Nikon D70 or D40?

Discussion in 'Dog Pictures and Pet Photos' started by Lizmo, Mar 20, 2008.

  1. zoe08

    zoe08 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    In her post above she said

    This shows interest in more than just pictures of pets.

    And the lens I want is actually a really great lens for that because you can get the zoom but you can get more shallow depth of field. Most people use it for portraits.

    If you can just buy the basic stuff and be happy with that, thats great. But if your really into photography, your gonna want to move up and get more and better equip. But it's just a warning to those who are interested in photography so they aren't surprised later down the road if they decide they want more equip.
     
  2. aivzdog

    aivzdog New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,038
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    3 Dogs, 1 Birds, and fish
    Location:
    New Jersey, USA
    Home Page:
    I have the Nikon D40
    Its a great camera.
     
  3. Lizmo

    Lizmo Water Junkie

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    17,300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    2
    Location:
    AL
    Yes, I definitely want to use it more than just taking pictures of my pets.

    All my hobbies (or likings) seem to be exspensive :p
     
  4. jess2416

    jess2416 Who woulda thought

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    22,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    1
    Location:
    NC
    Yeah well, thats not exactly what I meant, but ok...
     
  5. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    I think it can be expensive but you are really only limited by your creativity and rarely by your gear. Depending on what you want to do you can get away with very limited equipment.

    My photojournalism teacher told us of how she went to a pro-football game for the first time. she was just starting out and had a little point 'n shoot. All the other photographers were there with their long lenses and fancy gear and she didn't think she'd get anything usable but then she shot some action framed by the coaches legs and her shot was the best that any paper ran!

    I've had at least 200 photos published and the most gear I ever carried was a flash, camera body, and two lenses. Both basic zooms.

    I shot this on tuesday with a basic zoom and the d40. No flash.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. ACooper

    ACooper Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    27,771
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    IN
    I like my D40 so far. I haven't gotten to use it much due to the weather here, but what I have snapped so far I LOVE. I think the real test for me will be when the weather breaks and we are outdoors more.

    I am a TOTAL amateur and this is really my first manual camera to learn anything. I have always had P&S cameras.

    I think if you are already comfortable with setting shutter speed, understand lighting a little more, and want to go farther with your camera then go for the more expensive D80. I really feel the D40 will do me for a few years or more as I am learning.
     
  7. zoe08

    zoe08 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    Photojournalism though is quite a bit different. Just cuz a picture ran in the paper doesn't impress me. Most pictures in newspapers aren't all that impressive, and they dont have to be. They want the moment, they dont care as much about lighting and stuff. Even some magazines are that way.

    But newspapers aren't printed for pictures. And a lot of them are just going with P&S that the journalists carry instead of hiring professional photographers these days.

    Im not saying you HAVE to have the gear. And you certainly won't need it for EVERY shot. But it just depends what you want to do with it.
     
  8. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    Actually, you are quite off base. Most journalists study photography these days. I did. In a darkroom. We learned from scratch and developed our own film and prints before moving into photoshop. Shooting in the moment does limit you but it also challenges you. Many photographers can't do that and have to carefully set photos up. Some of the photos that photojournalists get are amazing simply because of the conditions they had to shoot in.

    It is definitely a different kind of photography. And you do have to consider the calibre of publication being discussed. Some are smaller/newer publications on a limited budget. The last one I worked at had two DSLR cameras plus assorted lenses. As well as several film cameras available to us. I don't know of any that used a p&s unless they were just getting started and didn't care.

    Of course, if we are considering the publication then your statement really is inaccurate. *Most* daily papers have their own pro photographers completely with in-house studios that they use for portraits, etc. Where do you think the food photos come from when they are getting critiqued for a paper?

    And you absolutely can not believe that photography isn't what is important in a publication. Photography is what makes people pick up newspapers. A good photo pulls people in more then a catchy headline ever did.

    I am much more impressed with someone who can pull of an awesome shot of minor league hockey from over the glass in a dimly lit arena then with someone who takes hours to set up a shoot and gets only the usual family portraits.

    And even if I hadn't brought photojournalism into it, it's still true that you don't need to spend thousands of dollars on gear. Your best asset is your creativity. Knowing when to get good light. Look up "chasing the light" those photographers don't need much gear at all. They need patience and a good eye. A decent camera body and handful of lenses help. A couple of my favourite pictures that i have taken I took with a p & s.

    The point is. The d40 is a great camera. :p Everything else can come later.
     
