D40x is a good body although it won't AF on all lenses. If you are planning to do more commercial work, a body upgrade would help in the ergonomics. A glass investment goes a long way no matter where your photography career goes.(avoid DX lenses if your budget can take it) 50 1.8 is the best bang for your buck.

What ? Pant, pant, pant ... D4 ? There's a new D4? Just kidding.
Actually, why not get the D3x and some nice glass like the 400mm F2.8. Nothing like a $17,000 investment to get the blood flowing !!

kyoshinikon said:
My D90 replacement will be a D3s!

wait for the D4, haha!

kyoshinikon said:
My D90 replacement will be a D3s!

LOL! nice upgrade !

My D90 replacement will be a D3s!

Thanks for the latest advice, i'm thinking I'll probably just start saving and buy/replace on a needs basis. But if I've saved enough by the time the d90 replacement comes then get that, or keep saving till I can get it unless there is some other equipment I need at some time for a specific purpose

I'm with both hearty and warprints, but my advice is the D90 replacement and the 50 1.8 as a portrait lens. It's dirt cheap and will AF on your new camera.
BTW, nice photos.

Nice photos Zac, There is a lot to be gained from getting good glass and other bits (Flash, tripod etc.) The D40X is a good camera. IQ as good as the latest D3000.

From Your Photos I think they would be most improved by getting some good glass.
1) Caves. Caves are too dark for ANY camera. You will need lighting(gels/flashlight) and tripod for good caving shots.
2) Portraits - A great portrait lens helps a ton more than a newer camera. Your portrait are nice with good composition and posing. But you will benefit from a much shallower DOF from a portrait lens. Consider the 50-150 sigma F2.8. or one of the XX-70 F2.8 FX lenses. If the 24-70 is too high in price consider the older nikkor 28-70 or the tamron 28-75 on DX these are great portrait lenses. The 50mm F1.4G is also great for portraits. Another benefit of these modern pro lenses is the low flare and therefore higher contrast images you get especially when shooting into the light. Also getting at least one remote flash will help a lot in fill or key lighting your subjects.

Do you find that you are lacking something in your setup? Do you find that you are specialising/interested is certain subjects/types of photography?

I would like to apologize for my bad form... in no way was I advertising anything. The only reason I gave my website was so that those who wished to give advice could see some of my photography (ie. different advice could be given based on varying skill level). And again, the only reason I listed any sort of prices was so that people could better understand my situation (ie. not pro but do make an occasional sale).

Now that that's out of the way....

Thanks for the advice everyone, especially warprints! I have been leaning towards splurging on a body first mainly because I have recently upgraded some glass, maybe not fast zooms, but still an upgrade.

He already has the 35mm F1.8G, so maybe just hold off fro the D90 replacement. ;-)

D90 with a 35mm f1.8 lens

Niko, I'm glad you cut him some slack, even though he is an Aggie. We fuss when people say "what should I buy" without telling us, or showing us, what kind of photography they like or want to do. The $50 thing, well, it's gotta be an ego booster to be able to report a real sale. SO, what do you think he should do re new glass vs new body?

One, it's considered very bad form to start your first post in any forum by telling everyone to come visit your website. That's another form of spamming. Two, by including your prices your post becomes borderline commercial advertisement and would normally be deleted. Why would we need to know how much you charge? But since you are an Aggie.... we'll you know. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this time.

Welcome to the forum, ZRB.
You're right, this is a highly debated topic, and even with the background you give (nice photos, by the way), the responses will vary quite a bit.
My two cents ... Given that it sounds like you would really like to be a bit more on the pro side than on the snapshot side, I think you really should consider upgrading your camera. Not that the D40x is bad, but you'll probably benefit from the added abilities of the D90 (or its replacement). I usually recommend upgrading glass before all else, but you have fairly OK glass with the zoom, and good glass with the 35mm f1.8 and, I personally would have a hard time recommending really good glass with the D40x. (Which came first, the chicken or the egg?) If you are into spelunking, you'll want the good low light capabilities of a more advanced camera. All that said, you should consider starting to save for new glass, too.

Howdy,

I have been using a d40x for just under three years now. I've decided to start saving money in order to invest in new/better equipment. With the talks of the d90 replacement, I have found my self puzzled on whether I should upgrade my body or my glass. I wouldn't call my self a professional by any means, but I am a serious amateur, who has on occasion sold prints (~$50/ photo), as well as taken portraits on commission (generally by friend's parents who don't want to pay absurd prices for "professional" senior portraits etc. for ~$75 for a session (includes CD of favorite photos for unlimited prints)).

Examples of my work can be seen on my website; {Link Removed}. Mind you, this is a new website currently under construction and does not reflect my full range of photography. Some of this work also includes some older photography from a Fujifilm S5200(point and shoot), specifically the photos in the Guatemala and Misc Travel galleries.

I have recently upgraded my kit lenses (older versions of the 18-55 and 55-200, ie. non-vr) to the Tamron 18-270 and Nikon 35mm f1.8. (most of the photography on my site was not shot with these new lenses, but the older ones)

My question to you is this; based on my work (from my website) as well as my status as a photographer (primarily a hobbyist who has on occasion made money off photography), do you think I would be better benefited from new glass or saving for a better body (would probably end up going with d90 replacement)?

Other things to consider:
Recently, much of my photography has been cave photography (see examples on site), and with the limited low-light capability of the d40x, I could benefit from higher low-light capabilities.

Now I know this is a question that is much debated and many other posts have asked the same question, but I am asking specifically based off my work/ status, what is your opinion?

Thanks in advance,
ZRB