These things are subjective - for me the ergonomics of the D90 are a huge benefit over the D5000/D3000 and made it worthwhile to change. The D5000 pics were as good as the D90 though.

jromie0924 said:
Go for either a D7000 or a D300s. The D7000 has 39 AF points, and the D300s has 51. If it is resolution that you are looking to one-up, then the D300s or D90 would not quite "up the ante" enough (at least for me, if I plan to put a significant investment into an upgrade, I would go for the gold). Currently, the D7000 has the highest resolution sensor in Nikon's APS-C lineup (16.2 MP).

If money is the issue, the D90 is certainly a step up from the D3000. The body os slightly larger, there is an LCD display on the top, behind the shutter button, allowing you to check and/or change the settings without using valuable battery power with the large 3" LCD on the rear.

This is coming from the perspective of a D7000 owner. I have had it for several months now, and I can tell you that it exceeds my expectations. If money is not an issue, than consider te D7000, or if resolution is not a top priority, go for the more durable D300s. It has a higher frame rate than the D7000 (7 vs 6 fps).

Worst advice ever and cost is a factor if you read the OPs post. He has a lightly used d3000 and you are recommending bodies that are double or more the cost. Although since this thread was made the d5100 came out. But for the price I would maybe go for the d90 still to have the in body af motor.

Hi all,

The OP's use is fairly modest and didn't mention what how he was using the camera. Some of us are hard on gear.

Lower light shooting sports might require something different than outdoor scenics, too.

I think it's safe to say that 'one size fits none'.

My best,

Mike

Go for either a D7000 or a D300s. The D7000 has 39 AF points, and the D300s has 51. If it is resolution that you are looking to one-up, then the D300s or D90 would not quite "up the ante" enough (at least for me, if I plan to put a significant investment into an upgrade, I would go for the gold). Currently, the D7000 has the highest resolution sensor in Nikon's APS-C lineup (16.2 MP).

If money is the issue, the D90 is certainly a step up from the D3000. The body os slightly larger, there is an LCD display on the top, behind the shutter button, allowing you to check and/or change the settings without using valuable battery power with the large 3" LCD on the rear.

This is coming from the perspective of a D7000 owner. I have had it for several months now, and I can tell you that it exceeds my expectations. If money is not an issue, than consider te D7000, or if resolution is not a top priority, go for the more durable D300s. It has a higher frame rate than the D7000 (7 vs 6 fps).

@NikoDoby: I agree with you about the D90 which may be a better camera, but don't forget that technology changed since 2008, Nikon has gained some experience with a CMOS sensor. I went for the D7000 instead of the D90 or even the robust D300/D300s.

@NikoDoby: I disagree with your about the shutter actuations, as far I know, you can not reset the number shown in the EXIF field on the photos the camera takes (even if the number overflows or it was reset).. Am I wrong?

@Drab: The D300 is more robust/weather resistant than the D90.. but from the other side, it is also heavier and older technology camera.(The D300 is also year older than the D90). Instead of going for the the D300s could be also an candidate.

Hi all, new member here

I have gone from a D3000 to a D3100 and to be honest I have used my bro in laws D90 for just a few hours and prefer it to the d3100

I have a 18-55/55-200 (kit lenses) & a 35mm 1.8 I have been debating hard on getting a D90 as I can put a battery grip on it, I actually was thinking of a D90 & keep the D3100 as a backup.. but if I did that I wouldnt be able to afford a new lens..

Reading some posts above makes me thing to wait and some read to go ahead.. Im not a pro so I dont need a D7000 or D3s etc.. anyway care to comment on my situation?

Video and beginner modes is all I can come up with, and if we're talking value it's probably got an edge on the D300 there as well. The D300 has identical image quality and better focus, build, and ergonomics—unless you don't like the small amount of extra weight.

mrdeven, I think it's worth the upgrade for the full set of command dials, the gorgeous screen, and the money you can save buying screw-driven lenses later on (50 1.8 comes to mind). Sounds like it may be too late for advice.

kanuck said:
The D90 is much better than the D5000 and also the D300 I think as well.

Again I'll bite. What does the D90 have that the D300 doesn't?

