photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
All Cameras >> Nikon >> Nikon D40

Nikon D40 SLR Digital Camera Sample Photos

Marketed: 16-Nov-2006
Megapixels: 6
Random Nikon D40 Samples from 85393 available Photos more
g1/16/10216/3/126676501.lzrDZxrX.jpg g1/54/200654/3/146251862.9KVpIO1g.jpg g9/68/763068/3/151069203.Y7jJ8acR.jpg g1/68/763068/3/108537012.nV6YrJgQ.jpg
g1/65/615065/3/112938476.vrE7UQF1.jpg g1/50/94350/3/105677290.7b1hzaNa.jpg g1/01/568601/3/108042207.DLkOR1XL.jpg g6/71/345271/3/80601389.J7FMJtMk.jpg
g1/16/10216/3/125544372.kGWH9pe9.jpg g2/54/200654/3/148777099.Oi8pAumX.jpg g5/31/567331/3/106147718.klE9JP3p.jpg g4/63/898463/3/143451857.zDKtyTwW.jpg

Guest 19-Sep-2008 13:26
In my wiev is the best dslr camera for people, who want to try with photography. Obviously, it isn't fast and professional, but it can make your photos better. There is my gallery of Nikon D40. Please vote and comment:)
Lou Giroud15-Aug-2008 11:40
I doubt very much that someone is able to make a better picture with a D300 then with a D40. That a D300 has better skills in performance, especially in inner rework and focusing is a fact. But, the D40 benefits of the same pixel desity then the D3 and D700 series and this is a big advantage. One might think that a higher pixel density would give more details and better pictures. Practice has proven that this is not the case since the ability of a larger pixel to "eat" light and details gives him wide advance in shrpnes and details. The only problem until recently was to manage the burning of highlights that is proper to elder cameras like the D70 and Canon's 5D for example.
The D40 is a fantastic step forward in picture rework to the D70 with, let's not forget it, the same sensor of 6 mpix. Since Nikon has taken this pixel density to put in their flagships, why do they not develop a high performance camera in Dx format with a 6.1 mpix sensor. Here again, it's this demand of the market and the consumer who leads them and those consumers who think that a higher pixel density is a step forward will find out sooner or later that they are wrong. Poxket cameras show this clearly and the loss of detail and increase of noise, despite of better inner software, is the only things you get more. A D300 is quite noisy without any inner rework and set to noise of. Note that even with noise settings turned off, the camera reworks and flattens noise and I would realy like to see a picture shot without any inner ework by a D300, many would be surpised. Note that if the D300 was a challenge rin picture quality to the D200, I would certainly have bought one since a long time. For me the race to more pixel is and remains a stupid game. As I wrote on another place on pbase, all is in the software rework internal to the camera and here is the place where newer modells progress. Sensors are what they are and unlees someone invents a new system, they keep coooking with the same ingredients. I reworked some elder raw shots of my D70 with Nikon Capture NX2 and I ask myself today why I ever changed to another camera. Software makes it, only software, internal or external it doesn't matters.
Guest 26-Jun-2008 22:11
Of course there are differences in the performance of the D300 ($1700) and D40 ($400), but no-one can honestly say if in the aggregate they are in favor of the D300, regardless of cost. All I can say is that human vestedness is harmonious with the amount of $ they've spent. Wny is there no good manual focus dslr on the market with a bright single lens reflex (slr) viewfinder? Think.
Guest 30-May-2008 01:09
As great a cameras as my brother-in-law's Nikon D40 is, my Nikon D300 produces better images at higher resolution and lower noise with better color. All the "gadgets" and "features" that are found on the D300 goes a long way to helping the photographer nail the shot. This is no way takes away from the D40 at all, but Nikon does provide additional (and genuine) capabilities to the camera with the higher price tag, for those who need it.
Lou Giroud28-Feb-2008 14:19
I agree with Pierre Rouseau, Nikon is indeed starting that stupid game of "buy another one every year" known from Canon and some others. The low resolution full frame D3 is best example. The best camera Nikon produced until now, considering the quality of the shot is the D40. I seldom walk around with my D200 since I have the D40 and framing manualy with none motorized lenses does not disturbs me at all. Like Pierre, I have known times on which we have not been that lucky to have AF and all kind of technological tatata. Nikon had better made to improve picture quality then starting gadgetting like on the D3 and D300. Sure, those cameras offer some features one would like to have on others, but paying that much for gadgests and not a better picture is somewhat questionable. I have decide to stick to what I have and wait a couple more years to see evolution and for sure improvement in picture quality and not technical gambling only.
Guest 19-Jan-2008 23:10
Well said Pierre. For an inxepensive "entry level" camera the D40 is the sweet spot of dlsrs. Here are several examples from mine. Not really fair since some of these are shot with the 200 F2 VR but at least it shows as puny as the D40 is physically, it still resolves high end glass.
Guest 19-Jan-2008 22:48
Screw Nikon D40/D40x marketing strategy exactly. To the fool in the boiler room who changed the list. Yes, Canon may be more popular, but Nikon is clearly better, and that includes the D40, notwithstanding the assanine stupidity that the D40 cannot autofocus with most of the great Nikkor autofocus lenses of the past. Canon cannot even mount FD lenses! Scrap the D40x from the list for not being one iota better than the D40, and a lot more expensive. Marketing ... that is the prime evil of our time. Nikon was not satisfied with staying at 6 megapixel. They recognize that the D40 is too good for itself. Give it away and suck the people in. Then you got them. Cash cow. Like Canon. Why is consumerism nothing but trouble? Because it is full of sophistry and without sophistication.
Guest 19-Jan-2008 14:28

