Nikon D40 to D5100... a worthwhile upgrade?

L

Lawrence7

Suspended / Banned
Messages
23
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys, I'm new to the forum. I was hoping you could offer me some advice on whether or not a Nikon D5100 is a worthwhile upgrade for me?

I currently have a Nikon D40 which always has my Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 attached. I have owned this camera since it was released.

I'm going to New York in August and I enjoy taking street and skyscraper photos there and would prefer a camera which offers me greater low-light performance and better overall image quality. I edit my photos in Lightroom and Photoshop and normally get them printed at 5"x7".

I cannot afford a higher-end Nikon so have been looking into buying a new Nikon D5100 (body only) for £380.

- Will I notice a big difference in image quality with the D5100?
- Will the new specs and features the D5100 has offer me a noticeable improvement over the D40?

Cheers
 
Last edited:
I have already looked at that page and the specs look good, but how much better would the overall image quality be? is it worthwhile shelling out £380 for this camera?
 
I think you would notice a difference for the better. The sensor in the D5100 is a much newer design than the D40 and the low light capacity is much improved. However, you have to ask yourself whether you feel that the money is worth spending, would you be better off investing in more lenses or looking secondhand at a D90 for example (they have 2 at MPB for £389 in mint condition).

Cheers

Andy
 
Using the same lens and shot at low iso in good light, printed to 5x7 I don't think you'll notice any difference whatsoever.

However, it's the situations where the camera is pushed a little harder that you will reap the benefits. I would say that ISO performance is going to be anything up to about 3 stops better. Not only will this show in poor light when you're pushing iso to the max but it will also allow you to shoot at much higher shutter speeds in good light so you'll possibly see IQ gains there too. The AF system should be a lot better, particularly for moving subjects. The D5100 will also show better dynamic range in high contrast scenes.
 
Andysnap said:
I think you would notice a difference for the better. The sensor in the D5100 is a much newer design than the D40 and the low light capacity is much improved. However, you have to ask yourself whether you feel that the money is worth spending, would you be better off investing in more lenses or looking secondhand at a D90 for example (they have 2 at MPB for £389 in mint condition).

Cheers

Andy
Click to expand...

I have only recently purchased the 35mm f/1.8 which I use all the time now and I am extremely happy with the results I have been getting from it. I think I will hold off buying any new glass for now until I get some more use out of it.

Yes, I have seen that I can buy a used excellent condition D90 off eBay for roughly the same price.

- Would the D90 be a better camera for someone of my needs? I am aware it comes with the in-built focus motor, although this is not a major selling point to me. On http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D5100-vs-Nikon_D90 it comes out with the D5100 been the winner specification wise.

My decision really comes down between the D90 or D5100 as I can get them for the same price.

Any help would be appreciated.
 
gad-westy said:
Using the same lens and shot at low iso in good light, printed to 5x7 I don't think you'll notice any difference whatsoever.

However, it's the situations where the camera is pushed a little harder that you will reap the benefits. I would say that ISO performance is going to be anything up to about 3 stops better. Not only will this show in poor light when you're pushing iso to the max but it will also allow you to shoot at much higher shutter speeds in good light so you'll possibly see IQ gains there too. The AF system should be a lot better, particularly for moving subjects. The D5100 will also show better dynamic range in high contrast scenes.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply.

I do enjoy shooting in low-light and access to a high ISO would be a big advantage to me. I also want to get into night time photography of the stars and milkyway with long shutter speeds.
 
Lawrence7 said:
Thanks for your reply.

I do enjoy shooting in low-light and access to a high ISO would be a big advantage to me. I also want to get into night time photography of the stars and milkyway with long shutter speeds.
Click to expand...

High ISO stuff will be hugely better, so much so that it will change your whole approach to low light photography.

Long exposures, I have heard some reports that suggest that the D40 is particularly good in terms of controlling long exposure noise so maybe you won't see any benefit there unless you're also using higher iso's.
 
a D90 would be more worthwhile, it has a lot of useful features the D5100 doesn't have and can be picked up for a reasonable price second hand
 
Of course everyone will have their own opinion but for what its worth mine would be to buy new just for the sake of a peace of mind. I think the D90 is a great camera (I had one for a couple of years) but the D5100 is newer and will come with the Nikon guarantee and will definitely be a step (or even 2) from the D40.

Cheers

Andy
 
callumduff said:
a D90 would be more worthwhile, it has a lot of useful features the D5100 doesn't have and can be picked up for a reasonable price second hand
Click to expand...

The thing is, for all the advantages that the D90 offers, the OP specifically mentions low light ability and the D5100 is comfortably better in that regard.
 
I went from D40 to D5000 and the increase in AF points alone was well worth it. Menu diving and previewing images are almost instant too, compared to the more sluggish D40.

I can only imagine the D5100 with the much improved sensor would be a very good upgrade. The 35mm 1.8 is also permanently attached to my camera. Sometimes I wonder why I bother keeping the rest of my lenses at all :)
 
If you were shooting in good even light then you may not notice vast difference between the 2 cameras. However in New York you will be dealing with high contrast scenes ranging from sun reflected of the tops of buildings to deep shadow at street level. With this type of photography the D5100 is going to much much better it has an extra 3 stops of dynamic range and the shadow noise will be much lower allowing much more enhancement of the shadow detail. Not to mention the extra 10Mpix, the tilting screen and the good deals on the D5100 at the moment.
 
gad-westy said:
The thing is, for all the advantages that the D90 offers, the OP specifically mentions low light ability and the D5100 is comfortably better in that regard.
Click to expand...

this may be true but the D90 still has many more advantages over the D5100
 
Thought I'd update this topic in case any other D40 users are looking to upgrade like I was.

I finally purchased the D5100 for £417 (body only) from Amazon and received it yesterday. I use it with a Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 lens.

I have only tried it out for one day and I am already happy with its overall performance. Here are some new features that I like...

- Image Quality - When viewing on my 27" iMac screen they appear a lot sharper and the colours are more natural and pleasing. I don't have to use Lightroom 4 as much to get the image I'm after. The ISO performance on this camera is amazing, light years ahead of my D40 which is a massive plus for me as I enjoy taking low-light photography.

- Articulated Screen - Before purchasing the camera this feature didn't interest me and I did see it as a bit of a gimmick but it is brilliant and is useful regardless of whether you shoot video or not. The screen quality is also fantastic with its high resolution.

- Overall Speed of Camera - the CPU in the camera is obviously faster than my D40 and it makes browsing in Playback mode smoother and a nicer overall experience.

So yeah, really happy with the D5100 so far and I am looking forward to getting some good photos with it and taking it on holiday with me. I would recommend this camera as a great upgrade from the D40.
 
Last edited:
Great stuff. I'm using one a lot at the moment and I've been quite impressed with it. I've never been interested in video at all but I must admit I've been playing around with it a fair bit. Love shooting video on a wide aperture lens, manual focus. They're invariably the dullest videos ever but I like it! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top