The Nikon D40x is a small framed camera. But if one wants the auto focus feature, you need to buy the lenses with this built in to them. I’m sure I just screwed that description up, but hopefully you get the point.

Thanks for the IS points. Well taken. I’d love to use a tri-pod, but it’s sorta hard to carry around on the tubes in London, or down crowed streets in Munich or Prague.

The Rebel is looking better all the time.

Not positive, but I think Sony is using Karl Zies(sp?) lenses?

I think you might have a slight misconception about the Nikon and autofocus. The Canon is essentially the same - autofocus is lens-dependent. If the lens doesn't have it, that's it. That said, almost all consumer lenses in production today are autofocusing lenses. The camera bodies themselves vary as to how many autofocus points are in the viewfinder, the sensitivity of each of those points and how you can choose the points, but the lenses contain the motors that actually focus the glass. As such, autofocus speed can vary depending on the lens, but even the slower autofocus lenses generally focus faster than most point-and-shoot digicams. And Nikon also has IS (they call it VR) lenses, but Canon rules the roost when it comes to the number of IS lenses available, particularly on the telephoto/super-telephoto end.

Some of the Sony's lenses are Karl Zeiss, but not all. I'd say Sony probably has the best shot of actually becoming a contender in the DSLR field simply because of it's size, but Canon and Nikon built their name on photography and are by far the dominant forces in the field.

As for me, I love my Canon 20D. Definitely try out cameras in a shop before you buy, though. I found the Rebel to be too small for my big hands, and felt the general Nikon layout wasn't as intuitive to me as the Canon one (though admittedly I've used nothing but Canons since the film days so of course I'm more comfortable with them).

Thanks Adam. I don't remember where I read that stuff about the Nikon D40x, but the reviewer made a point to call out that it takes a special type or size lens other than the rest of the Nikon line...., I wish I could remember where I saw that.... that was about the only negative comment the reviewer had to say about it though.

So what's wrong with Olympus? Do they suck?

Ya, that's where I saw that! So what do you think about that? Is it a big enough issue to drop that camera off my shopping list?

I live out in the boonies 300 miles from the nearest city where I can handle cameras so this information is helpful for when I do venture towards civilization and check these things out. I need to take a trip next week, so I’ll be looking then.

If I do pick up a canon next week, what lens would you recommend I pick up for multi use? I would like one lens that would get in the way while I’m being Joe Tourist in Germany this fall. One that’s good for scenery, buildings, people, beer tents and those dusk/night shots while wandering around the cities…. When I’m traveling, I don’t like to have much hanging off my neck if you know what I mean.

Thanks again Todd.

300 miles from the nearest city? My head is spinning.

Mike:
I'd lean towards the Rebel as well. Don't forget other lens manufacturers either to save some money....

Something like this might do the job for you... You can get it at a reputable dealer like B&H for $379.

So it's advisable to go with Sigma? I'd been planning on sticking with Canon lenses, whenever I have the disposable income for that instead of the other 14 expensive hobbies I have.

Thanks guys. The more I read up on these things, the Rebel seams like the logical choice. I’ve got to have image stabilization, regardless. Does that Sigma have it? I didn’t notice it noted anywhere.

Circling back to the Olympus Evolt 510. There’s not much written on it yet seeing how it isn’t available yet. One thing I did see however is they are calling it a four thirds frame. I know it’s smaller, but why call it 4/3’s? That’s larger than one to one. I don’t get it.

I have a Nikon D70, and I absolutely love the thing. Best camera I've ever owned. Even though it's a few years old, it's still a marvelous beast. 5MP is plenty for 8x10 and 11x14 prints, and I seldom do much cropping, so I'm perfectly happy. Easy operation, but allows as much manual control as I want. Great colors, excellent contrast, and amazingly-fast electronics. Ready to snap a pic in less than 1 second. When I bought it was $1k, which was more than I had ever spent on a camera, but it took about an hour to realize that it was worth every penny.

