they just seem to offer more for the same price

If im totally honest though I had just been using my 50 and my MF skills are shit :lol:

the camera is far better than me at the moment

quote:

---

Originally posted by mattk
I wouldnt buy a D40 again

Id go Cannon

---

Not really, it all depends on what you wanna do with the camera. For instance, the A300/350 have fold out screens which you can use at various angle and thats really useful when doing high/low level shots. Or when your using the camera on a tripod.

When I asked about live view everybody that's used it said it was just a gimmick, which after a bit of reading it seems to be, wouldn't let that sway a decision.

Sorry about that mate, my bad. Was confused with the A300.

Now thats a good camera for the money. IIRC its the same resolution as the A200 but with all the features of the A350 and its about 350quid new. That and it appears to rate well with magazines etc cus it has all the advantages of the 350 just with out the slower frame rate.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neil h
I personally would get the Sony mate. Its generally a better specced camera than the D40 and tbh the D40 is a lil old now.

Coincidentally, the sony also has live view where as none of the cheap nikons do atm.

---

paid for sony, getting delivered on friday :)

camera, 4gb card, tripod and bag for £250

It's everyone trying to annoy me by buying slr's when I can't afford one :mad: :lol:

Can get a 400d for 385 at work. Out of the two id say Sony, theres been loads of threads like this now.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mattk
I wouldnt buy a D40 again

Id go Cannon

---

Can get a 350d off ebay brand new in that price range, i'd have that over them both, possibly a 400d but not sure how much they're going for.

I wouldnt buy a D40 again

Id go Cannon

I personally would get the Sony mate. Its generally a better specced camera than the D40 and tbh the D40 is a lil old now.

Coincidentally, the sony also has live view where as none of the cheap nikons do atm.

(it's got a 4gb card and case in the classifieds)

out of those id go sony, admitedly not as big of a name as nikon, but the sony has some really good features on it. (i was oringally getting the a200 myself but went for the 1000d instead)

a200 advantages imo
built in image stabaliser,
anti dust thing (which im sure the nikon would have aswell)
10mp.
slightly better lense (for zooming as standard).
and for £30 more than in the classifieds
link
get a case and card.

nikon is only 6mp, but its a better known name in the dslr market and im sure has some features that the sony doesnt (never read up on them myself).

like i said imo between those 2 id go sony.

I was about to post about the a200 in the classifieds :p

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=80519

Obviously not trying to talk you out of a deal for the other fella, but that's available on that site

[Edited on 01-09-2008 by Cavey]

ok, narrowed it down now, i will be either getting a d40 or a200 and just want to know what you guys would buy as i am a complete novice here.

d40 would be brand new and they retail for around £300 i believe and the A200 is second hand from a guy on here, its in the classifieds and he wants £250.

also doing a bit research the sony has more mega pixels and has an anti dust thing which the d40 hasnt ( please correct me if im wrong ) excluding those two things i think they are pretty much the same. Once i get the hang of the camera which one is best to upgrade, lense kits etc