Back in 2006 I was looking to buy my first digital SLR as I felt I had reached the limit of what I could do with my current digital compact camera as while I was happy with the image quality, I was missing shots due to to slow performance. I wanted something with faster responses, better autofocus and I wanted to get some blurrier backgrounds like I used to with my old film SLR in the early 90’s. The only problem was the cost… DSLRs were still very expensive with the big manufacturers concentrating on the top end of the market to justify the cost of the technology and beginner models only just making it below $1,000 ($1,500 in 2025 money).
Then Nikon announced the D40 at a breakthrough price…
The Camera World in Late 2006
It’s easy to look back at old cameras and and their specifications and wonder why someone would have bought X when Y clearly had better specifications but that conveniently ignores pricing…
Let’s take a look at the prices Nikon and Canon were charging for their DSLR’s at various product levels, from full on pro level bodies down to their beginner offerings. Note that the EOS 350D in the table below only got a price reduction to the amount shown after the 400D launched and would later get a further cut to $699 in response to the Nikon D40 and later D40X.
| Make/Model | Type | Megapixels/ Sensor Size | Price in 2006 | Price – inflation adjusted to 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nikon D2xs | Pro DSLR | 12 / APS-C | $4,699 body only | $7,499 |
| Canon EOS 1D Mark IIn | Pro DSLR | 8 / APS-C | $3,999 body only | $6,399 |
| Canon EOS 5D | Semi Pro DSLR | 12 / FF | $3,299 body only | $5,299 |
| Nikon D200 | Semi Pro DSLR | 10 / APS-C | $1,699 body only | $2,699 |
| Canon EOS 30D | Enthusiast DSLR | 8 / APS-C | $999 body only | $1,599 |
| Nikon D80 | Enthusiast DSLR | 10 / APS-C | $999 body only | $1,599 |
| Canon EOS 400D (Rebel XTi) | Beginner DSLR | 10 / APS-C | $899 with 1 lens: EFS 18-55mm | $1,449 |
| Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT) | Beginner DSLR | 8 / APS-C | $799 with 1 lens: EFS 18-55mm | $1,299 |
| Nikon D40 | Beginner DSLR | 6 / APS-C | $599 with 1 lens: AFS 18-55mm $799 with 2 lens: AFS 18-55mm AFS 55-200mm VR | $999 $1,299 |
| Canon PowerShot G7 | Point and Shoot | 10 / 1/1.8″ | $549 | $899 |
| Nikon Coolpix P3 | Point and Shoot | 8 / 1/1.8″ | $499 | $799 |
It was only $50-$100 more than a premium digital compact camera, and actually less than I had paid for my Olympus 8080WZ compact just 2 years before! The problem was the megapixel count, at just 6 megapixels it had fewer than my Olympus which packed 8 million and it didn’t make sense to me to go backwards. Canons offering, although $200 or 1/3rd more expensive was at least 8 megapixels. This was the height of the megapixel wars and I didn’t yet understand that this simply wasn’t important.
I scoured the review sites I used to read, DPReview, Imaging Resource, CameraLabs and upon Googling, a site I wasn’t previously familiar with run by a photographer called Thom Hogan and another called Ken Rockwell. All these reviews suggested the D40 was a great camera but it was Ken Rockwell in particular who convinced me that I didn’t need more pixels and that the higher quality 18-55 Nikon kit lens vs the Canon 18-55 was more important to the photo quality. While he seemed to have some very strong opinions, not all of which I agreed with, I did understand his view that the photographers eye and skill is what makes great images, not camera features and megapixels. Given the pricing at the time, my choices were either sticking with my compact camera or going with the D40 so the point was moot…
To give context from the time here are some quotes from their articles:
DPReview gave the camera a “Highly Recommended” rating and an excellent value assessment:
In everyday use the D40 is just what it set out to be, a very capable, compact, lightweight and easy to use camera which makes a perfect first step for anyone wanting to get into digital SLR photography. It provides enough control and a large enough range of manual settings to enable you to experiment and learn but also helps you to take great pictures in the process. It’s one of those cameras you can just pick up and start shooting without fuss, that you can hand to a friend who’s never used an SLR and know they’ll be able to do the same. All of this and a pretty decent kit lens for $600, I’d say it’s a bit of a bargain.
