nikon d40/x vs. sony a200

woop

hello all,
first off Im sure people get annoyed with these recommend me a camera threads and if people deem it neccesary you can delete this

Im looking at getting into photography and looking for some of youre opinions on the above cameras. I initially wanted the nikon d40 as it seemed an ideal camera to begin with and reviews seemed that it was well regarded. I then happened upon a sony a200 and what with the d40's seeming to be sought after, I wonder is this a good camera for a beginner? what are the general differences advantages, disadvantages of each? Ive read reviews but at this stage my head is a muddle of different terms

Going by photos in user pools on flickr I prefer the shots taken with the nikon but I dont think this can be used to judge the camera accurately

Previously I was looking at bridges and heard that sony's menu system can be frustrating, is this the case with this camera?

Im not particularly pushed on megapixel(d40) and it seems that 10mp's arent necessary for great shots, more the use of the camera and thats what I want to learn;) so if people have other recommendations fire away!

thanks for taking the time to read this

kumate_champ07

lenses

DaireQuinlan

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=nikon_d40x%2Csony_dslra200&show=all

here's a comparison of the features. From a technical POV they look almost identical. Go into a shop and try both and then buy the one you prefer.

DaireQuinlan

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

lenses

Ah. I was wondering about this little non-sequiter, until I saw that thread on AH

dazftw

Nikon. Same reason as kumate!

kumate_champ07

dazftw wrote: »

Nikon. Same reason as kumate!

well sony do have some nice lenses but not as big a range as nikon. they have some carl zeiss lenses that arent available in other brand mounts

GavinZac

Sony also have the back catalogue of Konica/Minolta lenses etc. These tend to be a good bit cheaper 2nd hand than the Canon/nikon equivilant as there's a little less demand.

Sony also seem intent on making DSLRs affordable and I would not be surprised to see some cut price, good value lenses in the spring.

Cosmo K

GavinZac wrote: »

Sony also have the back catalogue of Konica/Minolta lenses etc. These tend to be a good bit cheaper 2nd hand than the Canon/nikon equivilant as there's a little less demand.

And exactly how useful is 25 year old Minolta lenses on a cropped sensor Sony body?

Yes, there are some really nice old lenses available for Sony and Nikon/Canon, but these lenses were designed 25-20 years ago, and whilst some work really well on todays crop sensor cameras, the 50mm 1.8 for example, others don't work at all, won't meter, have no autofocus or are simply outdated.

Buy the camera you feel most comfortable with, try it in the shop, what is the menu system like, how easy is it to make adjustments (white balance, ISO), how does the camers feel in your hands?

AnCatDubh

Cosmo K wrote: »

And exactly how useful is 25 year old Minolta lenses on a cropped sensor Sony body?

I suspect as useful as any brand name with a 20/25 yo lens. What has cropped sensor to do with it?

By far my favorite lens for Pentax is just that - a 25+ year old 50mm prime. A brute to use, but when you click with it (pardon the pun) it is magic. I thought my K20D was borked until I used it in test conditions with this lens. I now know that its me and not it BTW - that 50mm is so easy to use (not the brute that I describe) on manual film bodies.

Yes, there are some really nice old lenses available for Sony and Nikon/Canon, but these lenses were designed 25-20 years ago, and whilst some work really well on todays crop sensor cameras, the 50mm 1.8 for example, others don't work at all, won't meter, have no autofocus or are simply outdated.

I don't exactly agree. Yes, if you want a lens which will meter, autofocus, aperture set by the body, then that is exactly what you will buy.

Also those dinosaurs of lenses which will fit to a Sony will do image stabilisation which AFAIR is an in-body feature on the Sony (as it is with a few other brands).

But don't dish on the older lenses which are conceived with different purposes and at times of different expectations. My 50mm prime I describe above has no autofocus. This limitation is only to me that I (me) don't always get it right through the viewfinder. There's a school of thought which would completely dispense with autofocus on the basis of why allow an engineer probably in a Japanese factory decide what you want to focus on (even though they may get it right 90+% of the time).

Metering is obviously very handy but there are other ways as you learn more about photography. Perhaps it is more accurate and better in some/most respects but trying to get a correct exposure using a manual meter or the sunny 16 rule is such fun and when learned properly is a REAL photographic skill. You then understand something more about the art.

However what you say has validity with respect to the op's question. As a newbie then they'd be best with lenses which do the most for you. Later they probably will take delight with manual settings, manual lens, manual flash, manual......well everything and may even buy older film SLR equipment which your older lenses may work on but newer ones probably not.