This is my Original List.
Professional Digital SLR Cameras
1. Nikon D3
2. Nikon D2Xs
3. Canon 1Ds Mark 3
4. Canon 1D Mark 3

Semi Professional Digital SLR Cameras
1. Nikon D300
2. Nikon D200
3. Canon 5D
4. Fuji S5 Pro

Enthusiast Digital SLR cameras
1. Nikon D80
2. Canon 40D

Entry Level Digital SLR cameras
1. Nikon D40x
2. Canon 400D
3. Pentax K10D

Thats true I'm a Nikon user, I love it. Ive used other brand cameras but i didnt like them, NO OFFENCE. Nikon D3 & Nikon D300 have changed the users reviews thats y Nikon D3 & Nikon D300 are at the top. Nikon is the Best. (If the picture matters, the camera matters. At the Heart of the Image)
RS Photography19-Jan-2008 02:58
New List
Professional Digital SLR Camera
1. Canon 1Ds Mark 3
2. Canon 1D Mark 3
3. Nikon D3
4. Canon 5D
5. Nikon D2Xs

Semi Professional Digital SLR Camera
1. Fuji S5 Pro
2. Canon 40D
3. Nikon D300
4. Canon 400D
5. Nikon D80
6. Pentax K10D
7. Nikon D40x
Guest 15-Jan-2008 14:02
New List
Professional Digital SLR Camera
1. Nikon D3
2. Nikon D2Xs
3. Canon 1Ds Mark 3
4. Canon 1D Mark 3

Semi Professional Digital SLR Camera
1. Nikon D300
2. Nikon D200
3. Canon 5D
4. Canon 40D
5. Pentax K10D
6. Fuji S5 Pro
7. Canon 30D
8. Nikon D80
9. Nikon D40x
10. Canon 400D
Guest 14-Jan-2008 05:31
It's Nikon's Marketing Strategy, the D40 target entry grade market and those user without complaint about that becasue they just need what they bought. Guess Nikon wouldn't improve D40 just for the more professional user. but I think it'll be soon have a D60 bundled with the 18-55/AFSVR...haha... a filp-out live-view LCD. ~GRIN~
Guest 13-Jan-2008 19:04
Top Professional Digital SLR Cameras
1. Nikon D3
2. Nikon D2Xs
3. Canon 1Ds Mark 3
4. Canon 1D Mark 3