If you're starting out, I'd suggest the same thing as the others, look at the lenses and prices of Canon and Nikon, and pick which ever 'system' fits your needs best. Do you have friends that have a Canon SLR? An old uncle that has tons of old Nikon gear? That might be a factor as you could share lenses with them. I took a peek at Nikon's page regarding D40 lens compatibility...
D40x:
"Nikon F mount with AF coupling and AF contacts Type G or D AF Nikkor: 1) AF-S, AF-I: All functions supported; 2) Other Type G or D AF Nikkor: All functions supported except autofocus; 3) PC Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/2.8D: Can only be used in mode M; all other functions supported except autofocus; 4) Other AF Nikkor*¹/AI-P Nikkor: All functions supported except autofocus and 3D Color Matrix Metering II; 5) Non-CPU: Can be used in mode M, but exposure meter does not function; electronic range finder can be used if maximum aperture is f/5.6 or faster; 6) IX Nikkor lenses cannot be used
*¹ Excluding lenses for F3AF"

Ok, most modern current lenses are AF-S or AF-I, and those should work perfectly with the D40. But a few lenses are still 'D', like the 50mm 1.8 that I mention below. That's a bit of an issue because the autofocus won't work. Otherwise it's fine. Nikon's image stabilization stuff are 'VR' lenses, and I don't see anything that would indicate that these wouldn't work with the D40, but I would be very careful about this. I'd try to email or talk to Nikon directly for clarification. My advice might be either make darn sure the D40 will work the the lenses you want, or to just save your pennies or bite the credit-card bullet and bump up to the D80.

When you buy an SLR, you're buying much more than just the camera, you're investing into that company's products. Canon and Nikon are the most established brands in the 'pro-sumer' area, so you can't go wrong with either.

As far as lenses go, I don't really know much about Canon glass. For Nikon, you can't beat the simple Nikkor 50mm 1.8 ($100) for razor-sharp optics and wide aperture. No zoom, so it's all about composition and optics. For dimmly lit museums where flash photography isn't allowed, you can still get great pix without necessarily needing a tripod. Really superb lens for next to nothing.

For general purpose, I have the 'kit' 18-70 lens and it's great except for a slight vignetting problem when it's wide open (dark corners). Very quick focusing, and takes lovely shots. I would check out the newer 18-135, as that will give you a nice top-end zoom. I also have their common and cheap 70-300mm lens, and it's just fine for what it is. Not the greatest and takes pretty soft pix, but it's certainly a darn long lens on the D70 (105-450mm equivalent)

I used to have a Sigma 28-300 on my old 35mm film Rebel, and it was a fine lens for most things. Nothing wrong at all with 3rd-party lenses, and some of them are very good, but I like the look and feel of the name brand ones better. I know from first-hand experience that the name-brand lenses hold their value better than the Sigma/Tamron lenses, should you ever decide to sell lenses.

If this is a 'once-in-a-lifetime' sort of trip, I would try to have a good wide-angle lens. I'd rent or borrow one if need be. On most digital SLR's, there's a magnification factor. The way the optics work magnifies the image compared to a traditional 35mm SLR. At least on the D70, the lens multiplication factor is 1.5x, which means that a 18-70 lens actually acts like a 27-105mm lens, this can be a problem for wide-angle shots, as 27mm isn't really all that wide. I doubt you'll ever feel a wanting for more telephoto, but I do for wide-angle. So, even though 18mm sounds pretty wide-angle, it really isn't. I'm thinking landscapes, cathedrals, etc; you're going to want some panoramic, wide-angle shots and from my experience that may be tricky with just an 18mm low end. The 12-24mm Nikkor would be awesome, but that's a $900+ lens.

Enjoy the camera and enjoy the trip. Just make sure you get the camera way before the trip so you can take a few hundred shots first and learn how the camera works!

Thanks again for the info. 4.3…got it Mark!

Peter,

One buddy has the Nikon D80, and another has the Canon 30D. Both of these guys have gone off the deep end with their systems and have more lenses, flashes, multipliers, double battery kits, etc….. than I can ever imagine needing, but understand how one can get carried away with a “hobby”. But anyway, I’ve played a little with both and thought they were just too big for lugging around while traveling. That’s why I’m looking at the little fellers. So I figured that I’d pick up a little guy for traveling, and possibly one of the full sized guys for around home shooting and I could use the same lenses. Then I stumbled onto the Olympus cameras while surfing reviews on the smaller cameras and they always seam to compare them to others, which the Evolts are compared. So although price does weigh in on my choice, it’s not the driver for looking at the small cameras. It's convenient carrying more than anything.

