Which Nikon DSLR as replacement for D40?

Morbius

Morbius

Messages
213
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone!

I'm mostly into motorsport photography and my camera is a Nikon D40 that I've had for five years. I'm looking into replacing it with something a bit newer. The D3200 looks good and would be a step up in every regard - great considering its price point. However, I'd like to make sure that I don't disregard other models, such as the D5200, just in case there's one with particular advantages for what I'm doing. Ideally, I'd prefer to pay the D3200 price but would consider stretching to a bit more if it made sense.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. :)
 
My friend recently updated his D40 to a new D5100. Good price and couldn't be happier. Nice little thing! :thumbs:

He also bought my "old" Nikkor 16-85 and can't stop talking about, how perfect that combo is...
nono.gif



Happy Hunting!
 
If you are happy for second hand body also worth adding the D90 to the list.
 
Don't fall into the upgrade camera trap. By this I mean getting the next higher up the range camera, in no time at all you will be again looking to upgrade. I did exactly that starting off with the D70s to D200 to D300 ending up with the D800.

My advise would be look higher up the range, ok may cost a little more initially but you really save by not having to sell/buy later on.

D300/D300s second hand are now quite reasonable with a lowish shutter count.
 
Morbius said:
What advantages would the D90 have over a D3200? http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon_D90 seems to suggest the D3200 would be better.
Click to expand...

One of the reason is that the d90 has a built in motor which allows the use of more lenses than the d3200. For example the nifty fifty. As you are more into motor sport the D3200 may be better due to better iso etc. I agree with the comments above from realspeed, re getting the best you can afford.

I wanted a dslr and did not want to wait for a D90 to come up for sale as I could not afford a new one. I bought a D80 which was a good camera but not very good in low light so I upgraded to a D90 after a few months and sold my D80 at a loss.
 
sep9001 said:
One of the reason is that the d90 has a built in motor which allows the use of more lenses than the d3200. For example the nifty fifty. As you are more into motor sport the D3200 may be better due to better iso etc. I agree with the comments above from realspeed, re getting the best you can afford.
Click to expand...

All the lenses I own are AF-S so will autofocus on a camera without a built-in motor, so a camera without one will be fine for the time being.
 
Pretty much any current camera would be an upgrade to a D40. Personally, I wouldn't buy a camera that doesn't have both control wheels. Having physical controls that you can immediately access is WAAAY better than having to dive into menus to change something. That will probably put the start at around the D7000.
 
Last edited:
I got offered £50 part/ex on the D40, mainly because it's got a couple of dead pixels on the LCD. I'm half tempted to get a replacement screen and install it myself, assuming it made financial sense.
 
I went from D40x to D90, the D90 is really nice body, so nice in fact that Nikon kept it in the range despite moving to the new 3000, 5000, 7000 series.

People can crunch the numbers and compare the specs on paper all they like, but the 3000 series doesn't even come close when you get hands on.
 
I started with a d80 then bought an immaculate d200 woth less than 1200 clicks and have just bought a d90 gonna have a play with it tonight ill probably sell the d80 and use the d200 as my spare, if funds are tight id look at either d90 or d200 they will do all you want without breaking the bank
 
Morbius said:
I got offered £50 part/ex on the D40, mainly because it's got a couple of dead pixels on the LCD. I'm half tempted to get a replacement screen and install it myself, assuming it made financial sense.
Click to expand...

I doubt very much it would add much to the price ,in fact may be worth less after buying a new part any time doing the replacement You may well get another few more £ but the cost of the parts would wipe that out.

The D40 is the Nikon Starter DSLR and things have moved on considerable since that was introduced. What determines the price most is the number of times the shutter has been actuated not so much the condition. i see a new replacement part is around £10/15
 
Last edited:
Buy S/H or refurbished and look into a camera like the D7000. Massive upgrade over the D40 in every way and it is reasonably priced especially s/h since the D7100 came out.

I jumped to it a few years back from a D40 and it was a fantastic camera in many ways, just not as fantastic as the K-5 I ended up keeping :)
 
Didn't anyone actually listen to the OP?

Anyway, I bought a D3200 as a backup and it's a very nice body indeed and a big step up from a D40 (mine replaced a D60). However, in hindsight I think I'd have preferred the D5100 as 24mp is too many for my needs and the D5100 has an extra useful feature or two.

I had a D90 which I loved and whilst it was great in the hand the D3200 is leaps and bounds better in terms of the sensor and it has the same AF as the D90 so as long as you are happy with the size of the D40/3200 then that would be the way to go I think.

Both are about the same price so you pay's your money...
 
Last edited:
If you like motorsport dont get a new camera go for the older 300s. It will take any lens as its got a built in motor and there are alot of powerful zoon lenses knockin about which people cant sell due to all the new bodies requiring afs len setups
 
I think any other Nikon dslr will be an improvement. Nothing wrong with the old D40 [I knew a guy who used one with a 200mm f/2!!] but it is about the lowest end for Nikon. You could find a D3100 used for cheap enough nowadays. Even new they're only £289 with the kit lens on amazon. The D3200 just adds more megapixels, not necessary, as the 3100 was already enough for DX.
 
Last edited:
OK, I've thought about this and I'm prepared to stretch to a bit more money. I was looking at the D7100 but I saw that it has a smallish buffer. I see that I could get a new D300S for about the same price, which is quite a popular motorsport camera.

Thoughts?
 
Have you tried holding one?

If not, you're in for a surprise... it's gigantic and very, very heavy compared to the D40!
 
Morbius said:
OK, I've thought about this and I'm prepared to stretch to a bit more money. I was looking at the D7100 but I saw that it has a smallish buffer. I see that I could get a new D300S for about the same price, which is quite a popular motorsport camera.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Never used the *s* version, but I would get a D7000 WAAAY before I'd buy another D300.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top