Imaging Resource gave it a “Dave’s Pick” rating:
I can tell you that the Nikon D40 is one of the finest family cameras on the market. I’ve really enjoyed shooting with it, and would seriously consider it as a second camera to something like a D80, D200, or 30D. Those cameras are great for more serious work, but they’re also more bulky. The D40 is a camera for capturing fun and family. Its size and design are better suited for such duty. And you can still slap high quality glass on it and shoot with the pros on occasion if you like. The Nikon D40 is perfect for slipping into a small daypack for a hike or picnic. It doesn’t take a lot of space, and it comes out of the bag quickly. It focuses and shoots so quietly, you’re less likely to scare the animals you’re trying to capture. Nikon has some excellent inexpensive lenses to add to your kit for just such a purpose
Nikon really shocked the market with the D40. We’ve been pleasantly surprised with its excellent performance in low light and its simple grace as a day-to-day shooter. Then we remind ourselves that all this quality comes at less than $600, and we shake ourselves awake. The Nikon D40 is one great camera!
The Nikon D40 stands up well against the competition — even those with higher resolution — with great image quality at all speeds, and near-perfect utility as a family camera. It’s tough to ask for more. The Nikon D40 lives up to our expectations, and even exceeds them.
Thom Hogan said:
The D40 is likely to be Nikon’s only 6mp and entry-level DSLR for awhile. As such, it goes up against the Pentax K100 series, used bodies, high-end compact digicams, and a host of other products. And I think it’ll hold its own.
First, the image quality is excellent. Nikon has proven once again that they know how to suck every last little bit of quality out of the 6mp sensors they’ve been using for more than four years. And amazingly, the included kit lens doesn’t let the sensor down. For those that aren’t trying to shoot wall murals and are satisfied with the size prints you’d get off, say, a really good desktop inkjet, there’s nothing to complain about in image quality until you get to ISO 3200, and even then some will find it usable at smaller print sizes.
But the impressive thing about the D40 is that it is arguably the best-designed small camera to date. Handwise, it’s perfect. The viewfinder is good, if not up to the D200 level. The controls are sensible and what we Nikon users expect. And the moving of the top LCD to the color LCD, while still with some slightly rough edges, turns out to be a lot more useful than you’d expect. As I note in the handling section, you can do 99% of the settings you’re likely to make while shooting without dropping into the actual menus. Nikon almost hit a home run with that, and frankly, why their top end Coolpix cameras don’t borrow the best aspects of this design I don’t know. Color, noise, and resolution are quite good, and you have enough control over the first two items to get excellent image quality.
Ken Rockwell, a popular and sometimes controversial but independent photography reviewer, strongly recommended the D40:
My favorite SLR camera just happens to be the cheapest SLR camera: the incomparable Nikon D40.
Even with 6 megapixels I can make stunning 12 x 18″ prints. If you can’t make a sharp shot with the D40, a more expensive camera isn’t likely to help you. Contrary to what salespeople try to get you to believe, megapixels have nothing to do with sharpness.
This is all you really need. I go on vacations for a week at a time with my super-lightweight D40, 18-55mm and SB-400 flash, and never miss anything. In fact, I love not having to carry more gear! The D40 battery lasts so long, about 500 – 1,000 shots, that you might be able to leave the charger at home if you’re feeling lucky.
No one, not even me who uses his cameras all day long, needs anything better than a D40. Guys who own fancy cameras may not have the confidence to admit it and poke fun at the D40, but I love it.
I own fancier cameras because they make it even easier to do fringe-element things, like make 6-foot-wide prints that are still sharp close up (prints from a D40 look great at any size when seen from a reasonable distance), or shoot with bizarre wide angle lenses, or burn away at 10 frames per second for sports. No one needs this, but if you have the cash or use cameras so much that even little improvements are appreciated, go for it.
My Experience
I was thrilled with the quality of the photos I got from the D40 and it was lightning fast vs my compact, and it became a gateway drug into photography. When I had the compact camera I would use it to take photographs of my trips, whereas with the DSLR I took trips specifically to take photographs. I started taking it with me to work, commuting in extremely early so I could wander around London at sunrise and later at sunset. I started buying books like “The Photographers Eye” to understand composition and what actually makes a good photograph.
