Am going to Tanzania and Kenya on photo safari in about a month. I need to buy a serious camera/lens for the trip. Have narrowed the choices to
Nikon D80 or D40x with normal kit lenses but with additional AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF. I really like that lens for this trip, and especially the image stabilizion (bouncing around in LandRovers, etc.) Would get more lenses later. Would also welcome other recommendations as well.

I am new to DSLR's, having used nice Nikon Prosumer models in the past (currently have CoolPix 5700), and serious film SLR's in the way distant past.

Am partial to Nikon because of the quality of their glass, but wouldn't rule out Canon. Am starting from scratch, so I have no existing lenses that I need to be able to use, but want a nice platform from which to build. I am neither a novice nor a pro, but enjoy quality photography and travel the world extensively and do understand the basics of photography and how to operate a good camera.

The D80 is heavier and bigger, rugged, more serious, more nice features, roughly $500 more than D40x (which is a souped up D40 marketed to compete with Canon Rebel XT 10.2mp). D40x is lighter, smaller, agile, easier to tote, maybe the consumer DSLR prototype of the future.

So I am locked into "analysis paralysis" and have been in a decision stupor for 4 days. I want a camera body that I will be happy with into the future, as I plan to travel worldwide and very extensively for many more years.

Light and agile is a plus (D40x). So is the feature laden "pro-light" (D80).

Anybody have any thoughts, experiences, recommendations? Yea, make my decision for me!!!! (Only kidding). So all you photographer types here, please share your thoughts with me as if you were my buddy or family. Thanks.

in the same boat...although I wish I was going on safari, too. I'm big-time Nikon fan, with Niknon film, DSLR and point-and-shoot for recreation/serious amateur use only. I got D50 couple of years ago and have been traveling/shooting a lot over past year. I've been looking at D80 as well...
d200 is just too much camera for what I want/need. but have also seen d40x features and can't really figure out the major differences...aside from a few minor features. I'm leaning toward d80 for the few upgrades it offers...and feel (mentally) that I can grow into it. may be the only deciding feature...the mental thing...and that I'm getting more for the bucks. and, that may be OK

Please keep in mind that DSLR is nothing like flim SLR. Your body will be obsolete in about 6 month, and useful life of a brand new model will be 3 years at max.

That being said, if I were interested in quality glasses, I would take a look at Sony too. Carl Zeiss glasses are one of the better lenses out there (and better than Canon L lenses or Nikon's expensive AF-S lensess).

Among your choices, I like D40X better as it was introduced later (and partially because it surpresses noise a lot better).

sorry to jump in, but I read that the Sony is only a Zeiss-based design, not an actual Zeiss lens; Panasonic/Lumix is an actual Leica lens, etc. interesting comment about the noise factor on d40x.

Am going to Tanzania and Kenya on photo safari in about a month. I need to buy a serious camera/lens for the trip. Have narrowed the choices to
Nikon D80 or D40x with normal kit lenses but with additional AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF. I really like that lens for this trip, and especially the image stabilizion (bouncing around in LandRovers, etc.) Would get more lenses later. Would also welcome other recommendations as well.

I am new to DSLR's, having used nice Nikon Prosumer models in the past (currently have CoolPix 5700), and serious film SLR's in the way distant past.

Am partial to Nikon because of the quality of their glass, but wouldn't rule out Canon. Am starting from scratch, so I have no existing lenses that I need to be able to use, but want a nice platform from which to build. I am neither a novice nor a pro, but enjoy quality photography and travel the world extensively and do understand the basics of photography and how to operate a good camera.

The D80 is heavier and bigger, rugged, more serious, more nice features, roughly $500 more than D40x (which is a souped up D40 marketed to compete with Canon Rebel XT 10.2mp). D40x is lighter, smaller, agile, easier to tote, maybe the consumer DSLR prototype of the future.

So I am locked into "analysis paralysis" and have been in a decision stupor for 4 days. I want a camera body that I will be happy with into the future, as I plan to travel worldwide and very extensively for many more years.

Light and agile is a plus (D40x). So is the feature laden "pro-light" (D80).

Anybody have any thoughts, experiences, recommendations? Yea, make my decision for me!!!! (Only kidding). So all you photographer types here, please share your thoughts with me as if you were my buddy or family. Thanks.


Went on a round the world trip in late 2005 and wanted to get a DSLR. Ended up with a Canon EOS 20D after a very long thread here with lots of good advice. I had been partial to Nikon but at the time I needed the camera the Canon was probably better. Probably flipped a couple months later for a while. I dont think you can go wrong with either brand.