  9. makenzie71

    makenzie71 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    This single statement clearly shows that you two are talking about completely different things. I was just telling Kalee that if I saw this:

    [​IMG]

    ...on the front page of a newspaper, I'd bring it home. Not because the picture is good. That picture is horrible. The lighting is terrible. The depth and focus are both unflattering. The color is off, as well. On top of that, you'll be losing another 25% of the quality putting it on newspaper. I know what a Smokin' Joe CBR is. I know who Duhamel is. I'll be bringing it home because it's interesting. Not because it's good.

    Good photography has NEVER sold a newspaper. Interesting photography sells newspapers. And bold headlines have sold more newspapers than any kind of photography ever has.

    I'll mention, though, that I do somewhat agree with one of your statements: you don't have to spend thousands of dollars to get an interesting picture. On the other hand, you don't see wedding photographers show up with a coolpix and those guys down on the 50yd line getting the high dollar, on the fly action shots aren't doing it with $8 disposable polaroids. Equipment is not a direct reflection of skill or ability, but your ability will be defined by the limitations of your equipment and you'll never be able to escape that fact.
     
  10. zoe08

    zoe08 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    First of all. I don't believe photo"Journalists" should really be using much photoshop. As it is journalism and altering the picture makes it not "real or unbiased"

    I believe that pictures are what makes people pick up most publications. Although it doesn't have to be a *great* picture, just of a topic that interests people. Although most newspaper readers, read the newspaper no matter what picture is on it. Most people are more likely to pick up a magazine with a pretty picture. Newspapers are more likely read by subscribers.

    And as I said previously you don't HAVE to have the gear, but if you are really into photography and depending "What kind" you may eventually end up with a lot of money invested.

    I have a $1000 camera w/kit zoom lens
    a $300 telephoto zoom lens
    a $160 used light meter
    a $100 camera backpack
    a $200 used off camera flash
    about $1500 of studio equip and that is just with 2 AB 800s and softbox, umbrellas stands, etc.
    another $1000 of backdrop stuff

    Now of course that is because I do want to do "studio" photography and you can't do that kind of photography without the equipment which is pretty expensive.

    Not to mention I don't even know how much money I spent last semester buying Velvia 100 slide film and having it processed and getting prints. And I have $150 used Nikon film camera with a lens for it.

    I want to buy a $1600 lens, I need to buy a new camera, so that I can have my D70 as a back up. Not too mention the other studio equip. Although I understand not everyone wants a studio. But if you like taking pictures of people, or products, and such then you may want one and the stuff is expensive.

    But I was taught by "photographers" not photojournalists. I took a documentary/photojournalism class and I admit that is not what interests me. I much prefer landscape/nature/people photography.

    And I am MUCH more critical than just about anyone when it comes to pictures. I took a class where it didn't matter how proud you were of the photo, when it came time to show in class, the teacher would always have a "however....such and such would make this a much better photo." And he was the state photographer of Texas. And I took classes from art photographers (one of which actually had worked in just about every kind of photography there is), and they are probably the most critical of any photographer. So I imagine it might be quite a bit different than having a photojournalist program.

    I am sorry, it is just frustrating when every person who owns a P&S camera thinks they can be a professional. Even getting an SLR will not make you a photographer. And some people think the camera is what will make you a photographer. I know my mom didn't like to tell people my degree was in photography, because it sounds like such a blow off major. But I worked my butt off and it is a lot more difficult than it seems. Its not about pointing and clicking a button. It is about soo much more.

    I never said it was expensive right off the bat. And I never said the D40 isnt a great camera. I think it is a great camera to start with. I just thought I would point out that if you get really into it, then you will usually start to want more, and all that money adds up.
     
  11. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    Then a photo should never enter the darkroom either if it's used for journalism? There is a difference between post-processing and manipulation. Think about it. How does a photo get cropped? Or the DIP dropped for publication purposes? How does it get converted to grayscale since you can't shoot in grayscale for newspapers and it's not a good idea to do it generally.


    if you haven't studied jrnl i wouldn't expect either you or mackenzie to know how newspapers are sold. Let's just say that while newspapers are read about subscribers that's really not the point. Not all newspapers have subscribers. Some are free and go door to door. And how is each article chosen? Those with a good, yes, good picture, are more likely to be read then others.

    glad you specified studio. i can't stand it when ppl are made to feel like they can't take good pics becuz they don't have the gear

    Not to mention I don't even know how much money I spent last semester buying Velvia 100 slide film and having it processed and getting prints. And I have $150 used Nikon film camera with a lens for it.

