While nI think willis hit the nail on the head on all fronts (mind you I haven't used the D40 enough to know if it's AF sucks sucks sucks) - the D40 bought used as a "get your DSLR toes wet and learn what you really want" is a hell of a deal.

Hey Fuge - Go easy on us man. I don't think any of us own both a D3k and a D40, so a scientific comparison isn't really an option. That said, you would expect the D40 to outperform in the noise department due to its lower pixel density.

I stand by my statement that I'd be much more interested in a comparison of the D3k to the D60 or D40x.

Don't let Ken's noise comparison put you off buying the camera. All Nikon's are clean through ISO 400, and usable through ISO 800. If you can shoot inside those constraints (which are common to the D40 BTW), then the D3k is an amazing camera for the buck.

Its worth the premium over the D40 for the AF system alone. The extra resolution is just a bonus. Finally, I suspect (but can't prove) that the D3k's unaltered high ISO shots look the same as any of the 10mp series, and that the differences are just a function of differences in the noise removal settings in the camera. If you do NR in post, then it doesn't really matter.

Yeah I won't read all that stuff but I agree with Niko.

How did I miss this reply before:

["If by ADR you mean Active D-Lighting you could always add it later in Capture or View NX,"]

NO YOU CANNOT D Lighting and Active D Lighting are not the same. They're two different features that perform a similar action with confusingly similar names.

Welcome to NR fugue137: Just to stop this from going to get crazy. I think we most have to admit that we tried in vain to prove KR wrong on this one, yes Nikon should have used the same sensor as in the D5000 without charging more right. So either you step up to the D5000 or move over to similar offerings from Sony and Canon if you feel that they will give you a better value

Pete

OH no.... not this again.... NO COMMENT :^)

So you're telling us that...???

Hi! I hoped the d3000 would be a lightweight update to my d40, maybe offering better metering, a stop of sensitivity, and what KR refers to as "Gen2" features (lateral colour fringe removal, ADL, more colour/wb adjustment, etc). Rockwell talked me out of it and I am looking for evidence that he's wrong.

I have read this thread, and I find a couple of things:

(1) It's been a month, and NOBODY has posted pictures showing that KR is wrong. Someone posted a that he claimed was "good enough", but who cares? The question is how the d3k compares to the d40, not whether the d3k is good enough for one random guy (an iphone is good enough for most people). PLEASE, if there's someone lurking this thread who has access to both cameras, can you try to reproduce KR's result? Everything else is kind of meaningless.

(2) There are a lot of ad hominem attacks against KR. Why is that?

(3) There are a lot of attacks against KR based on his being inconsistent. Fair enough--he constantly says stupid stuff like "this is the best" without saying _what_ it's the best for--but it's pretty childish to say "He's changed his opinion n times, therefore we will dismiss anything controversial." If he's made an overbroad statement that should only apply to what he's trying to do at that moment, why not accept the statement for the useful information that it contains? If you think he's wrong on a particular subject, can you prove it by designing and executing an experiment? Are you guys Republicans or something?

(4) A d700 is only better than a d40 if you aren't too tired to notice the good light, the best angle, the perfect moment. If you only photograph out of a car, carry a bigger camera by all means, but if you want to shoot things more than a few leagues from the nearest road, even the weight difference between a d3000 and a d90 is enormous. Some of us (and KR seems to be one) are frustrated by the attitude of "only beginners may have portable cameras." A d3000 with a better DX sensor (ie. a d5000 without the flippy screen) wouldn't weigh more. See backpackinglight.com: you truly can get your overnight base pack weight under 10 pounds, camera included! Yes, you'll have to cut the handle off your toothbrush :)

Sorry for the rant, but I'm stunned that this thread has gone on for so long without any data whatsoever. I've learned some useful things, of course--many of you seem very knowledgeable--but I am no closer to learning what I came here to learn.

If by ADR you mean Active D-Lighting you could always add it later in Capture or View NX, it is not 'Active' because you control it and not the camera.
As for sensor used in D3000 it is not just the sensor silicon that makes the image. Nikon has his own fab for packaging the sensors meaning adding RGGB filter and micro-lenses layer, IR filter and, on D200, optical low pass filter that could influence the performance. Surounding chip set, especially for less integrated CCD chips, can significantly add to noise for example. I am not saying the chips are exactly the same but they are very similar and made by Sony, and it is far less expensive to change all other components then the sensor itself though it is possible.