Thanks for all the information on Nikon, especially the lenses. That’s all very helpful. My fall trip isn’t really a trip of a lifetime or anything all that special. I like to travel and go somewhere every year for a few weeks. I took a pocket camera with me on last year’s trip and was very disappointed with the photos when I got home. I’m looking for a win-win here. IE: small enough for convenient traveling, but takes one hell of a picture and wont be a complete waste of money, or obsolete in 12 months. These Digital SLR's apear to be the best solution for me.

Here are my 2 cents.

I went on a trip to Europe for 3 weeks this year and wanted to get a decent digital camera that would not cost so much I had to eat bread and cheese on the trip. So, I looked at several options and ended up choosing the Nikon D40 for the following reasons:
• Resolution and quality-wise it met my needs. I wanted to take good quality photos while on vacation, but not something I would try to make a living from.
• It is "light weight" so I would actually use it and carry it around day-to-day (I still do even though I am now home, you never know when a great shop will pop up!).
• It was "affordable".
• I had no lenses. If I already had canon lenses I would have gone with Canon.
• I wanted a camera that would be easy for me to use and would “get out of my way” while trying to take photos. Meaning, I did not have to drill through 4 levels of menu from one photo to the next. Most of the time I set the camera to Aperture Priority and adjust the aperture until I get the speed and effect I want.

I figured if I got the D40 and actually kept up with the hobby for more than a year, then I'd see what was out there and get a "better" camera. There are things I would liked to have had such as depth of field preview and more auto focus sensors, but I really can’t say I feel a ‘lack’ because of it.

I read reviews on several sites (dpreview.com, dcresources.com, even the sometimes reviled kenrockwell.com, as well as various forums for nikon and canon) went to the store and held the cameras to get a feel for them, then purchased the D40. I have no regrets so far. Well, I’d love to get my hands on the nikkor 18-200mm DX VR lens, but don’t have the $1000.00 I’d need to get one!

If you like I can send you a link to my smugmug account and you can check out some of what I've shot.
james

I had a Canon Rebel XT for 2 years. I have had Canons all my life but I was never happy with the XT. Recently I bought a Nikon D40, not the 40x and I have been thrilled!! The pictures are honestly at least 10 times brighter, crisper and over all better. It could be that I have the settings more accurate on the Nikon but I think it is more. I love this camera. I bought the hard to get 18-200 VR lens to go with it although the 18-55 that comes with it is a very good lens. Go to Kenrockwell.com and read what he says about all the different cameras. You will not be dissapointed with the D40.

thanks for that tip. I enjoyed Ken Rockwell's take on his camera's and tech articles. Very informative. I find it refreshing to read reviews where the reviewer/user doen't try to up sell anything. That D40 sounds like a winner.

I caved and spent $850 on the 18-200 VR. How does one justify that much money for a lens? I don't know and don't know that I can logically. Having said that, I love the D40 and this lens is awesome. The pictures are unbelievable, sharp, crisp and just beautiful. The 18-55 took great pics too but this lens is fantastic. It did help that I sold the 18-55 on ebay so I recooped some of my money. Get one and just forget the cost. It's worth it!!!

OK, so I’ve been reading Ken Rockwell’s review on his “favorite” camera, the Nikon D40. He likes it better than the D40x, and I sorta understand why, but not entirely.

He says the D40 has a faster default ISO of 200 verses 100 and it has a faster sync speed. He also goes on to explain why the difference between 6 megapixels and 10 is not something to worry about unless someone wants to print images out larger than 8 X 11.

After looking at the D40x specifications, it has an ISO of 100, so what is Ken referring to? Why can’t I just select 200 if that’s so important.

Also, maybe it’s just plain over my head, but I don’t understand why this flash sync speed is so important to him. I don’t typically use a flash, unless it’s inside.

Am I over working this?? It’s not like I’m a professional or anything….

You have read through this right? Fantastic site for digital cameras.

Anyway, I would guess he's referring to the lowest ISO, not the only ISO. The D40 can do ISO settings of 100, 200,400,800,1600, and 3200. Auto and manual settings. That's a fine range. My D70's lowest setting is only 200, which has caused me problems for brightly lit scenes if I want to do blurred motion photography (think bridal-veil effect on a nicely lit waterfall). Having ISO 100 is great, as it means less noise (imager noise), and more flexibility. Changing the ISO on a digital camera affects the gain on the imager. You can be pretty safe just setting this to Auto and letting the camera deal with it. Even if it bumps up the ISO too high, it's a lot easier to digitally fix a grainy picture than it is a blurry one.

