Nikon D40x: a bit long in the tooth, but still good
Although already surpassed by the D60 and D3000, Nikon's D40x is still more than a decent performer.
After giving up my D60 and buying a D300 I did feel well-armed. Still, hauling the D300 with its battery pack and a few lenses required me to plan ahead. I enjoy the camera when I want to go shooting, but it is a bit too much to have with you everyday. Enter the D40x.
The D40x body is light and compact enough to carry without any problems, the 10 or so megapixels are more than enough, and the response times are very short -- the D40x attacks the subject with delightful speed.
Equipped with, for example, Nikon's affordable 35mm f/1.8 DX lens, the combo is a near perfect mix of fast action and good image quality; there really is no real need to carry anything else (unless, of course, one wants to capture something specific).
So, if you already own Nikon lenses (remember the D40x body lacks a lens motor, so unless you want to manually focus, use lenses with auto focus capability) and want a second body or if you are looking for a good entry-level digital SLR, Nikon D40x is a good option. The fact that it is a few years old does not mean it is worthless.
PS. Almost everything said in this review applies to Nikon's older D40 and newer D60 as well!
3. Can produce superb pictures
1. No lens motor means to auto focus one needs to use lenses with internal focus motors
2. Lacks features found in newer cameras: sensor cleaning, picture retouch options
3. Discontinued, so getting old
6 of 7 people found this review helpful.
Having tried a friends Nikon D40x
I was hooked, my Olympus E10 is a nice bit of kit, but so slow to react and store or review photos.
The Nikon is so far fulfilling my expectations, with it's almost instant initiation, and it's point and shoot auto mode giving good results.
I have yet to explore all the functions available.
Another reason for buying was:
Having seen test pictures from Canon & Nikon lenses supplied as standard,the 18/55 that came with it appears to give a better result..
So far the pictures I have taken are very clean with good detail and faithful colour.
The large LCD gives excellent viewing of the captured photos,but I do fear it might be a bit prone to bumps and scratches, so I need to source a screen protection cover.
I like the auto flash that activates when the cameras decides, and the options are available to change it's mode of function..like almost everything else on the camera.
I prefer the auto focus to be set for the center sensor, leaving it to pick multi zone tends to pick up near objects off center, rendering the distant object as least important.
One minor niggle, nothing wrong with the camera..just Nikon's NEF format.
I would like to work with the raw files the 10 meg sensor gives. the option is available to store data as NEF, or various size JPEG's
Their supplied programs will read the format, but there are only minimal adjustments for the photos, it's not an editing suite.
My older Photoshop programs wont read NEF files, and so far I can't work on these files without having to reinvest in another editing suite.
But the JPEG option on the camera does give a good quality and small file, thankfully.. as I have requirements of a minimum pixel count of 2500 on the shortest side of the frame, and saved as JPEG..
25 of 26 people found this review helpful.
i bought this entry-level DSLR camera on various recommendations (one direct from Nikon). there are two very models of this camera, the D40 and this one the D40x - which came out a couple of months later. the 'x' has better battery life (made even better by updating the firmware as well), faster FPS and obviously is 10MP compared to 6MP - this alone doesn't make it 'better', but has to be a bonus! the standard kit lens 18-55mm is perfect, covering most average users needs. it's simple and intuitive to use, no-nonense menus are straightforward to navigate.
i searched ebay - found a few D40's, and only a couple of D40x's - i read all the reviews on dpreview.com/kenrockwell.com/etc, and posted queries about the two models. all responses were positive. this is still regarded as 'up there' by those in the know. and to a degree, out-performs later models. the seller said this was hardly used, and i've since had the camera serviced/cleaned by Nikon, and they've confirmed this; showing only a few hundred shots captured since new.
having used compact cameras for the past few years - you get used the (lack of) quality they give - but after, the first shot on this i was blown away. it was like a 'proper' camera. perfect feel and weight, relatively small size, and pin-sharp focus and metering. makes my compact (sony wx1) comparable to a mobile phone camera. i've taken less photos of the same subject with the Nikon - because it just gets it right first time. you can tweak settings as you wish; using it in manual mode. i've yet to explore the RAW results; the 300dpi jpegs are enough for me at the moment.
i thoroughly recommend this model of DSLR to any one wanting to improve their photography and take it, effortlessly, to the next level.
2 of 2 people found this review helpful.
Nikon d40x Digital slr.
Small and neat, the nikon d40x packs the same sensor as my Nikon D200,While the D200 is my main workhorse, i needed a back up camera with the same picture quality yet lighter,easier to travel with or take on long hikes! the D200 just weighs too much, especially if other lenses are being taken along.
Lacks the build quality of the semi pro models, but the D40x was designed as a entry level slr,the menu is very well thought out,the layout of the various controls are a bit weird,not as logical as the D200/D300 etc.
All things considered a great compact slr that can handle most situations with ease in the hands of an experienced photographer, the easy to follow "info" on rear screen helps novices to the art of photography
and how to get the best from this great value slr.
1 of 1 people found this review helpful.
Nikon D40x vs. Canon, Olympus, Sony, Small SLR
I based my decision to buy this camera on strong reviews from the excellent dpreview site and others. Obviously the main competition to this camera is the small Canon SLR's.
At the time the D40x was in production the Canon equivalent was the EOS 400d. Some reviewers will talk about the better feature list of the Canon or the minute discrepancies in picture quality at high sensitivities but most who put the Canon in front are not reviewing the Cameras as a package with the kit lenses. Most reviews will say the Nikon lens is superior to the Canon lens which for me gave the Nikon the edge.
With both cameras being tied on image quality, build quality was next on my list to judge. Nikon wins hands down on this and I don't think many (even Canon owners) would argue. Just pickup a Nikon and a Canon and you'll see what I mean. Personally I have had a bad experience with a Canon that lasted about a week beyond the warranty before never turning on again but have owned two twenty+ year old Nikons. I should add, however, that although my Nikon D40x (purchased on eBay recently) works perfectly and is in very good condition the focus ring on the kit lens feels flimsy to me and has a lot of play in it. This doesn't affect the operation of the camera in any way but it detracts from the quality feel of a Nikon camera and is slightly disappointing.
The other major factor that pushed me to plump for the Nikon was second hand price; the Canons are massively over priced on eBay. This may be down to the replacement to the baby Canon (the EOS 450d) being aimed at a higher price bracket than it's predecessor thus confusing second hand buyers. Whatever the cause, for the price of the excellent Nikon D40x on Ebay, you'd only be able to get the much older Canon EOS 350d (which is certainly an inferior camera).
So from the perspective of a second hand buyer the Nikon D40x offers much better value than the Canon's but what about the Sony A100 or Olympus small SLRs? Don't know is the honest answer. Both can be had for even less than the D40x. Both are without doubt better second hand buys than the Canon (due to inflated prices of second hand entry level Canon's on eBay) but some reviewers think Olympus and Sony picture quality is inferior to Nikon and Canon.
If you’re into features then I would certainly look at Sony and Olympus in more detail. If you want a straight forward, reliable, well made small SLR that can’t be faulted of picture quality than go for the Nikon. If you the Canon’s, buy a new one; the second hand price is ludicrous.
2 of 2 people found this review helpful.