I have a Nikon D60 camera and had an accident with it. I was thinking about taking the insurance money and upgrading a bit.
Nothing extreme, just a layer or two up - maybe $200 max additional.
I was thinking about the D90 (body only) but I’m not sure the AF lenses from the D60 are compatible. What about picture quality & feature differences?
I know there’s a bunch of photo geeks here on the dope - any suggestions?
I think that Nikon lenses can fit pretty much any Nikon body. The D90 looks pretty sweet, if you have the extra $$, I’d say go for it.
If you want something that will improve your image quality, buy better lenses. The camera body won’t make as much of a change as better glass.
Any lens that works on a D60 will also work on a D90. Rumour has a D90 replacement to be announced in the next couple weeks, which will likely make old D90 stock cheaper.
I guess I should add that I"m thrilled with the current quality of the D60. I’m no pro and I’m getting all I want from in terms of quality. A little better low-light performance would be good. I’d be nice to have some cool in-camera features like pan-assist and maybe auto-bracketing or some sort of high-contrast assist.
I’m in the same boat, or maybe camera case.
I have a D60 and plan to upgrade to the D300s.
I’d considered Canon, but have two Nikon lenses as well as a SB600 speed light and a Nikon T mount adapter for my telescope. So I didn’t want to have to start over.
The D300s will give me the exposure bracketing and faster frame rate that I’d like to have. Plus live view, but that’s not too big a deal. I’ve been shooting with SLRs since the late 50’s so don’t care if I have that or not.
Oh, the d300s has an artificial horizon too.
Well - looked the 300s up. Way to much money for me - though the feature list is nice.
Mrs. Giraffe has the D90. It’s an amazing camera – you won’t be disappointed.
The D90 is my lower cost choice. Not a bad camera at all. I’m just plannng on buying the D300s body though, so it’s not to bad.
Costco has the D90 “kit” case, memory card, two VR lenses etc for $1495.
D90 is really your only option. The main advantage will be video, dont expect huge increases in low light capability, but there should be some.
Otara
I have a D90 - love it.
However, I would look at the D5000, and the new D3000 - they have some features that the D90 doesn’t have, and the features they give up may not be that important to you.
A good source for Nikon info is Ken Rockwell. He enjoys expressing extreme opinions but pretty much everything he says is at least 80% true.
The link above says:
Best Serious Camera :
You can pay a lot more, but I tell everyone who asks to get the Nikon D5000. You can pay more, but the pictures won’t be any better. All you’ll get is a bigger, heavier camera with more features no one will ever understand.
And that’s about 90% true. He then goes on to explain the circumstances when you might want something more expensive.
I have a D90 myself because it’s maybe half-a-stop better than the D5000 in low light, and shoots a few more frames per second. It’s also a big honkin’ camera and hundreds more expensive.
The smaller size (and quieter shutter) of the D5000 would make it preferable to the D90 about 95% of the time.
…but if you’re shooting for money that last 5% of the time makes the virtues of D90 (and the pro Nikons) worth the extra weight and money.
Ken Rockwell is quite the polarizing figure on forums like DPReview. He comes in for a fair share of hate :).
For a Nikon specific site, I actually am partial to Thom Hogan, who also self-publishes apparently well-regarded guides to most major Nikon DSLRs.
I also have the D90, and love it. It is a great camera, but I strongly disagree that the advantage of this camera is video as the quality is only fair and not what this camera is meant for. I would disregard the video component when comparing the D90 against other DSLRs.
I agree for many people that video wont be a priority because they wont view it as good enough, but you can say that about almost any DSLR video implementation at the moment.
Even so it seems to be an important selling point for many to have the option vs having none at all.
Otara
Check out the new D3100
I’ll check out Hogan some time. I can completely understand people getting pissed at Rockwell. He used to annoy me too.
As I said in my post he enjoys taking extreme positions, and if someone wants to be find contradictory statements on his site it isn’t hard to do. But it is full of useful information and very entertaining.
I started liking Rockwell more after I encountered a statement on his site that (in effect) said people should be able to figure out when he’s being precise and when he’s making useful generalizations.
Part of me recoils when he says that unless you seriously shoot sports or weddings, you’re better off with a D5000 than an D4… because he should be loading that statement up with a dozen disclaimers.
But if he did that, unknowledgeable people would read the dozen disclaimers and lose sight of the essential truth: you’re going have more fun and probably take better pictures (and more of them) with the D5000.
D3100 sounds pretty good and the price point is right. more megapixels & one stop better.
D90’s replacement by midpoint this month? Might have to wait to see the price on that. Everybody screams the D90’s wonderfulness.
Not sure the video is a big deal to me, though. I need a better reason for that.
The D90 replacement is rumoured to have continuous AF in video, which would be a big improvement for DSLR video if true. Its also supposed to have same noise performance as D700.
Take it with a wee grain of salt, second claim in particular.
Otara