Top Semi Professional Digital SLR Cameras
1. Nikon D300
2. Nikon D200
3. Canon 5D
4. Canon 40D
5. Fuji S5 Pro
6. Canon 30D
7. Nikon D80
8. Pentax K10D
9. Nikon D40x
10. Canon 400D
Guest 03-Jan-2008 16:15
Notice: I'm not saying Nikon is worse than the other manufacturers in marketing craftiness. Also, there is nothing wrong with the D40 except its lack of an autofocus motor. The D40 is a great small dslr camera, as long as you are prepared to stick with the excellent little 18-55 II and 55-200 II zooms, or instead of those two lenses, spend $750 on the amazing do-it-all 18-200mm VR, but you'd lose the way the 18-55's small size complements the D40. I am very disappointed with Nikon's marketing spasm here. I would have bought a D40 long ago to use with my very compact 10.5mm f/2.8, 24mm 2.8D, 50mm f/1.8 and 180mm f/2.8 if the camera had had an autofocus motor. But to imply that there are many autofocus lenses available, ... well, that depends on what the meaning of "available" is, in one's enculturated mind. There are obviously many who hero-worship duplicitous media protagonists like Clinton, Bush and Gollum. Like I said below, if you're adventurous, one secret of the D40 is you could also buy some of the hugely available Nikon manual focus used lenses, and go manual focus and manual exposure, and use your eye to guestimate the exposure: results are very creative. But then again, Nikon still got you, because you'd be wasting money on your D40's unused technologies, although not much. If you want to do macro photography - there you should certainly get a used manual focus 55mm Nikon micro lens. They are not only a fraction of the cost, and in they are optically better than the 105mm VR - especially in the area of chromatic abberation (purple fringing) but also sharpness. By the way - I don't see any benefit of the higher megapixel D40x over the D40 - it's pure hype.
Guest 03-Jan-2008 15:03
And I am sick of people twisting the facts because they are "socially" compromised by the corporate machinery. My point has been that with the D40 and D40x, Nikon is manipulating new users into paying for another autofocus engine every time they buy another lens. Evangee is for some reason omitting the price of these "available for the D40" lenses. I assume we generally don't want to pay more for each lens than we pay for the camera. That leaves us with 4 lenses, which overlap functionally. And Sigma has some quality control and compatibility problems.

AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II $115.00
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED $250.00
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED $315.00
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED $350.00
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED $500.00
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED $500.00
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED $700.00
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED $750.00
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED $1,000.00
AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED $1,200.00
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED $1,250.00
AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED $1,350.00
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED $1,750.00
AF-S VR Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED $4,000.00
AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D IF-ED $4,500.00
AF-S VR Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED $4,500.00
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED $5,000.00
AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4D IF-ED II $7,000.00
AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8D IF-ED II $7,600.00
AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4D IF-ED II $10,000.00
Guest 19-Sep-2007 01:58
Just found out via Google that quite a number of Nikon D40 / D40X photos made it to the Flickr Scout section. For details and a summary, please see
Guest 19-Jul-2007 00:38
Don't let the size of this little firecracker decive you. Here is one of my galleries taken by the D40 with believe it or not the 6&1/2 lbs 200 F2 VR. :)
Guest 03-Jul-2007 10:59
...and also for the D40 don't forget the Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S
Guest 24-Jun-2007 22:31
Okay, I am SOOOOO tired of everyone complaining about the supposed lack of available lenses for the D40. To shut everyone up, here's the list.

AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S VR Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8D IF-ED II
AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4D IF-ED II
AF-S VR Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED
AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D IF-ED
AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4D IF-ED II

AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II
AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II
AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E II