The higher the ISO, the more sensitive it is to light, meaning you need less light take a picture. But the higher the sensitivity, the more noise in the photo. Hey, it's just like speakers!

In looking at the link provided, I now understand the limitations of the D40 a bit better. The only lenses that will autofocus are the more expensive, newer variety that have their own internal motors. For instance, I have Nikon's good old 70-300mm telephoto that's a decent standard lens and is pretty cheap at less than a couple hundred bucks. That lens won't autofocus with the D40/x. To get a 70-300mm autofocus, you have to spend $500 for the AF-S version. Now that's a *much* nicer lens anyway, so it's probably worth the $$$ anyhow.

And you're completely right about the flash sync speed. If you don't a lot of flash photography (I don't, hate it. Flash to me is like an equalizer on a stereo: it artificially colors the material), then it shouldn't matter. It would matter if you're trying to do higher-speed stop-motion flash photography. Flashes can be useful for stopping motion, and a high sync speed means the flash can 'keep up' with the camera to freeze the action more effectively. Nikon is pretty famous for their flash technology, and so I'm sure the D40x's flash technology is fine for just about any situation. DPReview doesn't mention it as a 'Con', and they are quite nit-picky some times, so flash sync is a non-issue (IMHO).

If you're going the D40 route, I'd do the lens shopping first and make sure that the lens(es) that fit your needs and budget will autofocus on the camera. If they do, then the D40x is a truly excellent choice.

But again, even if you do use older lenses on the D40x, manual focusing IS NOT the end of the world. None of Ansel Adam's cameras were auto anything!

I've been having the same conversations and dilema with myself. D40 or D40x. I have the D40, love it and am totally happy with it. However, 10mp vs 6mp?? In my mind there has to be a difference although I understand that there isn't unless I'm blowing something up to 20x30, etc. Rockwell says that the megapixels isn't that important. The flash to me is not a big deal and the ISO isn't either. The D40x gives you 100 vs. the D40 at 200 which is a plus if it's bright bright outside. So far, I have not had an issue with 200 ISO. For me, the positive to moving "up" to the X is the 10 megapixels. In truth, that isn't a big plus except in my head so I'm sticking with the D40. I don't have older lenses so that's not an issue. All my lenses were Canon but I've sold all of them. Either way you win. My next step up is the D200 or whatever new model comes out first.

Yes Peter, I've read that review and others on that sight. Imaging Resources too.

I think I’m going to blow my $1000 budget….oh well, that’s my MO. Set budget, blow it to hell, feel guilty about it, rationalize it, justify it, then spend more on other crap I don’t need, then get drunk.

I’m still going to try and get my hands on all these cameras, but I’m guessing the D40x with kit lens, one of those fancy 200 mm lenses and the other fancy wide angle lens will end up on my CC before too long.

That little Olympus 510 is very attractive to me though, as well as the Rebel XTi. Too bad there are no reviews on the 510 yet.

….I better stay away from Amazon for a while until I can get my hands on these things.

That's the spirit!

If you're going to spend the coin for a nice system, you might as well spend what it takes to do it right. In six months (or three, or twelve - whatever!), you won't mind the extra few hundred bucks but you will appreciate that you bought what you really wanted. That's my motto anyway.

Compare the price of the Kit + zoom lens vs just the body and a nicer, 28-200ish lens. It's very nice to not have to carry around a bag of lenses if you don't have to, especially on vacation. I'd also take some time to play around with a 'regular' lens before spending the dough on a super-wide angle. You may find that you don't need it, as everyone's photographic vision is a bit different. While I might have complained about the 28mm not being wide enough, in the 2.5 years I've owned my D70 it's never bothered me enough to force buying a wider angle lens.

Photography is very much like home audio. There's really no limit to what you can spend on gear, and the laws of diminishing returns is in full affect.

Oh, and if you need suggestions as to where to buy it, I'd heartily recommend B&H Photo. They usually have fairly competitive prices, and are a legit store. There are many photography stores (mostly located in NYC) that are sort of less than legit, so be careful if you find prices that seem too low to believe. Dealing with some of them can be the complete opposite of dealing with Axiom customer service, for instance.

