Citazione:Messaggio inserito da Freddy LIRF
perchè la assacra?Mi sembra u'ottima macchina!(quand'è uscita come modello?)
Leggi qui, non la massacra in senso assoluto, ma la massacra come rapporto qualità prezzo rispetto alla più economica (ma a suo modo di dire migliore) D40.
Questo il link alla review completa fatta da Ken
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d60.htm
____________________________
The Nikon D60 is a replacement for the almost identical D40x, neither of which is as good as the less expensive D40. The D60 is merely a $470 D40 with a few more card-clogging pixels, a VR lens and adaptive dynamic range, but a slower maximum shutter speed with flash and half the light sensitivity (base ISO is only ISO 100, not the faster ISO 200 of the D40), for $300 more than the D40.
Save your money and get the D40, which I find to be superior to either the D40x or the D60, even for hundreds of dollars less, because the D40 has faster sync speed and double the light sensitivity in normal use (ISO 200 base vs. ISO 100 base). These three cameras (D40, D40x, D60) otherwise, for most users, are identical. Compare them in person and you'll see. Megapixels don't matter.
(I detail the few fine points which are new in the D60 further below.)
I had my hands on a D60 back in January 2008. The D60 is an excellent camera, but for most of the people who will buy it, it's the same thing as the $300 less expensive D40. I'd suggest getting a D40 and putting the $300 towards more lenses and/or a bouncable flash.
In fact, the faster flash sync speed (the fastest shutter speed with flash) is more than twice as fast in the D40 (1/500 vs. 1/200), and along with the faster base ISO, the D40 is more likely to make sharper photos for most people, for hundreds of dollars less!
The only significant feature in the D60 over the D40x and D40 is adaptive dynamic range. The D60 does not have any of the other next-generation functionality of the D3 and D300.
The D60 is just a D40 with more pixels, but slower shutter speeds with flash outdoors and less basic light sensitivity due to the smaller pixels needed to jam more of them onto the same-sized sensor.
I make excellent 12 x 18" (30 x 50 cm) prints from my 6 MP D40; do you plan to print bigger? Really? The resolution makes no difference unless I'm printing at 20 x 30" (60 x 80 cm) or more.
Since the D60 costs $300 more than the D40, I'd much rather have a D40, 1/500 flash sync for better daylight fill-flash range, a minimum ISO of 200 and $300 left over to buy lenses and an external flash that I can bounce for better lighting. For instance, the D40, 55-200mm VR and SB-400 is a far better way to spend the same $750.
