one or two that are either out of focus and/or "dull." The D80 will have focused more consistent than the D70, but about half of the pics will be metered incorrectly.

After I got my D300, skimmed through old pictures and even my wife was saying compared to the D300, the D80 pics are disappointing.

You meantion low light; the ISO noise on the D80 (at one point thought was good) is now unacceptable compared to the D300.

Parent

D40x with a new name slapped on it.

By ElFenix on 1/29/2008 3:45:18 PM , Rating: 2

they added a low FPS movie mode, a sensor to turn off the LCD, and a camera orientation sensor. oh, and some dust reduction features. other than that, basically the same camera. the EXPEED image processor, if it even uses it (they could very well have slapped that name on the old processor), hasn't helped out continuous shooting. so it sounds like just another bit of marketing-speak to help move cameras. not that the D40x had problems moving off the shelves. the bigger news is the new VR kit lens.

for the one who asked...

By GlassHouse69 on 1/29/2008 9:13:42 PM , Rating: 2

cannon is overpriced for same crap.

nikon is pricey but normal pricey. get a decent body, get a USED one from a great shop, get a NEW lens, thats the way to go.