# Just wondering how many Pro Photographers use a Nikon D40 as one of their cameras?



## PatrickHMS (Nov 4, 2008)

I was just wondering how many Commercial / Pro photographers have a Nikon D40 that they use in their business when they use a DSLR?

Maybe not as the only camera you use, but as one of them.

And what percentage of your business was taken with the D40?

I know that lenses are also a big part of the equation, but I am asking this question specifically about the D40 Body only.

Just wondering...

Thanks!


----------



## Overread (Nov 4, 2008)

I have known pros use 350Ds as their main camera (entry level DSLR for Canon - now no longer produced, but still sold) and when combined with the right skills and the best glass they have captured fantastic shots.
the body is the third on the list ;

1) The photographer - key part - if the monkey holding the kit is no good, the shots will be no good - no matter how good the kit is

2) The lens - controls directly what light enters the camera body and very much is key to capturing an image

3) The camera - the magic box that captures the light - better is good, but a better body won't give you a quality improvement in teh same line as better skills or better glass.


----------



## benhasajeep (Nov 4, 2008)

I have seen a few people on here who do weddings and such and list D40's, D50's and such for their gear.  Couple of them even list the modestly price lenses as well.  With good camera control, and not trying to sell to bill board companies.  Obviously it can be done.


----------



## PatrickHMS (Nov 4, 2008)

Reason I posted this was from a conversation I had today. Someone said that when he was looking for a professional photographer, if the guy used a D40 that was a deal-killer for him, as he did not consider a D40 to be a professional grade camera.

IMHO - for what it does, for what it costs, the D40 is as good a camera as there is for the money and capability.


Light, easy to use (and to get used to), versatile, does a nice job when the clickerperson knows what they are doing.

Makes it great for using outdoors and at sports events. Out of most all of the Nikon DSLR's it would be my FIRST choice to drop in the mud, get rained on, or to lo$e.

A little limited with the lense selection, but that can be corrected to some extent.

Still looking for how many guys out there use them, and to what percentage?

THANKS!

Patrick

FWIW - I don't miss 35mm film photography much at all anymore.


----------



## MelodySoul (Nov 4, 2008)

The person you were talking to is correct. It is not a professional grade camera, it's an entry level consumer camera. I would never hire someone using one either but that's just me, others may feel differently. Personally I just feel that someone who is calling themselves a pro and charging accordingly should have pro equipment.


----------



## skieur (Nov 4, 2008)

Depends on what you shoot of course, but in general terms even a lower level pro should have a 12 megapixel or higher main camera and a backup camera no lower than 8 megapixels.

skieur


----------



## SpeedTrap (Nov 5, 2008)

I would not hire a pro with a D40.
Like it was said above, right gear for the right job.  and there are many things a pro body can do that a D40 can't.


----------



## dEARlEADER (Nov 5, 2008)

the only thing i could think of would be the 1/500 flash sync... good for fill on sunny days.... the 6 meg is fine as long as you crop tight enough.... which you would be doing when flash filling anyways...

wouldn't be a main camera by any means.... but another tool in the tool box..


----------



## Christie Photo (Nov 5, 2008)

huh....  Makes me wonder if the guy wants to hire a photographer or rent gear.

My first digital was a Canon 10D.  I used it for more than a year.  I'd still use it.

I don't know the Nikon line.  Does a D40 have a fully manual mode?  If so, I have no problem with it.

In the past, I always thought of a camera as something to hold the lens and the film....  some had shutters.  I think the same applies here.  With a decent lens, the "virtual film" (sensor) is adequate for printing up to 20x24.

But for the record.....  NOOOO....  I wouldn't count on a D40 as my primary tool.


----------



## SpeedTrap (Nov 5, 2008)

There are many differences, some are real game changer depending on the shooting you are required to do.
Below are some of the difference between a D40 and a D700.


Max resolution 6.0 million *Vs* 12.1 million 
Sensor size 23.7 x 15.5 mm (3.67 cm²) *Vs* 36 x 24 mm (8.64 cm²) 
Pixel density 1.6 MP/cm² *Vs* 1.4 MP/cm² 
Sensor type CCD *Vs* CMOS 
ISO rating Auto, 200 - 1600 (plus 3200 with boost) *Vs* 200 - 6400 in 1, 1/2 or 1/3 EV steps (100 - 25600 with boost) 
Auto Focus Nikon Multi-CAM530 *Vs* Nikon Multi-CAM3500 FX 
White balance override 6 positions, plus manual preset *Vs* 6 positions, plus manual preset and Kelvin 
Max shutter 1/4000 sec *Vs* 1/8000 sec 
External flash *Vs* hot-shoe plus sync connector 
Continuous Drive Yes, 2.5 fps, unlimited JPEG *Vs *5 fps @ 12 mp, 8 fps @ 12 mp (with battery pack) 
Timelapse recording No *Vs* Yes 
Storage types SD/SDHC card *Vs* Compact Flash (Type I) 
Uncompressed format RAW *Vs* RAW, TIFF 
LCD 2.5 " *Vs* 3 " 
LCD Dots 230,000 *Vs* 922,000 
Live View No *Vs* Yes 
HDMI No Vs Yes 
Environmentally sealed No Vs Yes

Not to mention the Nikon CLS can be controled from some of the Pro line camers with no additional commander.


