I got to use a D5000 this past week and I really liked using the flip screen. Unlike what others have said I felt the screen was sturdier than what I was expecting. I liked being able to turn the LCD completely around and close it back up. I didn't have to worry about scratches while it was in my camera bag or hanging off my shoulder or neck.

I still have my Sony 717 and really enjoy it's articulated body design. That's why I like the D5000's flip screen. To me it comes in very handy. If you don't like it then don't move it.

My only complaint about the D5000 was the cheap feel of some of the buttons. Especially the small "trash can" button which didn't feel as solid to the touch as Nikon's other bodies, like the D60 or D90. Nikon had to cut corners somewhere I suppose.

I personally don't trust the articulating screen... it seems too easy to break.

d40 is a great camera, and if You care about IQ only, than for $800 You will enjoy it more with better lens than d5000 with kit

"I have thought about upgrading, but I'm happy with what I have."

That's true. This is going to sound wrong so I apologize ahead of time; you're always going to be happy with what you have if that's all you know. I started on a D40 too. :)

Let me correct that; I "upgraded" to a D40 from a Sony DSC-H1

thanks a lot..i rather buy a cheaper dslr for me.thnx again

Good points, mb and Gentoo. I still think that dollar for dollar, the D40 is the best bargain if you're thinking about a DSLR.

Gentoo, you're right about the autofocus, it has gotten in my way once or twice.

I have thought about upgrading, but I'm happy with what I have.

I would also add that the D5000's AF is the multi-cam1000; the same that's in the D80, D90 and D200. That AF system is a big difference.

I am sure we all mean best and are stating our own opinion, and I think that’s great for this forum.
If I was going to buy my first DSLR it would be D5000 if I could afford it, my second choice would be D60, it is light, affordable and user friendly, it is next generation camera compared to D40 or D200 and has great IQ without to much hassle.

Willis, spot on with your analysis.

The original poster wanted a camera that makes very good photos. Both of them make very good photos, but he's not really interested in becoming a photographer. He just wants to take photos. Plus, he added that $800 was all that he was willing to spend. The D40 will take good photos and still undercut his budget.

And no doubt the D5000 is the better camera between the two. I sort of exaggerated a little bit. But the D40 is enough camera for his needs.

I don't think that's what NSX was saying. The D5000, for me at least, just doesn't cut it in the price \ features department. You've got the D40, which is a fine camera, for about $400 (I've seen them as cheap as $270 w/o lens, but that appears to be gone now).

So what does the D5000 offer you in exchange for your extra dough?
- Better High ISO (about 2 stops better which is substantial).
- Live View\Movie Mode \ Articulating Screen (I lump them together because they all kind of need each-other
- Picture Controls\D-Lighting
- More Mega pixels

Those are all nice things to have, but I don't think I'd pay $500 to add them to my D40. I'd rather spend that on lenses and lighting. It seems silly to me to spend extra money on what is still a very cippled camera. Stepping up to the D90 makes more sense, because you get all the benefits of the D5000, plus AF on the older lenses, flash commander mode, Exposure Bracketing, a far better LCD, and the far better dual dial controls. Now those are benefits I'll pay for.

Its not that the D5000 doesn't bring anything to the table, its just that it doesn't bring enough to the table to justify the cost premium (unless you are into shooting SLR movies in which case this is the best Nikon you can buy. If you want a Toy camera, the D40 wins on price alone. If you want a camera that is suitable for profesional use, but still easy enough for a beginner to use, the D90 wins on value. The D5000 is a compromise, and if I wanted to compromise, the D200 looks like a far better compromise than the D5000.

"Saying D5000 is no better then D40 is just like saying D3x is no better then D5000, so if we follow that analogy D3x is actually no better then D40 right?
Why does Nikon bother to make all new models anyways, we should all jump on eBay and buy trusty old D1 and D100 for pennies and live happily ever after."

I was going to say something to that effect but decided not to since I do it all the time lol. Well put mb

Saying D5000 is no better then D40 is just like saying D3x is no better then D5000, so if we follow that analogy D3x is actually no better then D40 right?
Why does Nikon bother to make all new models anyways, we should all jump on eBay and buy trusty old D1 and D100 for pennies and live happily ever after.

