How Crutial are the auto-focus point and auto focus speed on the Nikon D40x compared to the Canon XTi?

I’ve been doing A LOT of research on both offerings from Cannon and Nikon.

Apparently they Both take Awesome pictures, but deciding which system I want to buy in is really whats got me hung.

The List has 9 focus points versus the Nikon’s 3. How vital are the additional focus points.

Would the lack of them on the Nikon become a conundrum when composing pictures since there is no coverage on the tops and bottoms?

I’d Automatically go for cannon since it has the whole auto focusing benefit. But Cannon glass is crazy expensive; Tameron and Sigma can fix that conundrum though.
To bman and fhotoace:
I held The nikon d40(x), List Xt(i), and Sony a100.

I like the Grips on the A100 and Cannon alot. But the D40′s worried me because it feels uncomfortable in my hands without tilting my long fingers across teh grip. The Viewfinder on the Canons seems small and dim vs the Nikon and the Sony.
Idk if they will be a conundrum except if I’m shooting at prom or something with low lite(I plot to soon)

Answer by Bman
I shoot Nikon and for the most part pleased. What I don’t like abot Nikon (and I am not sure this holds right for List) is the availability of their lenses. For example the 70-200vr. Just one of persons hard to find lenses. And yes, you are right, Sigmas line of HSM lenses will work on a D40X.

As far as the focus points. You should be able to program your custom button for AF-L. Auto Focus Lock. This allows you to focus somewhere in your frame, press the button to lock your focus, recompose and take your shot.

You may want to take a trip to your community camera shop to really hold the cameras. I really didn’t like the way the List felt in my hands, and while still a fantastic camera, I finished up with a Nikon.

Answer by fhotoace
You will really have to test them both in your hands.

I have an ancient D100 with five focus points, but really I only used two of them. Why? The way I compose, I only needed persons two focus points. (a modified rule of thirds)

Since you will be getting a new body every three to four years, the lenses you buy are really your largest investment because you will using them for literally decades, so you may want to rethink the thought of buying a third-party lens.

Years ago, when auto-focus was in its infancy, List place their efforts into quick focusing lenses and Nikon into compatible camera/lens combinations. So as time went on, List became the acknowledged leader in quick focusing lenses and Nikon for precision cameras what would use any lenses made from the birth of the Nikon SLR in 1959.

Much has changed, now both makers lenses focus quick enough for any sports or action shooter (and frankly, some of us still focus manually using the time honored “follow focus” practice).and now any lens made in the past 15 years will work on any DSLR, so the compatibility issue has become more of a historical fact than a drawback.

Answer by gryphon1911
What “whole focusingadvantage” are you speaking of? Everyone I know that uses a D40 has no problems with the 3 auto focus brackets.

The D40 uses AF-S lenses for auto focusing which are plenty quick for what you’ll want to do.

Lenses made by Nikon or List are generally going to be more expensive than a third party lens. Tamron has just started making AF-S styles lenses for Nikon and Sigma has made them for a while.

When looking for lenses, you’ll need to evaluate them all individually. There are some dogs and some fantastic lenses from each of the manufacturers.

Give your answer to this question below!

Greater & Lesser Scaup LMO
nikon d40x compare

Image by THE Holy Hand Grenade!
Both Lesser (top) and Greater Scaup drakes on Lake Merritt, Oakland, CA. Taken by a Nikon D40x at ISO 800 with a 55-200mm lens. (at 90)

i am upgrading from a point and shoot to dslr. i dont want to buy another camera in the future for a few years.lot of public posted on the website to buy the d40 and 55-200 vr lenses instead of the d40x.thats what intend to do now.but,after spending all this money,($ 750),i dont want to be needing more pixels in the future.i’d not be printing larger prints may be 11×14 max.its mostly to take my daughter’s pictures and my vacation pictures.
i am very influenced by the article http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40x.htm.

i just dont want to regret in the future that i should have got the d40x instead.

please help.my dughter’s birthday is coming up and i want to buy before that.
thanx a lot.

Answer by phoozball
The fact of the matter is, the higher the pixels, the better quality picture you’re going to get, though hardly noticeable. I cannot complain about a 6 mp camera, it still has more than what i’ve got. I don’t reckon you’ll regret your hold. You will get years of service out of it. Typically after two years regardless of the camera you hold, it has much lost value. That’s just the nature of the industry. Stick with your gut feeling, I don’t reckon you’re making a mistake with the 6 mp. The quality of picture will be just a bit better with the 10, but you will not greatly notice the difference. Especially if you are a rookie, look into additional features, image stabilization, red eye reduction, etc. Some cameras offer the higher mp, but not the extras that help the quality. Trust your instinct, mine stays with the d40.

Answer by TomTom
no
more pixels does not make a better picture

Answer by fhotoace
Ken Rockwell has a lot of experience shooting and owns both Nikon and Cameras and therefore, his opinion is valuable.

Here is another link to his excellent information …

http://kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

Answer by emotivedev
I bought a 6mp DSLR (K100D) in May 2007 and after 2000 shots I am more than pleased with the image quality. I have a photo of my son on the wall that is 20″ x 15″, and it was cropped too!

On DSLR’s, 10mp is better than 6mp. But in 2 years, the entry level DSLR will be 12mp or 16mp, and it will also have nearer shots per second and additional improved features.

With DSLR’s, the body depreciates, but the lenses do not. Use the extra $ to buy a better lens, not more pxels. When you upgrade the DSLR body in 2 or 3 years, you tan use your excellent quality lenses on to the upgraded DSLR body.

Answer by George Y
Ken’s the man and gives very frank and honest advice. Guess what? In a few years, you’ll be looking at 12mp, 15mp, or 18mp digital wondercameras wooing shoppers everywhere.

The D40x is a fantastic camera.
The D40 with an extra lens or flash is a fantastic camera system.

Currently, I shoot with D70 or D50 Nikons, dependent on my needs. Do I wish I’d gotten a D80 or D40x? Sometimes, yes. But everytime the opportunity comes up, I spend the extra money on optics, where it makes a difference.

Before I went to tour China this summer, I was considering doing an upgrade. But I ultimately chose to get a Nikon 18-200mm VR lens instead. It was the only optic I used on the entire trip and proved itself to be the MVP of my camera bag.

Here are some pictures I’ve taken with my D50 and D70. Both are 6.1mp cameras.

http://www.spmsportspage.com/images/college/football/2007/California-45-Tennessee-31-09-01-2007/DSC_0065_GHYoung.html

http://www.spmsportspage.com/images/college/football/2007/California-42-Louisiana-Tech-12-09-15-2007/DSC_8135_GHYoung.html

And here’s what some ordinary public did when handed a D40 in one small town.

http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown

As a photographer, teacher, & parent, I’ve always kept a camera nearby for that school event, community honest, dance recital, or class play. The camera helps the photographer, but doesn’t “make” the photographer.

I hope you find this a bit helpful.

What do you reckon? Answer below!