I don't think the difference between the 6MPand 10MP will matter much for me as the biggest prints will probablybe 8x10..

Exactly right.

Same for high ISO performance, at that size, it seems theIQ would be virtually identical..

Right again.

I really like the way the Nikonfeels and it's controls.

That matters as much as anything else.

But the one thing holding me back is this:In real-life situations (not lab test conditions), will I reallynotice a difference in focus speed and accuracy between the 9 pointAF of the Canon and the 3 point AF of the Nikon, particularly whenshooting the sports photos?.

The Canon wins here IMO. 3 AF points is OK if you are holding the camera horizontally, but what if you want to hold it vertically (portrait-style) - you have no AF points to the left and right of centre. Not a problem if you 'focus and recompose' but you may not have the time for that in sports photography..

Or, just completely blow my budget and get a 30D? Not sure I can getthat by the wife. .

Another guy was complaining about this a while ago and came to a deal with his wife: she could buy jewellery / clothes to the same value as what he spent on camera equipment. So do you think you can manage with a 5 disposable  ?Mike..

I hate to say this but no, 3 AF points will not be the best way to go..

If you like how the Nikon feels and you're considering blowing your budget why not a D80?Don't wait for the Nikon D-whatever, have fun now!http://www.flickr.com/photos/j_wijnands/..

There are some brilliant reviews on this site..

Have you read them yet?.

Peter.

Persuasive Marketing Systems -inc Copywriting, Design & Photography..

You really should look at the next models up in the ranges - the D80 or 30D. If you are planning on buying a 70-200/2.8, the weight balance will be truly dreadful with light cameras like the D40. You'll find the lens pitches forward, because the weight of the front elements. A heavier body will balance better..

The XTi/400D is a better balance, but it would still be better with a heavier camera behind the lens.You name it, I've broken it...

If you r stuck with limited budget, you have to make a choice among these 2 only! Now it will fully depend on your usage. If you shoot sports a lot, I would also recomment a camera with more focus points, but be sure you like the interface so that this should not prevent you from shooting. Else if you really like Nikon interface much more than Canon, then I would say, go for D80. You will not regret (and hopefully your wife too http://budding-nature-photographer.blogspot.com/..

I would definitely get the 400d. It is so easy to use the screen and adjust the camera's settings. I have had mine for about one year now and I wouldn't change a thing about it. I got the battery grip for it and it feels much more substantial and the battery lasts a long long time with the grip. So seriously, I would get the 400d with the grip rather than getting the 30d. But keep in mind, I only have the 400d and have never shot with the nikon or 30d.



God Bless.

Charliehttp://natureshots.smugmug.com..

Scruntys NutPea Funch wrote:.

You really should look at the next models up in the ranges - the D80or 30D. If you are planning on buying a 70-200/2.8, the weightbalance will be truly dreadful with light cameras like the D40.You'll find the lens pitches forward, because the weight of the frontelements. A heavier body will balance better..

The XTi/400D is a better balance, but it would still be better with aheavier camera behind the lens.You name it, I've broken it..

So if the 70-200 will balance better with the bigger D80 does that mean that a lighter lens is better with the D40?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

I got a D40 about 2-3 months ago, I like it, it is light weight, easy to carry around and does not intimidate your subjects - but - you knew there was going to be a but didn't you - I really liked taking action shots of watersports such as windsurfing and jetski's with a 70-300VR, this was quite unbalanced on the D40 (the results were very sharp etc) and I really missed the extra focus points, so I went and got a D200 last week..

I don't regret the D40 purchase as it was my intro and still gets a lot of use for family shooting and gets taken nearly everywhere I go, but if you think you will be doing sports shots then look above the D40. I can't comment on the D80 as although I held and played with one in the shop the D200 felt better and had all the functions I wanted (time lapse and 5fps). You won't be disappointed with the D40, but may outgrow it quickly!..

You got the D40 two months ago and you already bought the D200. Man, you don't waste time! What are your impressions of the 200 images? Are you happy with it?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Stevef1961 wrote:.

You got the D40 two months ago and you already bought the D200. Man,you don't waste time! What are your impressions of the 200 images?Are you happy with it?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

No point hanging around ) plus I had the money sat there doing nothing and it was either buy the D200 or try and spend it on something else, and the D200 won..

I think there is an improvement in IQ, but may not be so noticeable with me as I am still new to all this and just starting to get some shots I am happy with..

What the D200 does give me is the ability to change settings quickly and easily, which means you can vary the shots and see what works and what does not - This takes more time with the D40 and you can loose the shot, as a newbie this really does make a difference for me..

Am I happy with it? Oh yes, It's great, but I am still happy with the D40, and the D40 goes more places the the D200 does as it is lighter and easier to carry around..

I would happily go and get either again tomorrow if I needed to...