The one thing that thread talked me into more than anything was getting premium lenses and wow, have I been happy with that decision. The Canon L series lenses are fantastic. Last December we went to Zambia on a safari. I had previously gotten Canon 17-40 f/4 L and 70-200 f/4L and a 50mm lens. For the safari I got a Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L Image stabilized lens. That is a great lens for a safari and I probably used it for close to 90% of the pictures that I took. And a lot of those were at 400mm. So I would really consider looking for a 400mm lens. The second most valuable thing I had was bean bag that screwed to the tripod mount of the lens to support in it in the Land Rover. The third was a portable storage system for downloading pics. I shot about 4000 so that came in handy so I could recycle the memory cards.

You can see the images at:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/97883009@N00/

There are several sets of Africa pics.

As an example, an African snake eagle at 400mm.http://farm1.static.flickr.com/139/322017911_1962970b95.jpg

300mm would have been a different shot.

Carl Zeiss lenses for alpha mount is totally different from Carl Zeiss lenses found on Sony point-n-shoot models.
It is real Carl Zeiss.

Additional Comment
Sony will soon introduct Full Frame DSLR. This is why I like Sony/Carl Zeiss over Panasonic/Leica. Only if Leica made a true RF digital camera!

Carl Zeiss lenses for alpha mount is totally different from Carl Zeiss lenses found on Sony point-n-shoot models.
It is real Carl Zeiss.

Additional Comment
Sony will soon introduct Full Frame DSLR. This is why I like Sony/Carl Zeiss over Panasonic/Leica. Only if Leica made a true RF digital camera!

They dont make one? Isnt the M8 one?

They dont make one?

The only range finder digital camera I know is Epson R-D1. I don't think Leica makes range finder digital camera.

The only range finder digital camera I know is Epson R-D1. I don't think Leica makes range finder digital camera.

I believe that you are incorrect. Leica M8, 10.3 mp for $4795, body only. The only long lenses for the Sony seem to be a lower grade 500mm f/8 and a apochromatic 300mm for $6000. I think 400mm is important. Nikon and Canon each make about 5 times as many lenses as does Sony. The flexibility is important. It is also nice that they can go on film bodies too in many cases.

I believe that you are incorrect. Leica M8, 10.3 mp for $4795, body only. The only long lenses for the Sony seem to be a lower grade 500mm f/8 and a apochromatic 300mm for $6000. I think 400mm is important. Nikon and Canon each make about 5 times as many lenses as does Sony. The flexibility is important. It is also nice that they can go on film bodies too in many cases.

Didn't know about M8, thank you ^
I guess I can scrap 1D Mk. III and get M8.

I agree that Sony offers limited lenses. However, as Sony DSLRs share alpha mount with Minolta (d)SLRs, you can use AF 300mm f/2.8 APO G(D) SSM lens which IMHO, is better than Canon EF 300mm f/2.8IS L as far as picture quality is concerned. There's wide range of lenses available (made by Minolta which is just as good as Canon or Nikon). Minolta doesn't seem to offer 400mm lense though.

As for Carl Zeiss lenses, they announced ZA lens and I believe three models are available now, and other models are planned. I'd much prefer T* lense over Canon L, but it is highly subjective opinion.

Didn't know about M8, thank you ^
I guess I can scrap 1D Mk. III and get M8.

I agree that Sony offers limited lenses. However, as Sony DSLRs share alpha mount with Minolta (d)SLRs, you can use AF 300mm f/2.8 APO G(D) SSM lens which IMHO, is better than Canon EF 300mm f/2.8IS L as far as picture quality is concerned. There's wide range of lenses available (made by Minolta which is just as good as Canon or Nikon). Minolta doesn't seem to offer 400mm lense though.

As for Carl Zeiss lenses, they announced ZA lens and I believe three models are available now, and other models are planned. I'd much prefer T* lense over Canon L, but it is highly subjective opinion.

The lure of Leica ;)

Im starting to look at M3s and M4s :)

The lure of Leica ;)

Im starting to look at M3s and M4s :)

remember me with your castoffs. ;)

lala

The main advantage of the D40 is definitely it's size. It's a bit smaller than the Canon 350 and 400s and a fair bit smaller than the D80. It's great for hand held photography. As for the D80, I'd have to hold one with a reasonable lens attached to decide that one.

You need to be aware that not all lenses will auto focus with the D40 though. Also, it does not bracket if this feature matters to you (it mattered to me at some point when I learned about the existence of a feature called bracketing on my other camera).

There is one other thing to be said for a slightly larger/heavier camera - assuming your arms aren't tired, a heavy (but still balanced) camera will be easier to hold steady than a similarly well-balanced light camera - intertia can be your friend.

