Dario Bonazza wrote: > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0611/06111603nikond40handsonpreview.asp > > Dario >
I'm conflicted on this. It's got some nice upgrades: ISO3200, 9 RAW buffer, SDHC support, improved VF [95% at .8x pentamirror instead of the .75x of the D50,D70 and D100] and the self-timer button is now an assignable button, but there are major downsides as well, the new (and compatible with nothing) battery breaks Nikon's standard of 1 pro battery (EN-EL4) and 1 non-pro battery (EN-EL3) form factor for SLR's, no screwdriver AF obsoletes all non-long tele Nikon primes except the new 105mm VR Macro as well as all the consumer lenses except the DX's, notably the value-leading 70-300G, the AF unit is cut down from the D50 (3 point instead of 5 point), basic settings require menu diving (ISO and WB most notably, which are dual-function buttons on the D50). All in all, I'll be recommending the D50 over the 40 for most use, since they're very close in price (Difference is about $60USD). If I ended up with one, I'd probably set it permanently to Auto WB, RAW, Continuous advance and set the assignable button to ISO and the AF fixed to the centre cross sensor, this would make it the least painful to use. The WTF? bit is the new kit lens. At this point Nikon has introduced a new kit lens with every non-pro announcement since the D70 (D70 got the superb 18-70 AF-S, D50 got the first crappy 18-55, D200 got the 18-200 VR, D80 got the 'why bother' craptacular 18-135, D40 got the smaller but still crappy 18-55 II). And still there's no IS short zoom, no non-specialized digital primes (only the 10.5 DX fisheye) and no semi-pro telezoom. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
