Nikon D40 vs D40x

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:10:13 GMT, someguy469 wrote:

> Got a Nikon D40 about 2 weeks ago from Amazon.I went with the D40
> (6.1megapixel) and not the D40x (10.2 megapixel) because I used the $200
> savings on a flash. BTW the camera is great and able to print 81/2 x 11
> prints very crisp.
> Now Amazon is selling the D40 x for $115 more that what I paid for the
> D40. I love the camera but am wondering if I should return it for the D40x
> now that it's only $115 more. I did do quite a bit of reading on the
> cameras and am aware of the higher noise on the x at high ISO. But I do find
> myself cropping on occasion. I also read about the flash sync difference.
> Any thoughts? TIA

If you can swing it, the D40x would make a pretty good backup
camera. If you're at all serious about photography, duplicate
equipment makes for good insurance, and the second body would be
more useful than just as an emergency backup, since it would also
allow you to choose the body for the specific occasion (lower noise
or higher resolution), and if something malfunctions, could help
determine if it's due to camera or a lens. Most people don't really
*need* a backup battery, but it's nice to have one. If you have two
bodies, one shared backup battery might well suffice for both
cameras. You'd also end up with a backup battery charger. Hang
both from a strap 'round your neck and you might easily be mistaken
for either a nerd or a pro! <g> FWIW, at a time when the D40, D40x
the soon to be discontinued D50 (6mp) were all being sold, I chose
to get a D50. Had there been one, I'd have also purchased a D50x.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon D40 vs D40x