12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM
APO 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG HSM
APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM
APO 100-300mm F4 EX DG HSM
APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM
APO 300-800 F5.6 EX DG HSM
10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM
APO 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC HSM
30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
APO 800mm f5.6 EX DG HSM
APO 500mm F4.5 EX DG/HSM
APO 300mm F2.8 EX DG/HSM
80-400mm f4.5-5.6 EX DG OS
David Casler22-Jun-2007 04:12
Jun (below), it is surprising to see how many times you posted the same message. I did my research. I read Nikon's site and many others. I wouldn't be angry at all if I could return the camera, but I posted my first message (below) from Thailand and am now in Cambodia. I can't return anything and am stuck carrying around a bunch of useless camera equipment for the next two months. Worse, is I can't do my photography the way I had expected, with excellent fixed-focal length glass. All due to NIKON'S amazing lack of skill in marketing this surprisingly inferior product properly. Nikon fails to mention under the lenses that they don't work with the new D40. Under the D40 page you have to read carefully under "tech specs". Nikon made 2 mistakes. 1) they made this camera 2) they never made this shortcoming clear so that customers that trust their products wouldn't make the mistake I made.
Guest 20-Jun-2007 12:54
To David Casler,
D40 is out in the market for how many months already. Its surprising to know that you bought this camera without thinking that it wont autofocus on some nikon lens. Its not nikon to be blamed but you because you did not bother to search what are the limited capabilities of this camera.
Guest 20-Jun-2007 12:53
To David Casler,
D40 is out in the market for how many months already. Its surprising to know that you bought this camera without thinking that it wont autofocus on some nikon lens. Its not nikon to be blamed but you because you did not bother to search what are the limited capabilities of this camera.
Guest 20-Jun-2007 12:52
To David Casler,
D40 is out in the market for how many months already. Its surprising to know that you bought this camera without thinking that it wont autofocus on some nikon lens. Its not nikon to be blamed but you because you did not bother to search what are the limited capabilities of this camera.
David Casler20-Jun-2007 11:58
Words cannot express my disappointment with Nikon and this poor excuse for a digital SLR camera. I am (was) the most loyal Nikon user out there. I always owned the cheapest SLR, used good Nikon glass and got great results. Until now. It DOESN'T WORK WITH ANY OF MY D LENSES!!!!! Hello? Nikon? Are you there? I now have a new Nikon D40 and a brand new 50mm D lens (purchased today) that I figured out (the hard way) doesn't work together! Nor with my other lenses I've collected. Goodbye Nikon! I'm going Canon. What a P.O.S.! I could almost understand this if at least they told us about the D40's colossal shortcoming in their marketing. There's no excuse for this. I sold my D50 to upgrade to the smaller D40 for traveling, but NOWHERE is it clearly stated this huge limitation. Also, for you Nikon reps pretending to be Joe Shmoe who post here boasting and defending Nikon's products, please do not tell me that the D lenses will work great but just won't autofocus. If they don't autofocus, they DON'T WORK!!! To everyone else - do not buy this camera unless you want to be stuck with the slightly above mediocre kit lens that comes with it. GOD I feel so HOSED! Canon, here I come.
Guest 01-Apr-2007 13:34
Just have the D40X on hand, A great gear again.
Overall it's a compact D80 which without AF-D lens support,
other performance not significance of difference.
Also the 55-200 VR is pretty good for daily use.
James Clarke28-Mar-2007 04:39
I own a Nikon D50 with 1 AF-S lens and 3AF lenses so I probably wouldn't buy one of these as a second body.

However, if I was starting from scratch I might consider one with the kit 18-55 II and the 55-200VR. For a prime possibly a Sigma 30/f1.4. Although most casual users would probably only ever need the first two.

If any of my friends who are looking to buy a first dSLR I would recommend this camera if they don't have any glass to start with. If they've plenty of Nikon glass from a film camera I recommend they go for the D80 (if it is AF) or the D200 (if they have AI). If they have plenty of other brand glass I recommend they go for that brands dSLR or a brand with a compatible mount.
Guest 26-Feb-2007 18:53
There is a real positive side. If the D40 user wants quality on a budget, the D40, unlike the D70, D70s, D50, D80 and D200, which work with Nikon's own affordable autofocus lenses, manual focus is the only solution. THAT is the only way out when you have little money.

If a D40 owner knows how to do without the light meter, many of the real metal manual focus Nikkor prime lenses from 1959 into the late seventies, non-ai, ai and ais, are exceptional. They mount on the D40 without metering. They're usually much smaller and lighter than modern zoom lenses, which is what a D40 owner probably wants. For instance the Nikon series E is very underrated and ideal for the D40, a series E 50mm f/1.8 often goes for under $20 on ebay and there's a 28mm, 100mm and 70-210mm, all great lenses. I just bought a 70-210 E for $32 to use on my D50. It is outstanding with extension tubes for macro photography and for general photography. I would also recommend the tiny Nikkor 20mm f/4, if you can get one, but they go for about $200 on ebay, if you're lucky. Like I said; I'd buy the D40 myself, but not for autofocus, nor for metering. A manual-focusing non-metering D40 can be a strange jewel to the nerdy photographer population, reminiscent of the original Nikon F2 with the non-metering DE-1 prism. Use your dumb AFS autofocus lens for snapshots but your manual focus lenses for quality.

