Ive have built up more and more interest in photography since about 2004 when I obtained my first digital camera*. In late 2005 I finally caved in and decided buy a 'bigger' camera, with more zoom and image stabilisation - the Panasonic DMC-FZ5. A year later, I upgraded to the impressively sturdy DMC-FZ30, which has already been superseded by a later model. I knew about Digital SLRs but wasn't quite ready - the much great zoom range and handiness of the 'super-zoom' Panasonic was too tempting. But they don't call them bridge cameras for nothing...

Before my trip to Thailand in March, I decided the time had finally come to bridge that gap. I did lot of research and ended up deciding (as I'm sure many others have) between a Nikon D40 and a Canon 400D. But actually,for me, there was no decision. The Nikon was cheaper, the image quality appeared the same, it crucially took an SD card (I'll come back to this later), the controls were better placed (very important).

The D40 is a good size, it is a small, snappy and wieldy DSLR. It's still one of the smallest. I also pre-ordered a Nikon 50mm f1.8 lens to go with it. The D40 18mm-55mm kit lens is pretty amazing - it's incredibly light and the D40 + 18-55mm is actually lighter than my fixed lens FZ30 had been. Despite this, the smallness and lightness of the camera don't make it unsteady OR difficult to grip. I have large hands by any standard and the distance between the grip and the lens barrel is just sufficient. The grip itself is much thinner than the larger, more standard size DLSRs but still very good for such a small and light SLR. It is worlds better than the Canon 350D or 400D grip, which is extremely thin and dinky. The moment I tried them both out in a camera store, something you should do before choosing any SLR camera, I made the decision to go for the D40 because the Canon was so bad. Another ergonomic problem with the Canon is the fact the jog wheel is vertically on the top of the right camera, which in my opinion is bad design. A horizontally mounted thumb wheel on the back of the camera above the grip is much more intuitive to me than an index finger controlled jog wheel on the top like the Canon.

Continuing on the layout and feel, I have to say Nikon have done a truly excellent job with the usability of this camera. Almost everything is very well placed for maximum usability, for example the play button on the top left, and the delete button on the bottom right. To delete a photo on screen, you simply press the delete button twice, which is wonderfully efficient. The menu system is good too, and though I had worries about the lack of top 'mini - lcd' and therefore dependance on the rear LCD for camera info, I have not been at all disappointed. Occasionally it is irritating to find the LCD has gone off right before you want to change or review a setting, but a quick half press of the shutter switches it no again almost instantly. The LCD is large and bright, sometimes a little over saturated but on the whole very useful. It is much better than my friends $1300 Canon 30Ds. Image review and playback is instant, with no delays.

The image quality produced by this camera is in a different league to non - SLRs. You simply cannot compare, because it is so much better. I believe the Sensor is identical to the D70, which is tried and tested and excellent. I bought a remote to enable star scape exposures but unfortunately it is limited to 30 minutes, and even then there is significant 'sensor glow' in the top left hand corner of the image, a well known problem. The little 50mm portrait lens I bought is excellent, and I have had much more fun with it than with the kit lens, because it performs so well in low light. I have found the lack of autofocus for it annoying though. In case you didn't know, the D40 lacks an auto-focus screw, so it won't autofocus any lens that doesn't have an internal autofocus motor (all AF-S lens, which includes the kit lens of course, so, so are okay). That, and the lack of depth of field preview are enough to make me look forward to the day when these smaller SLRs have a richer feature set. Despite this, I have still taken many good photos with the 50mm, some of which can be found here. For lenses that do autofocus it only has 3 autofocus points which doesn't bother me in the slightest because I only ever use the central one.

All in all this is an excellent camera at a great price. If you are tempted by the D40x, an improved version which is effectively the same camera with a bigger, 10 megapixel sensor, then think about whether it is worth spending the extra money. It seems to me a lot to pay for what will be a negligible increase in quality unless you are planning on printing posters of your photos. My D40 cost me $570, an excellent price for such a great little camera. If you are looking for a first SLR this comes highly recommended. In fact even if you aren't, and just want a small but powerful camera to take around, or travelling as I intend to, it is also recommended. Heck, I would recommend this to anyone who has an interest in photography.

*Actually it wasn't my first, I got my first in 1999 - it was a $550 Olympus 340R with a 1.3 megapixel sensor and no zoom. It still works, when you take a photo and display it on the LCD, it takes about 6 seconds to scan downwards and fully load.