Buy the camera you feel most comfortable with, try it in the shop, what is the menu system like, how easy is it to make adjustments (white balance, ISO), how does the camers feel in your hands?

I'm agreeing here. If your budget is pointing you towards two brands or models, then if you can take it in your hand and get the feel of it. You should get a general sense of things.

Sony are relatively new to this world, but having bought the konica/minolta organisations they have pedigree. Nikon or indeed Canon are excellent brands and the most popular in the market. Does that matter???? Absolutely - When you are getting into buying cameras and equipment which are at the extremes of professional requirements, then it absolutely matters. When your photographic journey takes you there then it matters. If your photographic journey doesn't take you there then there is little or nothing in it and certainly little to worry about. You will get as much joy from a Sony as a Nikon (sorry, but you will). In fact the Sony or Nikon that you buy now will bear little resemblance to equipment which will actually start to make a difference to your photography.

Sony are an interesting corporate entity and will be interesting to watch over the coming years. They are big... Big.... BIG. Looking at their balance sheets (in the better times) Sony could have bought Nikon, Canon, Olympus, and Pentax all together. Now that would have been fun and we'd have been having a different discussion today. They choose the Konica/Minolta option. They are giants. What will be interesting to see is in the years ahead what this might will actually bring to the brand and the photographic technology and how useful that will be. This discussion in 10years time will be very interesting.

Cosmo K

AnCatDubh wrote: »

I suspect as useful as any brand name with a 20/25 yo lens. What has cropped sensor to do with it?

By far my favorite lens for Pentax is just that - a 25+ year old 50mm prime .

Some very good points AnCathDubh!

But tbh, I think the 50mm is overrated on a crop sensor camera. I bought one, for my Nikon D90 a year ago, and never really warmed to it, and I really tried. I simply find, a 50 mm lens a bit to long on a crop senor body.

I have a Nikon 35mm 1.8 (50mm equiv) as well, and absolutely love it, its light, its fun to use, its the best party lens ever, probably the best lens I bought in the last 2 years.

If I had to pick a camera for newbie, it would be a Nikon D40/D60+18-55 kit lens, or the really excellent Nikon 18-105 VR lens.

woop

yeh might just hold out for a nikon

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=nikon_d40x%2Csony_dslra200&show=all

here's a comparison of the features. From a technical POV they look almost identical. Go into a shop and try both and then buy the one you prefer.

I seen that the nikon doesnt have autofocus, how important would it be?

GavinZac

As a retort to the speculation on the usefulness of older lenses e.g. from the 80s, I have bought 4 lenses - one on its own (a Minolta prime 50mm f1.7), and a few by buying an old kit that someone has undervalued (e.g. a 70-200mm telephoto in a set), all work with the autofocus, none obscure the TTL, some came with gadgets for free that I probably wouldnt have bothered with going out and getting for myself - bokeh shapers, filters, hoods.

I've had more trouble with flashes but I don't think that the back catalogue of any of the brands has more or less compatible flashes - if the voltage is too high, which it usually is, it's a risk to your new body.

You can check what works and what doesn't work ahead of purchasing on these great websites:
Lenses:
http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/lenses.php
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp

Flashes:
http://www.dyxum.com/flashes/index.asp
http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/flashes.php

Both of those sites also have further information on other accessories. Dyxum does third party items, mhohner goes for perfect detail on K/M/Sony products only.

DaireQuinlan

woop wrote: »

yeh might just hold out for a nikon


I seen that the nikon doesnt have autofocus, how important would it be?

The D40 autofocuses just fine with practically every lens Nikon has made in the last few years. There are two types of nikon AF, the old screwdriver type in which a motor in the body drove the lens AF, and AFS in which there is a motor in the lens itself. The D40 only supports the latter.

dudara

The D40 and D60 Nikons rely on auto-focusing motors in the lenses. Therefore you need AF-S lenses to have autofocus functionality with these cameras.

I have a D40 for about 18 months now, purchased with the standard 18-55mm lens. I've added a 55-200 AF-S DX VR lens (zoom) and a 35mm AF-S (prime) lens to my kit since. Other Nikon lenses would fit the camera, but I'd need to use manual focus. Check out my Flickr (particularly my recent sets from the States) to see what the various lenses and camera is capable of.

Personally, I think Sony could be an interesting option - but the deciding factor will happen when you get to hold both the cameras in your hand. The feel of the grip, the menu options - that's ultimately what will decide for you. (I chose Nikon over Canon because the grip fitted my hand better).