I've been looking at buying either the Rebelxt or D40X. Unfortunately here in Canada it's around $800. I noticed that I can get it almost $200 cheaper in the US even with the exchange rate. Does anyone know if there's a problem with buying one south of the border? Will they warranty be valid in Canada?

I myself have my eye on that puppy...

Canada vs. US Warranty...

Camera manufacturers can be very picky about authorized dealers vs. warranties. For instance, here in the US, some retailers sell 'Grey Market' gear. It's usually exactly the same as the normal gear (made in the same factory, etc), but it doesn't carry the same warranty. The benefit is that they're a usually a bit cheaper, but there's no warranty on it.

Nikon/Canon USA is a seperate business entity from Nikon/Canon Canada, and so the warranties are different and probably not cross-supported. I would email and/or call the companies directly to confirm that.

I would assume that if you bought a USA-Warranty camera, that you would need to send it back to the US service department, should you have problems.

Edit: this seems to be in agreement with what I said, at least for Nikon.

Man, I've been shooting old-school with those for 25 years.....

Hey I have a buddy who has a camera something like that. I don’t know what the right terminology is or the name of the camera, but he told me his camera is one of an extremely very small number still working. He had a heck of a time restoring it.

It’s a wood box of sorts like the one in the picture above. He develops the pictures by using a small brush and lightly ‘brushing’ water over this special cotton bond paper. He then frames them with hand made diamond willow. The photos are nothing short of gorgeous. Very rustic, unique and stunning to look at. Anyone know what that technique is??

Here is the camera I started my career on.



Worked in a huge studio full of em.
4x5, 5x7, 8x10 and 11x14 sheets of film.
Exposure times on some sets could be 2 hrs at F45.

My oh my how times have changed

You got me by a year dont ya.?

With exposure times that long, you could expose yourself for minutes at a time in front of the lens without showing up in the print.

Are you talking from experience Peter?

Don't. Ask.

After reading Rockwell’s sight and other users, that Nikon 18 – 200 VR lens looks like one hell of a lens and about perfect for a traveling, one lens set up.

What would the comparable lens to this one from Canon be??

And when looking at lenses, they always have an ‘F’ number. What’s that? That question alone should confirm any suspicions you may already have about my photographic experience….

F-stop determines depth of field (very simply speaking, as my camera experience is maybe 1 level above yours). The lower the F-stop available, the more flexibility you have in taking shots in lower light (for one thing). I'm sure the real photographers will chime in shortly.

18-200 seems like an awfully wide range for a zoom lens--going from wide angle to telephoto seems odd to me. How much does that thing weigh?

Ken Rockwell loves it and it's so popular that it's hard to find. When you do find one, it's selling over MSRP and it was releaced two years ago.

Amazon has it listed at 1.5 pounds. http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/B000BY52NU/...;pf_rd_i=507846

Thanks... this is going to be an expensive hobby. I can tell already.

Olympus has an 18-180mm F 3.5 - 6.3 lens for their 4/3 cameras. It's pretty light too. Looks like I better put it back on the shopping list.. dangit..

Where'd you see that $750 for the Nikon Lens? B/H?

nevermind.... I saw it at B/H.

The f/stop refers to the aperture (or size of the hole) that the shutter opens to while a photo is being taken, which regulates how much light is allowed through to the film/sensor.

Here's a link with more than you need to know.

Thanks Peter(s). I got it now. Maybe if I keep asking these dumb questions I'll figure out how to take a picture.

I found a sight with some info and test results on both lenses.

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/2695/lens-test-olympus-zuiko-digital-ed-18-180mm-f35-63-af.html

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/2763/lens-test-nikon-18-200mm-f35-56g-dx-vr-af-s.html

Ah piss on it….. I got tired of researching and just ordered the Olympus Evolt 510. I never was much for having patience and my trip to the big city got delayed for two weeks, so I wont be able to play with any of these cameras. Plus it’s my B-day Monday

I downloaded a bunch of high res pictures that someone posted that he took with the slightly lower level Evolt 410 and was dazzled buy them. If I can learn to take picures like that with the same type of camera, I'll be a happy camper.

I got a kit that comes with two lenses. Some NYC store has them in stock and it’ll ship one day air on Monday. ( 17th street Photo. ) I hope they are legit. They say they’re authorized….

