what's the stats on the kit lens?

*wondering if my 3 old Nikkor lenses from my broken FE body would work on this camera*

18-105 VR (image stabilized)- geek review here.

danf - yes, yes they will. Nikon's bayonet mounts are compatible with lenses back to (I believe) 1974.

they may not AF but they'll mount and most will meter. manual focus is actually preferable in a number of situations, too (shooting macro comes to mind)

and here's an exhaustive chart from Ken Rockwell listing which lenses will work on what Nikon bodies, and exactly how.

enjoy!

I so want a digital SLR. I don't know anything about photography or lenses or altering photos. I just want a camera to zoom in on my kids and one that takes beautiful pics. This is very cool though, a quality video camera and an SLR for not that much cash. A thousand dollars still gives me sticker shock but it's not crazy. I can't remember from the article if that price comes with a lens.

We have a great photography program in our town and a great photography museum. I need to take a basic class.

Lori: the grand is just for the body. Current is $1300 with kit lens. With an dSLR, as you probably know, it's not the body that's expensive but the glass that will kill you (trust me on this).

I don't know about shooting "great" video just yet with this - apparently the autofocus kicks off while the mirror is locked up, meaning you'd have to track a moving subject with manual focus - and that's something I've only seen very experienced sports photographers do well.

but still... damn.

This sounds really cool, but I'm going to wait for the next version:

"Exposure is fixed for the length of the clip, it has monaural sound, and you can only focus manually while shooting..."

The resolution is a great plus, but with that pricetag I'm going to wait for stereo and autofocus/the ability to change exposure.

I don't know about shooting "great" video just yet with this - apparently the autofocus kicks off while the mirror is locked up, meaning you'd have to track a moving subject with manual focus - and that's something I've only seen very experienced sports photographers do well.

Oh. I see. I think I started skimming at the video part. I'm definitely not an experienced sports photographer.

I read a couple of blogs with beautiful photography. I've always wanted a fancy camera that can create the same kinds of images of kids, food, and other mundane things. I have a regular Nikon SLR, but I have no idea what I'm doing and rarely use it because it's not digital. I haven't used it since it came back from repairs. I dropped it. Graceful with cameras I am not.

I've always wanted a fancy camera...

That's because those folks on those blogs know how to take beautiful photographs. It has nothing to do with the equipment. I've seen a lot of people (and I do it myself, too) who shoot what amounts to throwaways with thousands of dollars worth of equipment. Sometimes this doesn't matter, but the point is: Yes! Take a class! And use the film body you HAVE, don't think that thousands of bucks worth of spendy is going to improve your shots. It doesn't.

Shot with a $14 plastic camera.

Again with the plastic toys.

Shot with a cellphone camera (no, really!)

another cellphone shot

a perfectly mundane snapshot made with my D70

and a perfectly mundane snapshot from close to $4000 worth of equipment.

Wow, these are great. I love the Ferris wheel shot. Yeah, I definitely need to take a class. Our community college, now a state college, has a very, good "renowned" program. I think they have leisure classes. Photography 101 would be good. :-)

Rant: I wish dSLRs came with more manual-friendly features like old film SLRs. I have the Nikon D40. The kit lens and focusing screen are really not set up well for manual focus, and the damn autofocus is always focusing not where I want. I liked my old Olympus OM-1 with the shutter speed and aperature setting where I want them. I haven't been able to learn to do those things well with the D40 controls. I guess I'm just a luddite. I might be taking better pictures with my D40 than with my old point-and-shoot (nikon coolpix 995), but it's not like night and day.

D40s (or the latest model in the D40 group, whatever they call it) are cheap now, I think, Lori. Have you checked ebay for a used dSLR? There should be lots of used ones coming up there these days. (Not that I trust ebay; got burned on a lens and never went back.)

And, yeah, I want this camera, though mainly for the image stabilization.

oh and another thing, take a class with your film body, and let the "limitation" of shooting film teach you how to make good shots THE FIRST TIME.

I don't have the time, or the setup, or the cash, or the inclination to shoot film. However, I do think the 'take-a-million-pictures-and-delete-95%-of-them-eventually-you're-bound-to-figure-it-out' mentality of the digital SLR crowd does a vast disservice to the advanced novice / intermediate learner types (of which I consider myself). This theory tends to forget one thing: only perfect practise truly makes perfect.

These days I deliberately avoid filling up entire cards with shit shots, just because I'm trying to actually learn how to frame and compose properly in-camera.

oh and DarkForest - get a "plastic fantastic" 50mm f/1.8 prime. Shoot with that for a year, it has great MF capabilities and it's only $100. You can't go wrong. I think it works fine on a D40 if I'm not mistaken.

I credit that lens for vastly shortening my learning curve the first year I had my dSLR.

I see the D40x is still pretty expensive, but the D40 is fairly cheap.

lfr: A 50mm f1.8 manual focus lens would be great fun on the D40. Could probably shoot in real low light and do some nice natural light portraits. Broke as I am, I'll have to consider it.

I picked up a plastic "Diana" camera (actually the See camera clone, but I think they're identical) recently for 50 cents at a junk store. I need to try it out. But I don't expect to get anything as nice as that Holga ferris wheel shot.