I delved into the realm of 'big' cameras a few years ago, having sworn I would always have a only a pocket camera for all my photography. This was naive, given that as I became more interested I inevitably learned more and wished better quality and more control in successive camera purchases. Since then, I have missed the ability to have a camera on my person whenever a shot presented itself, so I decided to get a second, pocket camera to meet these needs. However, when I did so I fell victim to the oh-so-common ploy of technology marketing: 'the higher the number for this feature the better the product'. Enter the Casio EX-V7...

As soon as I started playing with it I noticed a really serious design flaw: The lens cover is sort of 'springy' and doesn't click into and out of place, so it is easy to nudge it while you are taking a photo. Unfortunately, nudging it too far, which is much to easy, causes the camera to shut off momentarily, causing a 5 second delay while everything blacks out then reappears! The second thing I noticed quickly was that the image stabilisation that the camera is meant to have, doesn't really work, and can cause the CCD to oscillate in a very un-natural and sometimes absurd way.

The camera has 7x Zoom and a 7 megapixel CCD: excellent. Well, almost excellent. I'm sure those features would be excellent if the lens and CCD actually allowed good quality images to be produced. Uh-oh, you know what I'm going to say now... The image quality is blurry and noisy by any standard, but especially for me as I am used to a Nikon DSLR. At ISO 400 or higher the images are un-usable. Take a look at the 100% crop of an indoor photo at ISO 400 on the right. On the left is a photo taken in the same room a few weeks earlier with a Nikon D40 at ISO 400 which demonstrates the Casio's poor quality. The Casio was ~$450 and the Nikon was ~$570. The Nikon is only 6 megapixels. The moral of the story here is: don't believe the numbers!

In conclusion: I sold the Casio on eBay I was so displeased with it. I think it's a shame that in this day and age such poor quality images are still being made. I am ashamed that in my haste to enjoy the freedom of a pocket camera I snapped up the one with the biggest numbers in the smallest case. There are many cameras that produce better images and are cheaper and smaller, but suckers like me will pay for something which has the highest specs. I learned my lesson, and obviously lost money in the resale. My advice to anyone looking to buy a good quality pocket camera is:

• Don't go for a camera with high megapixel or zoom because they make the camera better: they don't.
• Do sacrifice size for quality - you won't mind carrying a slightly larger camera around as much as you think.
• The smaller the camera, the smaller the CCD, and the worse the photos. End of story.
• In my experience Canon, Nikon and Olympus produce the best quality compact cameras.
• Theres no such thing as excellent quality from any digital camera (compact or otherwise) unless it's an SLR (see above).

I was cleaning the living room the other day and stumbled across one of my flatmate's digital camera brochures. After noticing a pretty cool Fuji (s9500), I decided to investigate a new superzoom and upon reading many reviews and after much delibration decided to stay with Panasonic. The FZ30 is much heavier and therefore easier to handle and hold still. It has many feature improvements and enhancements including manual focus and zoom rings which make it feel very professional. I've taken quite a few photos with it in the last few weeks and am very pleased. The noise is quite bad at times but if photos are well exposed it is an insignificant problem.

It is also very hardy. I had it posed on top of a cairn on the Scottish Island of Iona. The cairn was a few feet taller than me (about 8ft) and of course in true cairn fashion made from solid boulders. I had foolishly thought my trusty jessops bendy mini tripod would be sufficient to keep it balanced while it took it's self - timed photo of the group and the beautiful view. Unfortunately a few seconds after I had climbed down from the cairn I saw it start to topple in slow motion... It bounced about 4 times on its way to settling about 6 feet from the base of the cairn, also solid rock. Each time it bounced it rotated in mid air flying metres at a time before hitting rock again. After it came to rest I was more than sure that it was broken. I couldn't see how any piece of electronic equipment let alone a heavy camera could endure such a trial without at least something (lense, ccd, lcd, pcb, internal mechanics etc) breaking. I stood for a number of seconds taking in the fact that I had just smashed my 5 day old pride and joy. After a while Jamie came over and handed it to me to survey the damage. To my utter astonishment, all of the above components had suffered no damage and incredibly the camera itself functioned perfectly. I think I was lucky, but was also impressed with the way the camera had managed to survive such brutal punishment. Highly recommended!