    I want to buy a $1600 lens, I need to buy a new camera, so that I can have my D70 as a back up. Not too mention the other studio equip. Although I understand not everyone wants a studio. But if you like taking pictures of people, or products, and such then you may want one and the stuff is expensive.

    But I was taught by "photographers" not photojournalists. I took a documentary/photojournalism class and I admit that is not what interests me. I much prefer landscape/nature/people photography.

    And I am MUCH more critical than just about anyone when it comes to pictures. I took a class where it didn't matter how proud you were of the photo, when it came time to show in class, the teacher would always have a "however....such and such would make this a much better photo." And he was the state photographer of Texas. And I took classes from art photographers (one of which actually had worked in just about every kind of photography there is), and they are probably the most critical of any photographer. So I imagine it might be quite a bit different than having a photojournalist program.

    I am sorry, it is just frustrating when every person who owns a P&S camera thinks they can be a professional. Even getting an SLR will not make you a photographer. And some people think the camera is what will make you a photographer. I know my mom didn't like to tell people my degree was in photography, because it sounds like such a blow off major. But I worked my butt off and it is a lot more difficult than it seems. Its not about pointing and clicking a button. It is about soo much more.

    I never said it was expensive right off the bat. And I never said the D40 isnt a great camera. I think it is a great camera to start with. I just thought I would point out that if you get really into it, then you will usually start to want more, and all that money adds up.[/QUOTE]
     
  12. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    I'd be interested to know how you know this?


    _^ That is a very bold statement to make. And untrue imo. i don't know how you can make a statement like that with such confidence. plenty of papers have been sold by good photos.
     
  13. zoe08

    zoe08 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    Actually I studied in the college of mass communications and I did take journalism as well as advertising, mass comm law, intro to mass comm which explains how all mediums of mass comm are circulated.

    And I said they shouldn't be using *much* photoshop. Cropping I can understand...and if you are changing to greyscale, I do hope you aren't just using the mode > greyscale, but hopefully using channel mixer as it is a much better way.
     
  14. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    lol ok. I don`t get how you can say one way is better then another. There are more then two ways to do it and they each have their purposes. That`s neither here nor there.

    where did you study
     
  15. zoe08

    zoe08 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    Texas Tech

    Well its called the Russell Brown approach. And using channel mixer you have more control. When you use grayscale or desaturate it is an "auto" thing and doesn't have the contrast you would get with the channel mixer. Kind of the same reason it is best to shoot in color, because the B&W mode on the camera is an "auto" type thing and doesn't get the contrast. I don't really know how to explain it well.

    Here is a link:
    http://www.bythom.com/bandw.htm
     
  16. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    I know that. Like I said there is more then just the two ways to do it. which method you choose just depends on what you want for the end result
     
  17. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    If you studied media I don`t get how you can think that photojournalists run around w point and shoot cameras. OR that photojournalists don`t need to take good pictures. I guess maybe it just depends on your definition of `good`.
     
  18. zoe08

    zoe08 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    Some of them do. Not all, but it is happening more often now days. And maybe because I don't live in a huge metro area with huge newspapers I don't see as good of pictures as you do in your newspapers. I dunno I have never lived in a huge city. Biggest I have lived in is population 200,000. Maybe we don't have the kind of photojournalists like NYC or huge places.

    And yes my definition of "good" is much different than most peoples. My friends/family keep telling me my pictures are great and that I should be making money from this, but I can't even pick pictures to put up on my website because I find something wrong with all of them. As I said before I am WAY more critical then most people about pictures.

    And photojournalism is different as the lighting and such isn't as important as "the moment" because it is shot without any set up, you don't have that kind of control over the situation. But when you shoot portraits or landscapes you can choose what time of day, and the location and such and it makes it very different from photojournalism.
     
  19. Saje

    Saje Island dweller

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23,932
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Home Page:
    The last paper I worked for was in a town with a population of 9,000. Town and county. We won a lot of awards for the work we did too. I just heard that we won best overall in our category again. It was a good paper. The only paper I`ve ever know to use point and shoot was the one I worked for several years ago. They were only a couple years old and didn`t have a budget for anything. They went under.

    You should join www.photo.net if you want to learn more about photography and meet some critical people!
     
  20. zoe08

    zoe08 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    I am a member of a few photo forums. I mainly only frequent the Texas one.

    I looked at photo.net and looked at the photo critique section but didn't actually see any critiques. Are the critiques private? Or am I just lost because it is not VB?
     

Share This Page