Do I Need a New Camera?

[Don Schaeffer]

I have had my 6.1 meg D40 for a few years now. I bought a whole bunch of cheap manual film era lenses I use with it. I sort of hanker for more megapixels. The 600 dollar price tag on a newer Nikon is a meetable challenge for a pension-bound retiree. Should I blow the money (credit)? Sometimes I'm happy with the D40 and sometimes I would like a new toy.
Comment would be appreciated.

[Franglais]

The D40 has the 6Mpix sensor from the D70 (which I owned) and the image processor (which I also owned). My thoughts:

- 6MPix is enough to do quite big prints (A3 size). You don't really need more (unless you want to crop)
- When I went from 6Mpix to 10Mpix I discovered that some of the cheap lenses I had (and was happy with) were not that good after all. I keep the 5 element 28mm f2.8 as an example of an awful lens with low definition. But it had worked fine with the D70. You may regret having more MPix
- Metering systems accuracy has improved a lot over the years. Buy a recent camera and you should get more consistent results
- Sensor characteristics have improved a lot too - noise, high ISO, dynamic range.
- Kit lenses have improved a lot. The 18-105 kit lens that comes with the D3200 is probably sharper than all your lenses except the 50mm f1.8

I don't think that you need to change. But if you do decide to I would go the whole hog and get something really recent like the D3200 (I'm afraid I haven't tried it so I can't speak from experience)

[Don Schaeffer]

Thanks Charles. That is certainly one option, sticking to what I have.

[OldClicker]

- When I went from 6Mpix to 10Mpix I discovered that some of the cheap lenses I had (and was happy with) were not that good after all

When you say this, you mean that you cannot make use of the additional Mpix with the cheap lens, not that the image from the lens is any worse than it was, correct? - Terry

[Greg McCary]

Don if I were you I would upgrade. Things have came a long way in a short time.

[freygr]

Upgrade in a Heart Beat! Less noise at the higher ISO's. As long as all the lenses you have are AI lenses they will work on the new body. Now if you have to go into debt that is a personal choice, me I did not wish to go deeper in debt so I'm not upgrading now, my savings has taken to many hits.

[Franglais]

When you say this, you mean that you cannot make use of the additional Mpix with the cheap lens, not that the image from the lens is any worse than it was, correct? - Terry

Yes. If I looked at the image at 100% then there was not more detail coming out, just more pixels recording blur.

Looking at the images at normal magnification or on a print - they didn't look quite right, especially when compared with the images from a good lens (Nikon 18-70 kit lens one of the best lenses ever IMHO). The 28mm images lacked snap and life. Same story with my 2002 24-85 which had worked just fine on film.

[Footski]

Don, as a regular poster on the site, your enthusiasm should be matched by your gear. Definitely upgrade. I went from a D60 to a D7000 and am loving it......

[Don Schaeffer]

I did it! I ordered a Nikon D3100 for $479 plus tax at Best Buy (on credit). May Heaven forgive me!

[Greg McCary]

I did it! I ordered a Nikon D3100 for $479 plus tax at Best Buy (on credit). May Heaven forgive me!

Congrats Don. Well deserved treat.

[Jimmy B]

Congrats Don! Let us see how the upgrade works out.
Jimmy B

[wfooshee]

Don, I started in 2008 with a D50, then in 2010 moved up to a D5000 for the megapixels. The D5000 showed me what a piece of junk the kit 55-200 lens was (although the kit 18-55 is actually pretty nice.) The increase in megapixels gave me an effective reach increase because I found I could crop more usefully. A crop that would only be a couple of megapixels on the D50 would be closer to 5MP on the D5000. Then this past summer I moved up again, to a D7000, which in focusing and low-light performance especially is light-years ahead of the D5000. But I really had to stretch the budget to get there!

When you say "cheap manual lenses," are they cheap because they were manual, or are they really cheap lenses? You may end up being disappointed with the results if they're really not that good.

One last point: focusing. Auto-focus SLRs don't give you anything in the way of focusing aids in the viewfinder other than the green dot at the bottom left. No split-image, no microprism, etc. For critical focus you'll need to learn to use the live view and zoom the view, get your focus, and shoot. It's not a fast process. I find trying to manually focus in the viewscreen to be very hit-and-miss, and higher resolution is only going to amplify that situation.

[Don Schaeffer]

Thanks guys. I know about the focussing problem. I didn't have live view on the D40. Now I will. My lenses are film era manual lenses. Some are very good, others not so much.