Olympus Evolt E-510 Live Preview/Dual IS
Two Lens Outfit with 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 and 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 Zuiko Digital Lenses -58mm-
Olympus XD 2GB Panorama Picture Card **Type-M**
$1080 shipped.

Another friend of mine and I got to taking about this and he said he was interested in buying one of the 4/3 cameras. He offered to buy this one from me if I don’t like it.

Now I can get off my ass and do some work. My friggin but's sore from sitting at the computor researching these things for the past week.

Congrats on the decision! That combo sounds great. Olympus makes great equipment. My first digital camera was a little Olympus point-and-shoot, and it was a heck of a nice camera at the time.

I have heard of 17th Street photo, but I don't directly remember if it's + or -. It looks like they're a good one from the ratings here .

Now I don't wish to alarm you, and it's likely that your transaction will go through without a hitch, judging from the feedback they've received. But just in case it doesn't, I can tell you what some of the 'scammy' stores do...

They will call you on Monday and try to 'upsell' you to a different model, or tell you that you need to pay $xxx more for the US Version. Sometimes they will disguise this sell as a 'your credit card didn't go through', or 'address verification' or some such nonsense. They very often call and will try to sell you accessories (which sometimes can even be the manual for the camera). I have heard stories that cameras were suddenly out of stock when people refused to buy the vastly overpriced accessories. I've also read stories of cameras just never arriving and credit card charges sticking for weeks before being resolved. I have heard stories of folks receiving grey market goods when there were supposed to be genuine US stuff. That's a pretty common tactic with some of the lowball-price places.

The internet can be a wild place to buy cameras!

When you receive your stuff, I'd just make sure you have all of the US Warranty cards and that any serial numbers match between boxes, documentation, and product. If any of it is suspect (photocopied manual, missing warranty cards, opened boxes, missing charger, etc) then be wary.

I just bought the Nikon D40 camera this weekend.
Nikon D40

Can't wait to start using it. God it has an awful lot of functions. It's going to take me awhile to figure them all out. Good thing the camera came with a dvd on digital photograpy. At least now I can finally take a pic of my home theatre setup!

Great choice. I've had the D40 for about 4 months and added the VR 18-200 lens about 2 months ago. For me, this camera takes better pics than anything I've ever had and I've had many different cameras. Just a suggestion, follow Ken Rockwell's settings and your pics will be brilliant, crisp and fantastic. You an always adjust if you want but his settings give you a great starting point. This camera should do everything you want.

Here is a link to the aforementioned guide. There is also a PDF you can download.
I used it to start getting a sense of my D40, but have moved on to my own personal favorites. It's a great way to get comfortable with what your camera can do.

My toy arrived last Tuesday and I’ve been playing with it some, reading the manual some…..

It took me about five minutes to realize I’m completely lost. This thing has more friggin settings, options, modes, etc than I will ever understand. I am overwhelmed. Heck I don’t know which record mode to use……. Holly crap, what did I get myself into?? Is there a good DSLR for dummies book worth getting?? Sonofabitch, this is going to take years to figure out! UGGG…

Other than being completely overwhelmed, this is very nice little camera. I shouldn’t really call it a little camera either. I’ve read where some folks say it will fit in a pocket……ya, right…maybe a pocket in a parka, but it ain’t fitting in any pockets of mine.

Congrats on the new toy - I'm sure you will get to know it well after a while. Just hang in there. At least there's no film to waste. You can just start taking pictures ad lib and keep only the good ones, sending the bad ones off to a digital graveyard.

Tangent alert: Are you still racing cars/bikes/anything with wheels?

Thanks Peter. I’ll look for that book. I need the basic, that’s for sure. This thing is unreal with all the manual settings it will let me do. It even has manual sharpness, color, contrast…. These are things my film camera did not have. My old 35mm had a little needle in the view finder that went from read to green. Aperture and shutter speed were about it. This digital thing has control over everything.

Hey Doc, yes, I still race. I’m in the “old fart” division. Snow –X, Hill climb, Motto-X. I also build a race engine every now and then for some of the stock car and ¼ miler guys.

Shoulda got the Canon.

Seriously, just use the auto modes for a while and see if you even need to go full manual. My Rebel XT has modes for portraits, landscapes, sports, night, etc. so I rarely feel the need for additional fiddling.