OMG yes.

As some of you may know, I'm about to get a D90 as a first camera for my son. (Was going to get him a 3100, but the consensus of opinion was that he would out grow it quickly). I've found a grade A factory recon body and 18-105 lens for £550. Can't seem to better it, does that sound reasonable?

Wow, that seems like a great deal, Andrew. Nicely done.

I just bought my D90 body with MB-D80 grip, two batteries, 2Gb SDHC, two remotes and a book about using it for £460 off fleabay if that helps.

Not bad I think?

When I went in to trade my D80 for a D90 they were going to give me $250 trade in for it. I ended up selling on ebay for $500. They really do not want our old junk and I can understand that. Ebay or craigslist would be my suggestion unless you REALLY do not want to hassle with it.

I just sold my d90 with an 18-55mm VR via Craigslist for $650...and I think I probably left $50 or so on the table. I did have numerous offers to buy it for $400-600 that I turned down, and two, possibly three, people who seemed as though they would pay $650 if the deal fell through with the buyer. I think I listed it Saturday morning. If I were to do it again I would probably list it for $700 or $750. Hope this helps others.

Sorry guys , if you are in USA or Canada , you are dreaming about secondhand D90 prices - no way you will $700-750 for your used body .

Brand new D90 body goes for $729 in Canada/USA ( since New Year ) . $829 with 18-55mm . This is an official Nikon agent and same goes for Best Buy & Future Shop which have price match schemes .

Search for D90 at *Link Removed*

NSX and Niz - Yeah...I didn't do it...can't take that beating no matter how convenient. I was just trying to show what I think the current retail value is of a D90. Guessing somewhere around $750 with the kit lens...assuming 50% mark-up on the $500 they offered on trade.

You could sell it on ebay or craigslist for more. Trade ins are always low.

Mountaineer63 said:
Was at the camera store yesterday with my D90...was considering trading it in for a D700. They were going to give me $500 for the body and the 18-55mm VR lens. I'm not sure what they would mark it up to for retail, but I suspect something around $750. Keep in mind that the camera is in great condition and has only about 4000 snaps on the shutter.

I wouldn't have traded it in for $500, that's way too low.

I don't know how EBay works, but I think you might get more from there.

Was at the camera store yesterday with my D90...was considering trading it in for a D700. They were going to give me $500 for the body and the 18-55mm VR lens. I'm not sure what they would mark it up to for retail, but I suspect something around $750. Keep in mind that the camera is in great condition and has only about 4000 snaps on the shutter.

I think that's a good idea, Niz. I love the D90 a lot, and sold mine for $200 less than I paid for it, which I think is not bad for the last year of (ab)use. Even the D80 still goes for $400-500, so the D90 will hold its current value pretty well, I reckon.

I'm only buying the D7000 so I can help people on the forum make their decisions. (You know there are going to be about 300 "D90 or D7000?" and "D7000 or D300s?" posts in the next few months as the word gets out.)

Completely altruistic motives.

I hope the prices start to drop, I wanted a D7k a lot, but got to thinking after two years or so I'll be jumping to a pro body so there is no reason for me to spend the extra money and just get a D90 which is still an awesome camera with a D7k out there or not.

Hah I know it has, so let's not get into it...except:

(I want to shoot video, short small things, and I want good control over dof. I want to primarily still shoot stills, so that's why I think video in a dslr is perfect for someone like me. I don't have the money to spare to buy a separate high quality video camera, when I can do pretty damn well with many of the new dslrs. I'm not looking to make money off of it, it's all just personal use and enjoyment)

Foofie - this has been hashed and rehashed, but ... my position is, if you want a video camera, buy a video camera.

Super Shooter said:
OK so if money matters then just keep the Xti and save up for a Nikon. Just cause the D7000 was announced that doesn't mean you have to get one now.

What do you mean save up for a nikon? What I am saying is I can basically swap my xti and glass (reminder, none of the glass do I really care about, and it's really only 2 pieces) for a d90 body. Are you saying I should just save up and go for the 7000? The other thing I have to worry about is the xti decreasing in value even further.

warprints said:
foofie - with the additional info, I say go for the D90 now.

Yeah that's what I'm thinking. Although the situation has been further complicated by the fact that my uncle is getting out of DX and is getting rid of his d300, and would give it to me for a pretty good deal, so now I might go that route instead. Although one of the reasons the 90 would have been a good stepping stone would be so I could play with video, which obviously wouldn't be the case with the 300. ¡Muy complicado!

foofie - with the additional info, I say go for the D90 now.

OK so if money matters then just keep the Xti and save up for a Nikon. Just cause the D7000 was announced that doesn't mean you have to get one now.