----------



## MikeBcos (Nov 5, 2008)

Christie Photo said:


> huh....  Makes me wonder if the guy wants to hire a photographer or rent gear.
> 
> 
> I don't know the Nikon line.  Does a D40 have a fully manual mode?  If so, I have no problem with it.




Yes, it does, P, A, S and M.


----------



## dEARlEADER (Nov 5, 2008)

geez... you took the time to write that out?


----------



## toofpaste (Nov 5, 2008)

I've seen pictures from a D40 look better then a D3. It's all about the photographer and their lighting.


----------



## Arch (Nov 5, 2008)

^ but that isnt the question... the question is would a pro use a D40 as one of thier cameras.... and the answer is largely no.

You may get the odd 'pro' who has one knocking around, but if they are in it full time and have been established for some time they wouldn't use and entry level camera for clients..... ever.


----------



## toofpaste (Nov 5, 2008)

Meoooooow


----------



## NateWagner (Nov 5, 2008)

really, the only way I could see one using something on that level it would have to be as a backup camera or something like that. Sure a pro could use one of the intro level DSLR's, but I for one wouldn't want to use it for fear of it breaking or failing on me, in addition the lack of features would bother me.

Also to the earlier poster that mentioned a pro camera needing to be at least 12MP I disagree. I don't think the camera needs to have 12MP for a pro, I think the 40d by Canon at only 10MP works just fine.


----------



## Humboldt (Nov 13, 2008)

Think this could be worth reading.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

I think the issue of making "professional" photos has very little to do with the equippment used.  "Proffesionals" are producing "fine art" with Holgas. 

I also think the value of 10 or 12 million pixels instead of 6 millons are just a marketing myth.

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/21pogues-posts-2/

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/technology/08pogue.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Of course, professional don´t use Nikon D40:s - normally, but this is for other reasons than the quality of the pictures the D40 is capable of.


----------



## roadkill (Nov 13, 2008)

Humboldt said:


> I also think the value of 10 or 12 million pixels instead of 6 millons are just a marketing myth.



There are those who still believe the earth is flat too...


----------



## SpeedTrap (Nov 13, 2008)

I know people like to say it is the photographer, not the gear and that is partly true.

But&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;

When I am on a shoot I would never consider using a D40, it is just too slow. There is only one command dial and when you shoot in full manual it is simply not fast enough.
I need to be able to make adjustment on the fly and while I am looking through the viewfinder (Which is much smaller on a D40). 

I need to be able to change settings without digging into menus; I need to be able to enact custom commands on the fly. The D40 just does not support the features that are required for a demanding workload.

As well the construction of the higher line cameras can just take more abuse. You need to remember, the camera is a tool and you need to invest in the right tools that will stand up to the abuse they will get.

As well the mega pixel thing is not the end all when choosing a camera, but why choose a camera for pro work that is already several years old.


----------



## dEARlEADER (Nov 13, 2008)

SpeedTrap said:


> I know people like to say it is the photographer, not the gear and that is partly true.
> 
> But
> 
> ...




not to mention higher frame rates for action/sports photographer, higher iso latitude for lowlight/wedding shooters, higher bit rates for post processing, better resolution for cropping, better lens compatibility, longer shutter rating, weather sealing, tougher construction for reliability.


this argument is really just silly....


----------



## Humboldt (Nov 18, 2008)

roadkill said:


> There are those who still believe the earth is flat too...



Well...I was actually referring to an article about a "test". I was not first and foremost believing anything. 
  And yes, some people believe the earth is flat....read this...

http://www.quazen.com/Shopping/Consumer-Electronics/Too-Many-Pixels-for-a-Good-Image.326677

http://www.quazen.com/Arts/Photography/How-Many-Megapixels-Do-I-Need-for-my-Prints.329299/2

 I think some of you people miss the point - I still think it is possible to produce "pro quality" pictures with a D40, but I also know it´s not the normal choice for a "pro". 

(Being a pro by the way can be a lot of different things, with very different equipment needs. When for example shooting for a daily newspaper, considering the size and quality of the prints, any digital DLSR would be good enough what picture quality matters.)

Of course a D300 or D3 or D700 can do things a D40 can´t do, but the question was if a D40 could be used by a pro (or a D60 for that matter). As I said, if you speak to pros you will find they usually use some of the moore advanced/expensive/capable cameras - but there are situations where a D40 could be a better choice.

 Se for example the following under [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]*Going Light&#8212;Travel Kits*[/FONT]

http://www.bythom.com/rationallenses.htm

 A D40 is 470 gram or something, a D300 is 825 gram, and that can in some situations make a BIG difference.


----------