What about my initial worry, the limited resolution? The 6 megapixels were no problems at all, bear in mind I had a particularly expensive and high res Apple screen at that time at 1920×1200 resolution which was around 2 megapixels or 1/3rd of the cameras output so had to zoom and scroll as much as you would today editing a 24 megapixel image on a 4k monitor (which is 8 megapixels).
I started taking so many photos that within a year I felt I had outgrown the D40, wanting more direct controls, more focusing points for sports tracking along with a faster frame rate. I can see now that there was also some GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) going on as well plus my business had been doing well and I now had some money burning a hole in my pocket…
I traded the D40 in at Greys of Westminster for a D200 and an 18-200mm VR lens (a massive investment of about $3,200 in 2025 money) and as much as I have an even greater attachment to my D200 I do have fond memories of this light, simple, quality beginners kit. I started to wonder… would it wow me again today, especially with modern post processing software, given I have been impressed by some old digital point and shoots in this manner? Only one way to find out… so I went on the hunt for one!
The Hunt
My first stop was EBay of course, with examples of the body selling for around $40, or with the kit lens for $60 or so. Shipping would take this to $80 but none of the cameras looked to be in great condition and were seemingly sold by non photography people who claimed they couldn’t test them properly or didn’t have the charger. Then there were some up at $400 with a couple of lenses and with ads clearly designed to scam the unwary into buying obsolete tech at an outrageous price without realizing it. The best option would likely be importing from Japan but they were going to cost me close to $140, too much for what the camera is.
Patience pays off however and I came across a local ad for $100. It came with two lenses, a bag (which I expected to likely need to throw away) and the battery and charger but with the charger cable missing and consequently it was being sold as untested. It all looked in beautiful condition, well cared for as it were, so I figured that it was worth a look given it was only an hours drive.
The camera and lenses were unmarked, the Nikon bag they had been stored in was clean and frankly new looking with no smells. I noticed the lenses were the later VR versions, which was interesting but I decided to gamble on a bit more discount from what was already a good price by pointing out the whole lot was untested and the battery having been left for so many years was most likely dead and showed them the price of a new one on EBay, offering them $80 cash. We settled on $90 and the kit came home with me. They told me they had sold another newer camera but the buyer didn’t want the lenses so made an offer on the body only while suggesting they sell them with this camera.
I later realized these lenses were much newer than the D40 and this explains why. More on that in a moment…
What Did I Get?
I essentially got the “twin lens” kit that would originally have retailed for $799 however with newer, upgraded versions of both lenses which are likely from around 2015:
- Nikon D40 camera body in flawless condition
- Nikon AF-S DX 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G VR ii lens in flawless condition
- Nikon AF-S DX 55-200mm 1:4-5.6G VR ii lens in flawless condition
- Nikon MH-23 battery charger – missing “figure of eight” power cable
- Nikon EN-EL9 battery
- Nikon DSLR shoulder bag in black and yellow – excellent condition
So if I were buying it all separately on EBay it would be around $225 according to recent “sold” prices, but more realistically, sold together as a kit, they have gone for around $180, however for that price the 18-55 would be the old non VR version. In any case, for $90 it seems I got a bargain!
But Does it Work?
I found a spare “figure of eight” power cable, charged up the battery for a couple of hours, popped in a 32GB SDHC card, crossed my fingers, flicked on the power switch and within a second the screen had lit up and was prompting me for the time. Once I had entered that in it said “lens not attached” which was worrying as the 18-55 lens was attached, but the I realized this version 2 of the VR lens collapses down for even easier transportation and once I had unlocked and extended it the error message went away. I took a few test shots at both wide and tele ends of the zoom range, changed the aperture, made sure it focused both distant and close-up and finally checked the VR was working (should stabilize the image when you half press the shutter) and all was good. I swapped over to the 55-200 and tested again and all seemed good.
There were a couple of dust spots in the viewfinder but they were easily cleared with an air blower and checking the sensor for dust did show maybe half a dozen but an air blower followed by a couple of sensor cleaning swabs had that down to two albeit in new positions. I’ll order another cleaning kit and see if I can get it totally clean.
I have no idea how much charge the battery holds given its well over 15 years old, but it shows all bars on the screen so that’s promising.
I checked the shutter count and it has a little over 9,000 which is well below the 50,000 expected lifespan.
I don’t have time to put it through its paces right away due to some unfortunate family matters, but I will take some test shots in the next couple of weeks to see what it can do…
Be the first to comment