Glad Nikon's doing well with the D3000.

Not a bad camera at all, it's just that the D3000 isn't enough for my needs anymore if I were looking into a new camera.

["Maybe future firmware updates may help with ADR issues? Can you do ADR in Nikon Capture NX2 after taking pictures in raw?"]

Only if you had it turned on in the first place. If you shot with it off, you cannot adjust it. I'm confused by the remarks of it slowing things down. I don't just hear it on NR but others have said it as well. I've played with it on and off on my D90 and D300 and have no performance issues at all. The only thing I can think of at that point is the memory card. If it's a cheap card that writes slowly, perhaps this is why? My CF cards for example are extreme III or IV (if that's the correct roman, I get 4 and 6 confused lol).

You know the Nikon D3000 is our best seller at the moment, it is Nikon's present D40, this is where it starts. If my customer is looking at entry DSLR's then we have the Olympus 520, Canon XS, Sony A230 and the Nikon D3000

The Olympus 520, great Camera, lots of features, but small viewfinder and screen

The Canon XS, small screen and I would say cheap looking lens, like most entry canon's

Sony A230, just hold in your hands, need I say more about Sony's new grip design

Then we have our Nikon D3000 with a nice Larger screen, the lens feels great, SOLD

miatadan: Enjoy your new Nikon D3000 and welcome to NR

Pete

Just saw this post. Had to see what it was all about. When it gets right down to it ones own experience counts the most. If I do shoot jpeg's, I save them imediately as a tiff. I always shoot raw and sometimes raw plus jpeg. As far as Ken's D3000 test, I would not count on it as being gospel. Awhile back he was down on digital and kept saying film was the only way to go. He said film was sharper, better quality and cost less. Now he's been shooting a Leica M9. Thinks it is the greatest thing there is except for his D40. I'd like to see him shoot all day with a 600mm F4 VR lens hand held. Tripods have there place more often then not. I think using them helps with composition also.

I recently purchased the Nikon D3000. I did read the review in Ken Rockwell. Seems ADR may be issue as it takes camera longer to process. I intend to purchase the AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8 lens when I can afford it.
I seem to prefer prime lenses. Guess from days of high school using Pentax K-1000 ( I am still old school )
Considering I purchased the D3000 with kit lens for less than Canon G11, I feel its a better choice than G11 or any other compact camera.
I have owned D40 in past. In general I feel its better to have put money into lenses instead of dslr bodies as digital does change quickly.
I made the mistake of taking Nikon L19 to my first trip to ukraine ( thinking small size be more useful than dslr ) . All the evening photos were awful thanks to small sensor 1/2.5" and no manual settings.
Maybe future firmware updates may help with ADR issues? Can you do ADR in Nikon Capture NX2 after taking pictures in raw?
This is my first post here but I am very happy to join this forum.

Dan

very true

I agree with you there, gentoo, but that is a subjective review vs the objective specs of sensors.

I'm not always sure about dpreview either. For example, most give the 70-200 very high marks while dpreview says it's only fair. I find it better than fair.

mb - what evidence do you have those cameras all share the same sensor? A cursory check on dpreview shows the D60 and D200 sensors have a different number of physical light wells.
Another quick glance at dxomark shows the D200 with a significantly better low-light ISO _sensor_ score than the D40x with the D60 somewhere in between.
Again, dpreview and dxomark show the D80 at a slightly different resolution still.

Not saying this evidence is a slam-dunk, but it makes me wonder if the sensors are more than the same family. Same line? Sure. Same generation? I can believe that. But I see some decent evidence against them being the identical sensor. Point being if it ain't the same silicon, you can't assume same performance.

KR is a guy who was paid by Nikon and lived very good couple of years by reviewing and promoting Nikon gear and then something happened.
D3000 has the same CCD sensor not only as D40x, D60 or D80 but as D200 too, and from what I have seen noise performance is good (better then current Sony, Canon or Olympus models in the same class).
I don’t know what he has done to produce those images and I don’t really care; D3000 may not be a quantum leap forward but is a very descent first time DSLR.

