FotoLord42 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Agreed. The 40D is so good in it's own right that switching makes little sense if you've invested in lenses already. The D700 MIGHT be worth switching for, since little else can touch it's group of features and performance. I'm reviewing the D700 shortly.

chuckie3015 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Its the Cats ass, not PJ"S

gusdan1 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

But if you are thinking about these semi-pro cameras you've probably already got some lenses, then i would recommend you continue with the type of camera you already own :D I personally own the 40D and i simply love it :D

FotoLord42 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Nikon currently leads in zoom lenses with their latest, the 14-24 24-70. Nikon just updated their 50mm prime and will do the same for the wides shortly. They also make the better consumer glass. What Nikon needs now is a state of the art 20mm lens that is 1.8. It won't be cheap when it comes. Addressing your comment on the D40, I make money with mine. It's capable of pro results when used correctly, just like the D700.

FotoLord42 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I can afford what I want, but not everyone else can. Saying $800 is negligible these days is not well thought out. For 800 bucks a person can buy a 35-70 and 85mm 1.8 and have a nice portrait set. Or a Sigma 50mm 1.4, or a Tamron 90 or Tamron 2.8 zoom and so on. If your 70-200 is poor at the edges you have a problem. Enough of us have posted sharp edged shots from that lens wide open on DPreview.

m3kiyaani (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I was going to say the same thing...they ARE two different types of Cameras...

AngryCorgi (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

You are correct. The D300 vs. 40D is difference of $700. The interest in the 40D is more a pull for the glass offerings of Canon vs. Nikon. Nikon has some decent lenses, but they are WAY behind in refreshing their primes and most are still screw-driven and optically based on ancient AI-S formulas.

AngryCorgi (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The price variance between a D700 and D300 in negligible. You can't even buy much glass with that $800. The 70-200 is not long and is typical for most crop shooters (especially since the edges are atrocious @FF). I'll buy the weight argument. The D90 I might grab to for wight concerns, but the D40 is an absolute joke and its lack of AEB and any of the quick switchgear on the pro/semi-pro bodies makes it a pain to use quickly or to count on as a reliable backup.

FotoLord42 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I own D700, D300, D90, D40 and a lot of fast glass. I make money with all of them and none of them are toys. The D300's crop sensor is useful at times and it's a very fast camera that costs a lot less than my D700. If I'm shooting action in daylight I'd rather grab the D300 and my 70-200 over the D700 at times. They are all just tools. Choose the right one for the situation at hand. Sometimes I grab the D90 or D40 over all others due to smaller size.

FotoLord42 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The 5D MK2 is a full frame camera, so it does not get compared to the D300 often. Canon's new 50D is a better pick and is also a DX model. The D700 competes with the 5D MK2.