In this vein I also recommend that a company like Tokina build a compact 12 megapixel full-sensor (135-format) camera, without lightmeter or autofocus, with all that implies, without any camera/lens electronic connection, with an old-style hot-shoe accessory and with a 200% viewfinder on an f/!.2 sensitive light-path (instead f/5.6) for about $500, and start manufacturing all the best manual focus lenses again. Nikon's not going to do it, with their dumb AFS philosophy.
Guest 21-Feb-2007 07:27
Ok, so that's 21 Nikon lenses that will focus perfectly well on the D40. Add the 16 Sigma lenses that will also focus perfectly well on the D40 and that's 37 lenses and counting.
So, even though you have stated "-The D40 cannot AUTOFOCUS with nearly all Nikon's own AUTOFOCUS LENSES.-" there are at least 37 lenses that will. Over 20 of them made by Nikon! Not really adding up there Pierre! Your comments would have had much, much more credibility f you had just stated "The D40 cannot autofocus with cheap low light primes like the 50mm 1.8 which may be a disadvantage to some people, although most people who buy the D40 wont need this or could manual focus one till an AF-S version is released"

At least you have admitted the D40's LCD 2.5" vs 2" screen and 80% vs. 75% viewfinder* are advantages.
Guest 21-Feb-2007 04:47
I doubled up. There are only 6 under $500, not 10 as it would seem when you read it.
Guest 21-Feb-2007 04:43
My guess was pretty good at 20. There are 21 AFS Nikon lenses. 6 are between $170 and 500. 4 are between $250 and $500. 4 are between $500 and $1000. 7 are between $1000 and $5000. 4 are over $5000. (prices online at B&H at this moment)

The cheapest Nikon AFS lenses that are optically excellent are the $859 105mm VR Micro and the $900 12-24mm f/4. The D40 cannot even autofocus with Nikon’s own dx 10.5mm fisheye! There are a truckload optically excellent NEW lenses for the D50 under $400, and the used market in these lenses is huge.
Guest 21-Feb-2007 02:25
Quote - "I would guess AFS-lenses are 1/8 of all Nikkor autofocus lenses, probably 20 or so"

Guess? Probably? Not exactly confident words from someone who "knows Nikon"!
Guest 21-Feb-2007 00:34
PLUS for the D40! I went to the store today and looked at the D40. Very cute, nearly like a point and shoot. It can mount and use non-ai lenses, (non-metering, but in the non-ai film camera niche the users usually have light meters) so that is a PLUS for the D40. Turn digital and use your non-ai lenses digitally!

... and the sobering thoughts continue:
Kananga. That is misleading.

DX lenses are all AFS also, except for the 10.5mm fisheye. I would guess AFS-lenses are 1/8 of all Nikkor autofocus lenses, probably 20 or so. But the high quality AFS lenses are VERY expensive and not in budget range for the D40 user. There are countless optically outstanding autofocus models on the used market that are within the budget of D50 users however.

Another point that you have to consider is that Sigma is notorious for poor quality control - and their lenses often don't focus accurately with Nikon cameras.
Guest 20-Feb-2007 04:37
Pierre, My mistake for the last post, I meant AF-S not AI-S. If you know about Nikon would you care to share with us the number of Nikon lenses that do autofocus with the D40? I only ask because you say that you know about Nikon and also that the D40 cannot autofocus with 'nearly all' of Nikon's lenses. How many of Nikon's AF-S lenses can the D40 autofocus with? All of them! How many DX lenses can it focus with? I was under the impression it was all of them! How about Sigma's F mount HSM lenses? Does the D40 autofocus with them by any chance? Add them up and let us know (with your indepth Nikon knowledge) exactly how many lenses will Autofocus perfectly well on the D40.