"Gomer Pyle" makes over $300USD A DAY just by people clicking over to his website! His site is worth 6 figures a year, so yes he BS a review to get the web traffic going.

"The only time I actually get annoyed is when posts are not read carefully then a conclusion is drawn tht isn't correct. Case in point." Um OK, whatever that Daft point means...

Pabnj and Willis, I hear what your saying and I agree with you guys. Anyway I'm not losing sleep over someone's camera "review"

There could be dozens of reasons to explain Gomer Pyle's conclusions, none of which would make the D3000 a lousy camera. So before we all wear-out our keyboards speculating, I’d say we wait for Thom Hogan’s review. At least if he sees something out of the ordinary, he’ll call Nikon directly for an explanation just like he did with the D80 when it came to the amp noise issue. I really have no faith in Gomer Pyle, or his damn monkey. Personally I am in favor of Thom Hogan's basketball.

The D3k has the (presumeably) same 10mp CCD sensor of the D40X\D60\D80. That's why I'm so confused by the test results.

My D80 (when its meter behaves) isn't any noisier than my D40. So something doesn't seem quite right.

"I think over the weekend someone discovered a nice feature in their D300 that opened up new possibilities that most don't understand yeah?"

I know where you are going with that statement, and my experiments are not fully done yet. I even e-mailed Thom Hogan for his input, and was gracious enough to respond so I will check back with you later. I have a very analytical mind, it’s not good enough for me to know I have some feature available, I have to know exactly how it works, and what exactly it does before I am happy.

["Well no it isn't. But its where all the noise comes from. Software figures out how to deal with the noise... You can turn the D40's NR off (at least I can on some of my Nikons... never tried it on my D40, but I assume it is the same). If you wanted a truly controlled experiment, you would do that to both cameras.

Ken knows this. He's done it in several of his previous reviews. He doesn't bother to address it here.

Comparing cameras out of the box is useful, but only half the story. Is the D3k inherently noisier than the D40? You would expect it to be a little bit noisier on account of its extra MP's. But this review doesn't tell me how much noise is making it into the shot before software starts dealing with it. The reason his conclusions don't ring true to me is that I don't remember anybody complaining that the D40x\D60 was any noisier than the D40, so I don't understand why the D3k would be.

It also bothers me that the D3000 shots are all clearly overexposed. The highlights on the left side of the monkey's face are completely blown out (not that this bodes well for the D3k, but it makes a direct comparison a little more difficult."]

Willis, I think I see what you're saying now. I don't remember correctly but I don't think the D40 has a controllable NR setting in the menus. I'd have to look at my roommates to be sure though.

The D40x and D60 had their sensors tweaked I believe. Not sure in what way though and I've not used either of them to be able to remark on their noise. So I guess what you're saying does make some sense to me now that you've explained it so well. If the D40x and D60 don't have much more noise at 10MP, why would the D3k have more at just 12MP? An extra 2 MP should not increase noise by that much, I think that's what you may be saying and if it is, I agree with that.

"Ken Rockwell over-simplifies photography and diminishes the technical expertise of a paid professional. He inspires the do-it-yourselfers, and probably makes a handsome living doing it. If you are a paid photographer, or aspire to being one, Ken Rockwell IS NOT your friend because he knocks all of the technical knowledge you worked so hard to gain."

That statement makes perfect sense pabnj ;)

The rest of your post makes sense as well. KR does say that tripods are no longer necessary. Try doing certain wildlife shots. Yes I do most of mine without a tripod but at times I really do need it. He's also one of those that says that one thing that gets to me like nothing else; "just get closer". Anyone who shoots wildlife knows what an idiotic statement that is.

He does however offer some good knowledge as he seems to understand the technology in cameras better than most. I think over the weekend someone discovered a nice feature in their D300 that opened up new possibilities that most don't understand yeah? LOL JK but it goes to show that even Gomer Pyle can know a few things here and there.

Oh and on another note, let me address what someone said earlier because I forgot wehn I got into this discussion. When I called KR a fool, it was in response to a picture he took and claimed it was in Taiwan when it was at Sea World. In other words, it was in response to a specific misnamed shot. Sorry for the confusion.