Thanks to all for you insightful responses. I'm probably going with the D40x with the 18-55 stock lens, and the 70-300 AFS-VR lens. Decided I liked the lightness and size of the D40x vs. the more full featured D80 and with the price difference I can buy more glass. Besides, as someone pointed out, these DSLR bodies become obsolete very quickly. Now to find the best buy. So many discounter internet sites try to sell grey market product or make other changes to the normal package.

Figure I will need 4gb at a minimum and 3 batteries. Normally shoot at "fine" and may reduce size as max with 10.2 mb eats memory.

Thanks to all for you insightful responses. I'm probably going with the D40x with the 18-55 stock lens, and the 70-300 AFS-VR lens. Decided I liked the lightness and size of the D40x vs. the more full featured D80 and with the price difference I can buy more glass. Besides, as someone pointed out, these DSLR bodies become obsolete very quickly. Now to find the best buy. So many discounter internet sites try to sell grey market product or make other changes to the normal package.

Figure I will need 4gb at a minimum and 3 batteries. Normally shoot at "fine" and may reduce size as max with 10.2 mb eats memory.

I would suggest you reconsider whether to cut the image size. I shot RAW format and used a portable storage device. I used this one:

http://www.adorama.com/ICDHD8040.html

But there are others as well. I shot everything in RAW plus JPEG and went through about a 2 gig card or more a day but Im really glad I had the extra storage. I actually backed up on the Hyperdrive and a notebook so that I had redundancy and so that I could look at the images since I was not real familiar with the camera and totally unfamiliar with the lens.

By the way, I use the Nikon 18-200VR and love it. I wound up selling my 18-55 and 70-300 and just carrying one lens.

Thanks to all for you insightful responses. I'm probably going with the D40x with the 18-55 stock lens, and the 70-300 AFS-VR lens. Decided I liked the lightness and size of the D40x vs. the more full featured D80 and with the price difference I can buy more glass. Besides, as someone pointed out, these DSLR bodies become obsolete very quickly.
I'm sorry to hear this before I had an opportunity to chime in. I am a D80 owner who is madly in love with it. I also roll with the 18-200VR & 50mm 1.8

I will just say I disagree with the poster who said that DSLR bodies have a useful life of 3 years. Especially when it comes to a camera as feature-laden as the D80, which is worth the money. The D40 is more for beginners and average mid-level shooters and I think you will feel hemmed in by its limits if you are fairly advanced, as it sounds like you are. I just think you'll be more satisfied with the D80 for more years.

You are right about the importance of lenses. The 18-55 stock lens is a great idea and a good lens for the money and the 70-300VR is good for a Safari. But you also may want to check out this Ken Rockwell article on lenses for Safari: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/safari.htm

By the way, I use the Nikon 18-200VR and love it. I wound up selling my 18-55 and 70-300 and just carrying one lens.

^ ^ ^ That's the way to be!:D

I'm sorry to hear this before I had an opportunity to chime in. I am a D80 owner who is madly in love with it. I also roll with the 18-200VR & 50mm 1.8

I will just say I disagree with the poster who said that DSLR bodies have a useful life of 3 years. Especially when it comes to a camera as feature-laden as the D80, which is worth the money. The D40 is more for beginners and average mid-level shooters and I think you will feel hemmed in by its limits if you are fairly advanced, as it sounds like you are. I just think you'll be more satisfied with the D80 for more years.

You are right about the importance of lenses. The 18-55 stock lens is a great idea and a good lens for the money and the 70-300VR is good for a Safari. But you also may want to check out this Ken Rockwell article on lenses for Safari: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/safari.htm

Body wise, D80 offers many more features than D40X, that's for sure. But electronics wise, D40X is more advanced than D80. I just don't think D80 is worth premium over D40X. And digital cameras, just like computers, are changing so quickly that it will be obsolete in a year or so. I would invest in good glasses instead of body as good glasses will last a whole lot longer than a good body (be it D80, D2Xs, D2Hs, etc).

MrsJ recommends checking out the forums on Nikonians.org

http://www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?conf=DCConfID3

There's a pretty hot thread about the D40x in the D40/D50 users area because of the extensive review (http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/nikon/d40x/nikond40x.html) from LetsGoDigital.

Body wise, D80 offers many more features than D40X, that's for sure. But electronics wise, D40X is more advanced than D80. I just don't think D80 is worth premium over D40X. And digital cameras, just like computers, are changing so quickly that it will be obsolete in a year or so.

Several posters here have mentioned that DSLR bodies become obsolete very fast. From a technical perspective, this might be the case. However, from a functional perspective, a DSLR body can be useful for many, many years.

