Built-in-camera VR/IS/SR or built-in-lens VR/IS/SR?

[vassilli]

Hello denizens of SA. First time poster here. Apologies if I'm posting in the wrong section. If I am, please direct me in the right direction. :redface:

Anyway, I'm currently in a predicament over choosing between 2 DSLRs. Pentax K100D or Nikon D40. Both have their pros and cons. I’ve done some relative research online but unfortunately, the result from my research isn't enough for me to make a decision yet. Money is an issue for me. So I don't think I can consider anything above the price range of those 2 DSLRs. So here I am asking for some relative experiences and opinions of people who may have been using either cameras or both.

From my current research, the D40 is a very formidable camera. Able to handle relatively high ISO, user friendly for newbies (like me), lightweight and has a wide range of lenses to choose from which includes 3rd party lenses compatibility. But the thing that I'm not too happy about the D40 is the lack of built-in-camera Shake Reduction (or Vibration Reduction as Nikon would call it) which is necessary when trying to shoot in low-light conditions without a flash/tripod. Nikon's solution to that is having VR in their lenses. The problem that I have with that solution is that VR lenses just aren't too pocket-friendly. Meaning that if in the future I decide to upgrade my lens, and I want VR with that lens, it would cost me a rather significant amount of cash for every new lens I might purchase for the D40.

However K100D is a bit of the opposite to the D40. With a slightly higher learning curve (I hate their menu;)), built-in SR, a solid body and has complete AF compatibility with all Pentax lenses ever made. Unlike the D40 which only favours AF-S or AF-I lenses if you want AF. Due to the fact that since SR is built-in the camera body, lenses that I might want to purchase as upgrades in the future would be relatively cheaper because I won't need to buy lenses that has built-in SR.

Which now bring me to this question, which is better? Built-in-camera SR/IS/VR or built-in-lens SR/IS/VR. Or is the difference between both of them negligible in terms how it affects picture quality?

Apologies for the long and winded post and thank you for reading/replying to this post. Cheers! :redface:

V

[tresca]

I think you should take in consideration on the future upgrade of your camera. For D40, it cant be auto focus for some prime lens i.e. AF 50mm f1.8, AF 85mm f1.4 etc. You can find variety of used lens in the market for nikkor lens and also 3rd party lens.

How about consider some camera say D50 to fit your budget? Some used camera condition is very good and almost like new if you dont mind it is an used camera.

Good luck

[noordin]

It looks like you're going to do photography for a long time. So it's the system you have to look at. Nikon has a much wider system and more third party lenses on top of their own array of lenses. But do not start with a D40 because it's a dead end because the type of Nikon lenses it can use is restrictive. Get a D50, it's a much better option.

Pentax has been building great cameras all these while but their marketing has been poor. But they have been bought over by Hoya and they now have the budget to be a world player again. The K100D is a good camera, certainly better than the D40. the good thing about Pentax is that their lenses are so much cheaper than Nikon. But third party lens are hard to find for Pentax. There are many satisfied Pentax owners here so you can always get help if you should decide on Pentax.

[ShutterClicker]

I seconded unc noordin here..I am a pentax k100d super user. There's been rave review recently by Digital Camera Malaysia. I am glad that my purchase is justified as I can purchase old lenses that is as old as 20 years ago and still able to autofocus with it. ex SMC F 50mm f1.7

There is a pancake lens DA 40mm f2.8 ..wonderfully built prime for potraits.

Lenses are a little hard to find but follow the threads in Photomalaysia( admin : don't ban me..just suggesting resources) in pentax and u can easily find those lenses there.. i find my lenses in ebay ..3 purchases and all arrived safe and sound.

11 autfocus points with 9 cross point similar like olympus e 3 with 11 cross point. vs the D40 measly 3 points only.

Body comes with a stainles steel cage wrapped in high quality plastic definitely felt better than the d40 plasticky feel.

ISO 200 - 3200...even at 3200 ...u get some grains only ..usable..

There's a range of lenses...especially manual lenses to play with multiplie brands too
cosina, vivitar, practica , ricoh, pentax, tokina - some of the older lenses..

My plan is to get the SMC F AF convertor which is able to convert any manual lenses to autofocus on my k100d super and since manual and screw mount primes are very cheap these are worthy investment to look into.


Cons: warm lighting indoors, lousy built in flash require a ext flash. very loud mirror slap, noisy autofocus but very fast.
AA batteries( i consider it a strength where many consider it a cons)

Strength : all of the above, solid built , fast 11 point autofocus, dust cleaning system, image stabilizer...

This is a value system and the amount of lenses available are huge and it's easier to own a range of lenses from pentax than nikon as the cost is quite expensive...compared to pentax prices.

[iwhizz]

if money is an issue for you, you should by pentax k100d which has built in SR. VR lense for nikon is a bit expensive. for comparison BO n kit lens for both pentak n nikon d40 is in the same price range..so i would go for pentax..go pentax go :) n if u want to buy K100D, go for K100D super

[raclette]

pentax got some great limited lenses too.

[gr2k]

if you're looking at the long run, start of with the D80 at least..you can get a used one under RM 2k and you won't have to upgrade body in awhile..

if money is really an issue, get a D50 (RM 1050 at YL Camera)..long-run-speaking IMHO, pentax is out of the question..i've known 2pentax and 3sony users who've changed to nikon/canon after a short time due to the limited line-up and compatibility of lenses/accessories/photographic equipment etc.)

if you're just gonna get a DSLR and you're pretty sure you'll be sticking with that (or you're not exactly gonna spend time in photography), then any brand to your preference would suffice..

IMHO, VR is negligable in most cases if you're shooting under 100mm..many many lenses don't have VR and yet people take great pictures with them..it's no issue and since DSLRs have variable ISO, make use of it ;)

[noruazumi]

wait... got VR _in_ the camera?
are you talking about AF Motor or Vibration Reduction system?

[gr2k]

wait... got VR _in_ the camera?
are you talking about AF Motor or Vibration Reduction system?

VR=IS=SSS=VC=SR=whatever fancy name all the brands come up with..

*basically meaning 'image stabalisation feature' :)

[ShaolinTiger]

Technically speaking VR/IS in the lens is a better solution, but in the body is much cheaper..