Xti was a gift many years ago before I got back into film shooting. divorced parents, mom had.all the nikon stuff, dad bought me an xti. Also I'm really not going to lose any more money than I would have if I was upgrading from a d40.

I have to analyze the upgrade options because money does matter. I think it really just depends on if I want to go without a digital body or not for awhile.

If you have a bunch of Nikon glass then why the hell did you buy a Canon Xti? Seems like you dug yourself into this hole so either way you are going to lose $$$. Just get on with it already and stop analyzing all of these crazy upgradation plans.

NikoDoby said:
I say keep your canon gear and just build up on that. A D90 wouldn't add anything significant that you can't already do with your canon. Besides your staff job gets you access to "quality" canon glass and that's more important then figuring out what cameras to buy so that you can sell them to get the camera you want. Seems pretty silly to me. Kind of like driving around on an empty tank of gas looking for the cheapest petrol station.

Lol Niko you are making a lot of assumptions. Maybe I should have been more specific.
First off My "staff job" gets me no access to any canon glass (we had one nice telephoto and someone seems to have stolen it)

Second, I have a lot of Fmount glass that I use on my film bodies. I have a lot more f mount glass than I do canon glass, and my canon glass for the most part is just eh. The canon I'm shooting with is also an xti, and it's done great by me, but I want more out of my camera.

I guess I should also mention that adding video, would be something I would really enjoy, which is something my canon doesn't have.

warprints said:
Hmm. If you are changing gear just to change to Nikon (for no concrete reason), I'd say keep with what you have. If you are not happy with Canon for whatever reason, then, by all means change to whatever makes you happy.

If you sell your Canon stuff now, and buy a D90, then turn around and buy a D7000 not too far down the road, you may be losing money at almost the same rate as if you hold onto the Canon stuff until you buy the D7000. Tough call.

I feel like having a bunch of glass for nikon (whereas I don't have a lot of canon glass) is reason enough. On top of that For basically what I sell my canon xti for I can get a d90, and have 4 more lenses than I have now, with a much better body. Whether or not I later on resell the body for the 7000 shouldn't even really factor in. For what is essentially a swap, it seems like a pretty good deal.

NikoDoby said:
I say keep your canon gear and just build up on that.

Hmm. If you are changing gear just to change to Nikon (for no concrete reason), I'd say keep with what you have. If you are not happy with Canon for whatever reason, then, by all means change to whatever makes you happy.

If you sell your Canon stuff now, and buy a D90, then turn around and buy a D7000 not too far down the road, you may be losing money at almost the same rate as if you hold onto the Canon stuff until you buy the D7000. Tough call.

I say keep your canon gear and just build up on that. A D90 wouldn't add anything significant that you can't already do with your canon. Besides your staff job gets you access to "quality" canon glass and that's more important then figuring out what cameras to buy so that you can sell them to get the camera you want. Seems pretty silly to me. Kind of like driving around on an empty tank of gas looking for the cheapest petrol station.

Oh boy I think my purchase gameplan just got pretty complicated.

Basically I need to sell my canon gear now. It's dropping in value and I've been meaning for for awhile. Unfortunately I don't have near the money for a d7000. Selling my canon stuff would put me about halfway there (not including taxes...)unfortunately that would also leave me digitaless for atleast what a month, probably more assuming they (d7000's) are hard to get ahold of. However selling my canon gear also nets me just about the right amount to get a like new condition (or one of those perfect condition factory demos with a 1 year warranty) d90.

Buying a d90 now would
A) let me finally use all my f mount glass on a digital body
B) Give me a (fantastic) camera to use while the d7000 gets reviewed and any possible bugs ironed out/addressed (maybe even if the gods are smiling down a firmware update for 60fps in 720, is that even possible to add via firmware?)
C)Lose me a little cash through reselling probably as the d90 drops in value further (although maybe if I resell it through craigslist or some other avenue other than ebay or amazon, I can regain a little of the seller fees).
D)Give me time to build up enough cash for the d7000.

Basically I'm trying to convince myself that this is a good route for me. The d90 is a fantastic camera no doubt, but the d7000 comes very close to being a camera hand designed for what I need. Is there any reason this sounds like a bad plan to anyone? Normally I would just hold off on buying a body, but unfortunately (well in this case anyway) I am a photog for our newspaper, and it'd get very annoying to have to borrow my gf's d70 everytime I needed to shoot an event, although it wouldn't be a problem.

The D70, D80, and D90 were all $999 for the body-only and $1299 with a lens at launch. I doubt the D7000 will sell body-only for $999 until Christmas next year.