Actually a lot of people considered the D5000 was a an upgrade over the D90 before the D7000 even came out although your right the D5000 does sit below the D90 in the current product line. The D90 is much better than the D5000 and also the D300 I think as well. I think mrdeven would benefit by upgrading to the D90 for sure, its a wonderful little camera.

kanuck, I assume you mean D7000, not D5000? For the D5000 was (is) a model positioned below the D90, not a refresh of the D90.

A friend of mine actually said they upgraded from the D5000 to the D90 which is kind of funny because the D5000 was supposed to be a refresh of the D90. They are loving the D90 though and I have had a chance to play with it as well over the years and its a wonderful camera. I'd take the leap if I were you! By the way, is the D7000 out of your price range? If not, this camera would solve any doubts you might have about a future camera purchase its fantastic as well.

I wanted the D90, bought the D5000, regretted not having the direct access buttons, bought a second hand D90 and am selling my D5000. Would I say I have improved my images? Definitely not - the D5000 is a great little camera. Would I say it was worth it overall? Just about, but I am already thinking I should have got the D300s instead.

I agree with the 'buy a lens' advice once you know what the lenses that you already have lack (that you really need). If you feel they lack nothing, spend the money on travel to use your camera.

Good Call heartyfisher.. I'm holing out and going to invest in a lens instead for now.. Either sell / my 18-105 and buy a 18-200 or keep the current lens and buy a nice wide angle. :)

I would say keep the D3000 what ever people may say I bet it still has many lessons to teach you! I think save up and wait till the end of the year. There will be lots of great second hand gear to pick up when the new D400/D800/D4 gets announced and shipped. I am hoping to pick up a nice D700 then !! :-) but I am sure there will be D7000 to be had for a good price.

Much better in low light though and the sub command dial was a deal breaker. I'd say get it and a 35mm f1.8 with the remaining money you saved

adamz said:
buy a lens

+1 kit lenses work well, but to really be able to do things some nice glass is the key. As I always say...bodies come and go all the time, but people on here still uses lenses they don't make anymore. A good lens on any body can help, but in every case you still need to learn the camera and some techniques...not that I am a pro and I learn new stuff every day.

After alot of thought there is no real need to upgrade just a nice to have.. I will probably work on a lens once i figure out what i want :)

buy a lens

The shutter count means nothing. It can easily be reset. I agree with tcole1983. Judging from your question I'm going to assume that you are under the impression that a fancier camera will get you better pictures. Save your money and enjoy your D3000. In a year or so you can upgrade to a used D7000 or new D5100. There is always going to be a better camera tempting you.

I'm calling the lady later today.. I think i will most likely get it.. Having the bracketing for playing with HDR, Autofocus in body (lets me get more cheaper lenses to experiment) will be some nice perks. It still makes me laugh because i have only had the D3000 for a few months.. haha oh well it served its purpose in finding out if i like photography and i defiantly do!

Here goes 500$ hopefully someone picks up my other one in not to long!

Thanks for the advice :)

go for it, you will be happy.

also, the new gear bug will bite you, it will cause you to go out and shoot some more, that alone is worth the new camera.

close your eyes and jump in with both feet, get it today so you can shoot the moon tonight.

good luck and let us know what decision you make.

Don't forget also the D90's ability to take a battery grip. For my son that was a deal breaker over the D3100. Of course that may have no relevance to you.

You have pretty low acutations on your camera still, but the upgrade wouldn't be too much cost. Because you haven't really taken that many picture makes me think you don't really need the upgrade...but you do gain stuff by getting it. I wish I got a body that could AF with the non-AF-S lenses. I guess the jump from the D3000 though might be significant compared to from a D5000. If you feel like you are missing something by having the D3000 then maybe you do need it. If you are doing it just because you can and think it will somehow improve your pictures without actually knowing what you need...then maybe not.

For $200 I'd consider it a no-brainer, but for all I know the D3000 more than satisfies your needs today and $200 next year could get you closer to an even better match!

I mean, upgrades for the sake of upgrades are never cheap, regardless of the price.

All very good points Drab, At the moment My lens have VR so in body focusing its not a big deal, but it would be nice to be able to get cheaper older lens to play with.

All in all would you say its worth the 200$ (counting selling mine)