Don't worry about the D5000, it doesn't offer you anything more than the D40 does, unless you really want the video feature. The D40 costs much less anyway, and it will take great pictures.

sory for the late reply.im really confused because this is new to me.i dont have any experience in dslr cameras.but i had a sony cybershot camera.i want more features and a camera that can satisfy my ideal pictures.ideal pictures like view in the beach, picture taking at dark places, children parks, can capture with a moving object, taking picture with animals and a nice resolution day or in night mode.photography is my new hobby because i like to travel a lot like islands and tourist spots.anyway,thanks a lot for your ideas.i learned something to you guys.i want more ideas for a beginner like me.please help me in choosing a nice nikon dslr guys.i want the d5000 but i think its too expensive.

that's pretty much same with me willis, I take most of my pictures on either 100 or 200 iso, and it's anyway a huge progress for me, as I've been shooting on Velvia and Provia in the film times (so anyway I gain one stop), I can handhold my tele combo (70-200+1.7tc) up to 1/2 and still get sharp results. therefor, on one hand I understand that people want more iso, on the other hand for me that's not an option (most of the times) - and very often I would suggest to improve Your skills in handholding (sounds weired :)) instead of boosting iso.

So where do you find a refurbished Nikon D40 for around $270? Amazon wants $408 which doesn't seem like such a great deal compared to a new one for $430.86. (These prices include the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX)

Adamz... I got the same impression when I got my hands on one. I don't think it would break (short of being dropped), but I don't think I'd use it all that much. I will say that I like shooting very low to the ground, but I usually wind up getting on my stomach.

The problem with shooting in live view is that you can't really hold the camera steady which is critical for shots under 1/60th of a second. If I hold my camera close to my eye, I can shoot as slow as 1/15th without blur on most shots. Sometimes I can go as slow as 1/8. Forget about any of that if you are holding the camera at arms length.

MB - While I agree that the CMOS chips wipe the floor with the CCD chips in the high ISO department, I have to throw a big "Who Cares" in there with it. I'm a low light junky so I certainly appericiate what the higer ISO's do for you, but I'd say 90% of the shots I take are at base ISO. (Side note: The older CCD chips had a base ISO of 100 vs. 200 found in the CMOS cameras like the D90, D300, and D5000... which is kind of like having twice the flash sync speed in terms of your ability to control ambient light). I'm not saying high ISO is important, I'm just saying most beginners would be better off investing that same money a fast prime lens if low light is their heart's desire. My 1.4 lens at ISO 200 on my D200 is going to look better than my 18-55 kit will look at ISO 1600 when shot at f/4 on my D90.

as for the tilt screen I've played with it today, and it's just too fragile - I know that if I'll ever buy this kind of camera (with such a tilt screen) it will be broken sooner than later

I doubt you could get D5000 for 800$ anywhere, but if you squeeze a bit for another 100$ you will get greatest beginner DSLR on the market.
It is way better than any older Nikon models like D40, D60 or D200 , not only it has twice the resolution than D40 but all of them are almost useless above ISO 400 and with D5000 you can go up to 1600 and get good results. It also has much better software and image quality produced by it is generations ahead of what you could do with others mentioned.
It is very user friendly, JPEG images (mostly used by beginners) are fantastic right out of the box with some of the scene modes, and tilt–able screen is great new feature that you will find very useful, no matter what puritans say, it is the same as with digital technology; everyone was against it when it started. Ergonomics and ease of use are just perfect so you will get great results right from the start.
And 18-55VR kit lens is very good match for it, light and surprisingly good for the money especially because D5000 has CA correction for it built in, but I would consider adding 55-200VR to this setup after a while.

I played around with one in the store... its a fine camera, but I don't think I'd own one for the price... for my money, the D200 was cheaper and a much better buy.

The first thing you need to ask your self is what kind of shooter are you? If this is your first DSLR, we'll assume you are a beginner and the D200 \ D300 would be overkill. Personally I'd go with a referbrished D40 for less than half the cost of the D5000. The only thing you really give up is a little bit of resolution, the articulating screen, movie mode, and the CMOS chip.

I wouldn't care about any of those except the CMOS chip, which does substantially better at high ISO's. This means you can take pictures at low light and they will come out with less noise.

If low-light photography is your thing, by all means, get the D5000. If you want to buy one camera with top-knotch build quality and a full feature set (remote flash triggering, exposure bracketing, high FPS, access to Nikon's full range of lenses) then the D200 is your best bet and $200 cheaper... just be prepared for a learning curve as there is no full auto mode on the D200. If you want all of that in a lighter body combined with the low light capabilities of the D5000, then the D90 is your best bet and about $200 more. If you want an even smaller and lighter body that takes pictures with more resolution than your computer screen, go for a refurbished Nikon D40 for about $270 and you will have lots of money left over for a nice lens which will do more to get you good pictures than any of these cameras will.

Its not that the D5000 is a bad camera, its just pointless in my opinion. For a beginner, there are cheaper options that are almost as good, and if you really get the photography bug, you will want something much higher end in a year or two anyway. If you don't you won't miss any of the D5000's features.

hi people out there,
i need my first dslr.my budget is limited to 800 dollars.i want to buy the new D5000.what can you say?how much is the D5000?