New Nikon D40

The EOS 10D is still available for order in Asia. Lots of canonistas
have also put their 300Ds, 350Ds and 20Ds on the used market and
upgraded. Me thinks the Nikon D40 is competing against those old Canon
cameras. The 10D is definitely lots better than the Nikon D40 despite
having almost the same pixel count.

The Nikon D40 is also going to compete against the (discounted) D70s
and the D50s that are still available in the market. Makes me wonder
what strategy Nikon is following. I wish Nikon has something to compete
against the Canon 5D so that Canon is forced to lower the premium on
that full-frame camera.

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

Nothing wrong with that. It is not like Nikon is taking options away from the
more advanced users. Dollar per dollar, Nikon competes very well against
Canon and Canon has left the sub $600 niche wide open in the SLR market.

On 2006-11-16 11:24:37 -0500, "Bill Crocker" said:


"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message
...
Hi All,

Nikon USA has just announced the D40:
http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=774

Cheers,

Wayne
--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/

Don't get too excited. Only works with "G" lenses.

Bill Crocker

I suspect the only purchasers of this camera won't care. All new Nikon
glass will work with it. It doesn't strike me as a camera that will be
purchased by anyone with any significant investment in non AFD lenses
or even non-G lenses.


--
Jim

On 2006-11-16 13:02:02 -0500, "just bob" kilbyfan@aoldotcom said:


"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message
...
Hi All,

Nikon USA has just announced the D40:
http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=774


Is it me or are Nikon's cheap cameras getting dumber while the cheap
Canon cameras are getting smarter?

A dumb digital camera that works is not a bad thing. I shoot RAW with
my D70s and will continue with whatever I buy in the future. Photoshop
is my firend. But, Dad a veteran of the Speed Graphic, Leica IIIf,
Nikon F and a Nikon F3 and Kodachrome when it was ASA 10 (yes for you
young ones, ASA 10 with f 3.5 lenses) bought a D50. I questioned his
judgement. In the past, he has taken many prize winning photographs.
It isn't the first time I have later admitted Dad was right and it won'
t be the last. He is compentent in Quicken, does on line banking etc.
But, trying to teach him the basics of PhotoShop Elements or Microsoft
Picture etc.. was well, a futile effort. So, with that D50 on JPEG
fine, large, he takes pictures, shoves the SD card in his Epson
printer and prints off some pretty amazing photos. He also takes the
card to the quicky one hour lab and likewise gets back very credible
pictures. Are they going to win the Salon Slide category month after
month, perhaps not, but they are still very worth while. If he had to
post process every shot, he wouldn't be taking pictures.


--
Jim

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 00:21:48 +0100, (Philip Homburg)
wrote:

The problem is that due the relatively small size of that market, the
camera is likely going to be more expensive than a D200.

Are you prepared to pay Leica prices for such a camera?

Why would a *smaller* D200 sell fewer units than the large D200? Is
size, by itself, an indication of desirability?

This makes no sense. Everything in electronics has a tendency to
become more and more miniaturized.

I'd pay D200 prices for a smaller D200.

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 18:01:58 -0500, Rita ? Berkowitz ritaberk2O04
@aol.com wrote:

There's absolutely no reason Nikon can't make a 22 MP digital back for my
FE.

It would be more practical to design an entirely new camera, rather
than make an adaptation for a film camera.

But there's no reason why Nikon can't make a digital camera with the
user parameters of the FM/FE series.

The way I shoot pictures, I really have no use for autofocus, for
automatic exposure, etc. Just give me a big, bright viewfinder with a
split prism, and a TTL light meter with LED's to indicate under- or
overexposure. And make sure the camera can use all my old Nikkor
lenses. (Full frame would be helpful in this regard.)

I'd buy a D200 and just turn those features off, but the camera is
still too big and clunky.

(I'm conservative when it comes to photography. I cut my photographic
teeth using an unmetered Contaflex, back in the early 60's. Moving to
a Nikkormat and then to a Nikon FM2 were big steps up.)

(BTW, I own a D70 and a couple of F2's, and I don't use them for the
same reason: they're too clunky compared to the FM. I like the small
size and handiness, combined with the ability to use interchangable
lenses.)

"Bill" wrote in message
.. .

All of the new Canon Rebel cameras have been introduced at $1000 with
an 18-55 lense, but now you can buy a new Nikon with more than enough
features for entry level SLR users for about $600 with an 18-55 lense.

Is that $600 Australian?

Maybe I bought my D50 too soon. :-)

Gerrit

"Gerrit 't Hart" wrote in message
...

"Bill" wrote in message
.. .

All of the new Canon Rebel cameras have been introduced at $1000 with
an 18-55 lense, but now you can buy a new Nikon with more than enough
features for entry level SLR users for about $600 with an 18-55 lense.

Is that $600 Australian?

Maybe I bought my D50 too soon. :-)

Gerrit


Doubtful.

In article ,
Alexander Arnakis wrote:
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 00:21:48 +0100, (Philip Homburg)
wrote:

The problem is that due the relatively small size of that market, the
camera is likely going to be more expensive than a D200.

Are you prepared to pay Leica prices for such a camera?

Why would a *smaller* D200 sell fewer units than the large D200? Is
size, by itself, an indication of desirability?

The smaller D200 is the D80.

This makes no sense. Everything in electronics has a tendency to
become more and more miniaturized.

However, cameras are mostly not about electronics. Cameras are about
sensors, batteries, LCD screens, and handling.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

"Gerrit 't Hart" wrote in message
...
"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
All of the new Canon Rebel cameras have been introduced at $1000 with
an 18-55 lense, but now you can buy a new Nikon with more than enough
features for entry level SLR users for about $600 with an 18-55 lense.

Is that $600 Australian?

Dream on.
And the Canon Rebels are called the 300D, 350D and 400D here in Aus.

MrT.

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Rita ? Berkowitz ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote:
Alexander Arnakis wrote:

Personally, what I want is an all-manual camera like the FM2, except
with a digital sensor instead of film. Leave off the bells and
whistles and make it small and simple.

There's absolutely no reason Nikon can't make a 22 MP digital back for my
FE.


Sure there is ... you would be [relatively] the only customer.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0