Both Canon and Nikon have been selling lenses with motors in them for years now. This isn't some ground breaking conspiracy of evil marketeers you have suddenly discovered. Ignorance indeed!
Guest 19-Feb-2007 18:50
Kananga says, (A) "If it had an internal focusing motor it would be as big as a D50 and more expensive." Rubbish! You illustrate exactly how you're taken by the marketing process. 1) The motor fits in the lenses, so its size is not the obstacle towards camera miniaturization. In fact things are so miniaturized now, that even in the D40 there is unused space. 2) You pay for another motor every time you buy a lens, and even if you just buy one lens, you pay for one motor anyway. Kananga says,(B) "What are you going to say with Nikon inevitably release AI-S primes in the near future that will autofocus with the D40?" Apart from your ignorance about what an ais lens is, (manual focus), I will say that they're selling the D40 owner an autofocus motor every time they sell a lens. Kananga says, (C) "... people will get on with their lives." Right! People get on with their lives largely blind to what is happening to them, because no-one can know much about everything. I don't know much either, but I know about Nikon.
Guest 18-Feb-2007 03:33
manipulative advertising hype and the resultant preoccupation with the newest shiny (smaller) gadget? Really? I thought it was to cut costs and size and appeal to a market that doesnt need or have non AI-S lenses. If it had an internal focusing motor it would be as big as a D50 and more expensive. This isnt the market Nikon is targeting with the D40. Anyway, apart from a 50mm1.8 (which still works manually on the D40) most people will either keep the kit lens or throw on the 18-200 VR which works perfectly fine and get on with their lives. The way you are acting it is as if you think Nikon is forcing people to trade in their cameras and are forced to buy a D40. What are you going to say with Nikon inevitably release AI-S primes in the near future that will autofocus with the D40? FYI You still sound like a bit of a madman.
Guest 17-Feb-2007 17:32
The D40 cannot AUTOFOCUS with nearly all Nikon's own AUTOFOCUS LENSES. You either misrepresent or do not understand this one huge deficiency (amongst others) of the D40, Kananga. I know exactly why - manipulative advertising hype and the resultant preoccupation with the newest shiny (smaller) gadget. The problem with the D40 is not that it does not work with ai/ais lenses. It does that exactly like the D50 does (without metering). The D40's stunning impotence is that it cannot autofocus with Nikon's HUGE inventory of AUTOFOCUS lenses. And the D50 (which I own) is hardly a bulky camera. I agree the D40's LCD 2.5" vs 2" screen and 80% vs. 75% viewfinder* are advantages, but on the whole the D40's technology is cost-cutting cheaper than that of the D50, which more than counters the meager technological novelties. *the D80 has 94% viewfinder magnification and my 6 year old D1x has 96%. I cringe at the possibility that the D60 will further disseminate this Nikonian brain cramp of autofocus cameras not being able to autofocus with most Nikkor lenses. And why do you have to call me a madman to get your point across? It is revealing of how much your mind is integrated in the process of "progress."
Guest 17-Feb-2007 04:40

The D50 is not much better. They are both different cameras. The D50 has some advantages over the D40 and the D40 has advantages over the D50. It seems to me that you are just being a bit childish over the whole thing. For the type of photography I do the D40 is a much better option than the D50. If you have non AI-S lenses and cannot afford a D80 or a D200 then the D50 would be a better fit. TO suggest the D50 is much better when it is older technology with a less advanced image processer, smaller disply, dimmer viewfinder etc etc is not only wrong but makes any argument for somebody's preference even less credible. You are beginning to sound like a ranting madmam and you don't really want that now, do you?
There are many many people who do not have AI-S lenses and dont want to have the bulk of the D50, enjoy having a large display and the ability to put a 4Gig SD card in, and go shoot with excellent results. Nobody likes it when a new product comes along and steals the thunder but you really need to chill out dude. Bottom line..both very good cameras with their own set of advantages over the other. Choose the one that best suits your needs and advise people on what they need, not because of some laughable Nikon Marketing conspiracy theories!
Guest 16-Feb-2007 15:35
You've been seduced, John. The D50 and D40 are in different classes indeed. The D50 is much better, and the D40 is full of marketing hype (hence the niche takeover you mention) to compensate for the obviously PLANNED D40 deficiencies vs. D50, concocted by some brain spasm at NIKON.
John Stevenson12-Feb-2007 04:50
In my opinion the D40 and D50 aren't even in the same class. The D40 is geared far more for the parent to take pics of kids. The D50 used to be that category, but the D40 certainly fills it now.
Guest 08-Feb-2007 00:34
So what you are infact saying Pierre is that the D50's Raw image capabilities are the same as the D40 but the D40 has better jpegs straight out the camera? If I can get great jpegs at have the memory size instead of shooting RAW and having to post process then that's surely a positive thing. As well as being smaller, lighter, have a much better, bigger LCD, a brighter viewfinder, better menu system, in camera editing, HCSD capabilities etc etc.
I am assuming that your comment about Nikon removing the internal AF motor from it's complete line up will mean they will produce AI-S prime lenses in the near future which will auto focus with the D40. Anyway, the D50 is old technology now and many shops don't even stock it anymore. If you want a camera that big save up for a few more months and get the D80 instead. A far better camera than the D50. Or wait for the D60 to come out this year!
frankcoti04-Feb-2007 14:49
I have the d50 and the older d70 and tried the d40 for about a week now ( my brother in law lent me his :) and although jpegs are better than the d50, there's very little difference with raw files. The decision therefore goes down to this, if you plan to use the d40 as a jpg shooter only then by all means get it- it's a sexy little beast! if however you want to use non-afs lenses ( and there are a lot out there ) or push photography a bit further or dig deeper into NEF files, then the d50 may be the more judicious choice. Another strike against the d40 is that it doesn't have the fv-lock feature, what this means is that during flash photograph you may get people closing their eyelids prematurely because of the i-ttl preflash( ie: there's no way of seperating the i-ttl preflash from the main flash on the d40 unlike other Nikon dlsrs ). I find young children especially prone to this because of their quick reflexes and have to use fv-lock all the time on my d50 & d70!
Guest 03-Feb-2007 17:22
You're right, David. The market will determine D40 sales, and it is an outstanding jpg-machine, but its image-quality is not superior to the currently cheaper and also cute D50, so its market-niche is driven by ultra-cuteness. One could also say its body is too small to perfectly fit even average size hands. I'm just sharing my awareness of the very real possibility that Nikon is going to remove in-body autofocus from the complete line-up, as soon as the D40 has a strong following. I will repeat the fact for the benefit of potential NEW Nikon buyers that the D40 can not autofocus with most Nikkor autofocus lenses. You should look at the D50 as a far better deal.
Guest 01-Feb-2007 12:31
Work-in-progress: D50 (ex)-owners who now prefer the D40 :> - I'm not disputing the fact that many have felt disappointed that the D40 does not have a built-in AF motor, but ultimately, the market forces will decide the D40's fate. I guess D40 owners simply can't help but be enamored of the D40's cuteness factor and its superb JPEGs. They're wreaking havoc out there capturing amazing pictures and enjoying photography.

