Originally Posted by ncx

Image quality is superb on both. The D60 is really like a D40 v3. The D40x is considered to be the dog of the three, although it is still very close in image quality. The differences that matter are small. Here's some food for thought...

- If you are shooting your little boy, specially indoors, you may appreciate the higher flash sync speed difference on the D40 vs D60. Check that out.

- The D60 is could be considered less sensitive to light since the pixels are much smaller to cram more of them into the same-sized sensor as the D40. The trade off is, you can shoot with a lower ISO and wider apertures on the D60 which gives you a little more flexibility with blurring backgrounds, etc.

- You can buy that same 18-55mm VR lens for the D40. The lens is really inexpensive for an AF-S VR Nikkor and gets very good ratings. It is the lenses you will keep, not the bodies.

- The dust shake sensor thing is kind of cheesy (D60). If you change lenses a lot, it may be useful. The stop motion animation jpg thing is cheesy too.

- The D60's Expeed processing is the latest and greatest from Nikon. It rocks. The D40 is extremely fast too and shares the same programming of colors, tones, etc. Go look at the same shots on the D40 and D60 side by side and try to tell a difference in the processing or image quality.

- Unless you are printing out gigantic prints all the time, or doing a lot of major cropping post-shot (which IMO means you may be setting up your shots incorrectly), then don't get hung up on the 10 MP vs 6 difference. Also consider storage requirements for files taken on high/fine.

- If size and weight are major issues, you may like the non-VR lens. On that light D40/D60 body you can feel the weight difference of the VR vs non-VR and it is a little longer as well. I think VR is worth the small difference in size/weight.

- D60 has been reported by a lot of folks to have a louder shutter than the D40, may not be as good for sneaking up on sleeping kids, etc. Doesn't seem to be a big deal.

- The Active D lighting on the D60 is really cool, and can be set pre-shot. You can do basically the same things on the D40 after the shot in camera or in Pshop. The D40 does this really well after the shot, in camera (tested with firmware 1.10).

- How long are you going to keep the body? If this is your entry into DLSR's, maybe the cheaper D40 with excellent lens is a good start. Lenses will last. For example, get a D40 now, upgrade to a better Nikon body in a few years when you know more about what you want out of a DLSR. Use the money you save to buy some really great lenses like the 18-135VR, 55-200VR, and/or the 50mm Prime AF-S when it comes out soon (which will all work with your upgraded body later). The 50mm is excellent for portrait shots of your child, specially indoors and low light situations. Sigma makes an AF-S 50mm now but I am hoping the Nikkor will be out very soon.

If you think you will keep the body 3 years+, maybe start with the newer body and let the extra $250 you spent will carry you farther down the road. The prices have been staying near retail on the D60 since it came out, but if you can get a really good deal on the D60 and plan to keep it for a while, you can't really go wrong with that kit.

Sorry for the long post. My take on these two cams: If plan to use manual/advanced controls a lot, do lots of huge prints, keep the body for as long as possible before an upgrade, go for the D60 with VR kit lens and don't look back. If not, save your money and get the D40 with kit lens or VR lens and maybe another zoom or prime lens for more flexibility. You will get fantastic images with either camera and that has been proven by many pro reviewers.

Just my .2 cents. The camera experts here will probably have some other good things to think about.