I have a Nikon D70 which is now close to three years old (around 30.000 shots so far). Technically, many would consider it a stone age relic, but it is a fine body that does everything I need. It has "only" 6 MP resolution, but since I do not make large prints, I don't really need more. What I have invested in are lenses: they are what enables me to take (hopefully) good photos. I plan to live with the same body for at least a couple more years and use my money for lenses.

As for the OP's question: if you find that the D40x fits your hand (it is quite small) and you don't need the extra features the D80 offers (bracketing, internal autofocus motor, etc.), then it is a good idea to get the D40X and use the extra money for lenses. I'd actually pay quite a bit of attention to how the camera feels in you hand -- when you take a lot of photos, that becomes a major issue.

As for cards and batteries, I'd get more than 4 Gigs of cards (probably 2 or 3 4 Gig cards and 1 or 2 2 Gig cards). Unless you are planning to be in places with no electricity for long periods of time, you should be fine with 2 batteries.

Enjoy your African safari -- it will be magical no matter which camera you choose. One final suggestions: on some game drivers, go without the camera. You get a different perspective when you are not thinking in terms of potential shots and compositions. If you lose the shot of a lifetime that way, so be it: some moments are just not meant to be photographed.

Cheers,
T.

Body wise, D80 offers many more features than D40X, that's for sure. But electronics wise, D40X is more advanced than D80. I just don't think D80 is worth premium over D40X. And digital cameras, just like computers, are changing so quickly that it will be obsolete in a year or so. I would invest in good glasses instead of body as good glasses will last a whole lot longer than a good body (be it D80, D2Xs, D2Hs, etc).


so, the question I have for you and the others is whether there are any rumors Nikon is pu-grading the D80 (perhaps a D80X) in light of the D40/D40x upgrade?

Wirelessly posted (HTC TyTN: BlackBerry7230/4.0.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1)

I'm not familiar with the Nikon line but would like to comment on features that I found useful on the camera body for photography in Africa. First was full manual over ride, including focusing. An animal hiding in the brush is a tough autofocus. Likewise I also used spot metering a lot. For similar reasons I found depth of field preview really invaluable on numerous occassions.

Body wise, D80 offers many more features than D40X, that's for sure. But electronics wise, D40X is more advanced than D80. I just don't think D80 is worth premium over D40X. And digital cameras, just like computers, are changing so quickly that it will be obsolete in a year or so. I would invest in good glasses instead of body as good glasses will last a whole lot longer than a good body (be it D80, D2Xs, D2Hs, etc).


I'm not familiar with the Nikon line but would like to comment on features that I found useful on the camera body for photography in Africa. First was full manual over ride, including focusing. An animal hiding in the brush is a tough autofocus. Likewise I also used spot metering a lot. For similar reasons I found depth of field preview really invaluable on numerous occassions.

To address GadgetFreak's list of nice-to-haves, the D80 comes out as a clear winner.

* D40x does not have depth-of-field preview
* D80 has more autofocus zones: D40 has 3, D80 has 11 AF sensors
* You'll have to use an AF-S lens if you want to use the D40.
* D80 has a larger, brighter viewfinder (pentaprism 0.95x magnification vs pentamirror 0.75x magnification) - this makes manual focus much easier. The D70 has the same basic finder as the D40, and I just don't bother with MF.

* You'll have to use an AF-S lens if you want to use the D40.
* D80 has a larger, brighter viewfinder (pentaprism 0.95x magnification vs pentamirror 0.75x magnification) - this makes manual focus much easier. The D70 has the same basic finder as the D40, and I just don't bother with MF.
*You can use older lenses on the D40 in manual mode.
*D40 has a 0.80x 95% coverage; D80 is 0.94x. The D70 viewfinder was 0.75x and not as good as the D40's.

http://www.bythom.com/d40review.htm has a thorough review of the D40 (and D40x) by a Nikon expert, with some comparisons to the D70, D80 and D200.

Body wise, D80 offers many more features than D40X, that's for sure. But electronics wise, D40X is more advanced than D80. I just don't think D80 is worth premium over D40X. And digital cameras, just like computers, are changing so quickly that it will be obsolete in a year or so. I would invest in good glasses instead of body as good glasses will last a whole lot longer than a good body (be it D80, D2Xs, D2Hs, etc).
No doubt that having better glass is the most important purchase decision. But the idea that an advanced DSLR will be "obsolete" in a year is far-fetched. I think that's much too strong of a word. Sure it won't be the latest and greatest in a year . . . The D40x may have all the features you desire and if that's the case, it's the body you need and u can spend the difference on better glass. That's basically what I did with the D80. I actually wanted the D200, but decided it wasn't worth the $600 premium, so instead I got the lesser D80 and put the $600 saved on great lens gear!^