And hey, I'm an informed and experienced Nikon photographer too.
Guest 26-Jan-2007 21:48
As an informed and experienced Nikon user, I think it is a crying shame that the Nikon D40 CANNOT AUTOFOCUS WITH MOST NIKON AUTOFOCUS LENSES. It is not a slight shame, as David Chin says below. It is just amazing to see people actually paying MORE for the D40 than they could have paid for the far more versatile D50! I have a Nikon F100, D70 and D50, and a Coolpix 5000, and will soon buy a D200, so I am a Nikon man, and I believe the concept of the D40 is dishonest, and should be scrapped.
Guest 25-Jan-2007 01:17
I've compiled a list of Sigma lenses that will autofocus on the D40 at :> . It looks like Sigma is going to see a surge in demand for their 30mm f/1.4 prime lens. It is a slight shame that the D40 can't AF with cheap Nikkors such as the 50mm f/1.8D AF, but that isn't stopping owners from enjoying and getting great images from their D40, specifically, the few shots I've seen taken with the D40 + SB-400 flash and the new Nikkor 70-300mm AF-S VR lens are really good; they're linked up here :>
Guest 24-Jan-2007 07:03
A very nice camera, it's side by me everyday now.
Guest 21-Jan-2007 22:01
This camera can not autofocus with any Nikon autofocus lenses except the few and more expensive silent-wave lenses. I would not touch it if I were you. Buy the D50. Shame on Nikon for trying to do what their daddies did when they switched to ai, making all the wonderful pre-ai lenses obsolete.
Guest 09-Jan-2007 02:08
I love the nikon d40. I purchased one recently and been taking great shots. :)
Guest 31-Dec-2006 20:20
Posted a few new images. More to come later. =^)
Guest 21-Dec-2006 21:57
Check the total number of shutter release for your D40 by Opanda IExif Viewer.
Guest 14-Dec-2006 00:28
Purchased the D40 an' it will be here tomorrow. I will post many pictures soon. =^D
Guest 01-Dec-2006 03:20
600$ for that
@ Bruce Gilling30-Nov-2006 17:50
A winner for $599 !
Guest 25-Nov-2006 04:40
I'm so eager to see some samples. This may very well be my first DSLR camera. =^D

All photos are copyrighted and may not be used without permission from the photographer.
These photos are are a guide to what these cameras are capable of, but may not fully represent the camera due to post-processing, scanning, or photographic technique.
All brands are trademarked by their owners.
These pages are not sponsored or approved by the manufacturers.
Other content Copyright © 2003,2004,2005,2006, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Contact to contribute data or photos of cameras.