Both with kit lenses cost around exactly the same.
So my question is this.
I shoot sports alot and i also like normal photography.
is one suited better than the other?
Which is the camera of better quality? I like the D40. Here are some photos I took with a D50, the older brother to the D40. I used a Nikon 75-300mm lens and shot from ISO 800-1600.
http://www.spmsportspage.com/images/coll...
I might also suggest a gently used D70, D70s, or D50 for your camera body base. I use D70 and D50 bodies for college football, WNBA, & NBA basketball assignments. Image quality they are going to be about the same... The Nikon has 2 more megapixels but that doesn't translate into better pictures. The Nikon has better build quality but Canon currently has the edge on the sports photography market... doesn't mean they're better. I shoot with Nikons and shoot sports all day long with excellent results that make me a lot of money.
At the entry level both of these are going to operate about the same. For sports photography you'd probably want to step up to the next models up to get a few more frames per second. You'd be suprised how much you can miss from a split second. When I shoot sports I shoot with a Nikon D2H because it shoots 8 frames per second... I don't miss a moment of anything. My newer D200 is great but only 5 frames per second which would probably be enough for most people. Not sure what the D80's speed is, but I would probably recommen d this one over the D40 or the Rebel XT. | 