What are you shooting? Is a tripod or external flash not an option? I haven't used a D90, but ISO 1600 on a D7000 is really good (ISO 3200 is even usable for a lot of stuff if you don't mind a little grain). What do you really need? 1 more stop = D7000, 2 more stops = D700, or even more = D800. You could always get a D7000 now, and resell it when the D700 replacement comes out if it doesn't meet your needs (or if it does what you need, you could get 2 of them for the price of a D700).

I would think you have the gear you need. As a predominantly prime shooter myself, I sometimes long for a second body. Depending on your "end use" of the images (print size, etc.)

For bodies I would consider if DX is getting your images or are you having to crop? If you go full frame, cropping would be more and your IQ starts to decline and artifacts appear quicker. That is where I would start with body choices. The D300 replacement may be a consideration (and be out faster than a D800). It is not really the season to get a new body since the upper bodies are due for a refresh in the next 6-8 months unless the D7000 will do.

ISO 1000 just acceptable? The D90 is better than my D300 and I shoot up to 2500 all the time. Have you looked into a standalone noise reduction software? I use Nik and I can get away with 1600-2200 90% of the time and up to 3200 at times. That is cheaper than a body and it could help with all of your photos.

I would say shoot Raw and Push your Auto iso to 2500 to start and see what that gets you. My guess is that you may get 1 out of 20-30 images that are usable which is good in that type of light. What that would tell you, is if 1 extra stop of light is all you need. I would spot meter (and lock exposure) as well which will raise your shutter speed some.

1 stop of light is not much at all. If you are only shooting at iso 1000, you maybe over limiting yourself quite a bit.

To help in the meantime:
When shooting with multiple primes, I plan much more and use a different thought process. Before shooting, I write down 5 shots I want with each lens and do a pseudo mock-up drawing and checklist. I then focus on getting each of the 5 shots I want leaving a lens on, then swap, get the next 5, and so on. After I get those frames (probably 50-100 frames from each lens with the light you are dealing with) and after a quick review (focus zoom) to make sure that I got at least 10-20 shots, I then go haphazard and pray N Spray. During high energy events it is easy to get wrapped up in the moment and I find my check list of shots helps slow me down and be more methodical. I have also found I get my shots quicker and can enjoy most of the night rather than just running around.

PB PM said:
I think it would depend on the light he is working with. The D7000 has one stop over the D90, while the D700 has two stops. Tough choice, but if your budget can handle it the D700 is the better buy for shooting in low light.

If you wait for the D700 replacement you could be waiting for 6-10 months, good luck.

Is the D7000 really that good in terms of high ISO? It would be great if that would seal the deal for me, since it's cheaper than the D700 and I can use all my DX lenses. Still I'm curious to see what FX is like.

BTW the light I'm working in is bad enough to have shoot at f2 (at f/1.4 the DOF is too shallow), shutter speed around 1/60, ISO at 1000 (doesn't look great but still acceptable noise) and then push 1 stop in RAW :) This venue has got the absolutely most terrible and challenging lighting conditions ever.

If the D700's successor is out as much as half a year I'd go for D700 then.

ProImages said:
Have you considered the D7000?

I think it would depend on the light he is working with. The D7000 has one stop over the D90, while the D700 has two stops. Tough choice, but if your budget can handle it the D700 is the better buy for shooting in low light.

If you wait for the D700 replacement you could be waiting for 6-10 months, good luck.

I have a D7000 that shifted my old(ish) D3000 out into 2nd body use :-)

Today, if I wasn't spending my money on other things (just got a nice new phone and have to get a new sofa/love seat next week and then a nice big flat screen TV after that <grin>), I'd go out and buy a D5100 to replace the D3000 *today*... You know they say that a good life is all about balance... LOL!!!

If I was really pushed for cash, the D5100 would be the main body with my D3000 (or the D90 of yours - if I were you) as the backup... Both the 3k and the 90 are old in generational terms now and are well outclassed by the 7k and the 51k for that all important IQ, low light, speed etc... All IMO of course, disclaimers, etc, etc.

:-)

Bram said:
.

My current gear: D90 + Tokina UWA + 35mm + 50mm + 85mm. Great for when the light is not too terrible and things aren't happening extremely fast in front of you. However I've been doing some events/concerts assignments recently, and even with the superfast primes (all 1.8 / 1.4) I'm having a hard time.
My perfect lens would be 24-70 2.8, however my finances aren't infinite and I think it's a tad bit too large. I'm curious to know your thoughts on my considerations, maybe you've faced a similar problem yourself.

24-70 2.8 is slower than 1.8 and 1.4 primes.

good luck on waiting for the D700 replacement.

Have you considered the D7000?

Hello all,
I know this is a subject that'll probably have been discussed loads of times, yet another gear discussion. However, I do need some very specific advice so forgive me for opening a new topic.

My current gear: D90 + Tokina UWA + 35mm + 50mm + 85mm. Great for when the light is not too terrible and things aren't happening extremely fast in front of you. However I've been doing some events/concerts assignments recently, and even with the superfast primes (all 1.8 / 1.4) I'm having a hard time. Also, it kinda sucks having to change lenses all the time. I invested in primes a while back because of their superior image quality, their DOF and low light capabilities. However, I'm not getting enough light in still at the moment, it turns out, and also the switching lenses is killing me.

So I'm thinking about getting a D700 (or its successor if there's any news soon). Great high ISO performance, and it's a second body. My perfect lens would be 24-70 2.8, however my finances aren't infinite and I think it's a tad bit too large. So I'm considering just sticking to the lenses I have now. I'd use the Tokina 11-16 on the D90 and fit the D700 with the 50mm or 85mm probably. The 35mm is a DX lens BTW. Of course my lenses lose some of the focal length I was used to having on the D90 before. Since the Tokina is a UWA lens, I'll still be able to use it at somewhat slower shutter speeds.

I'm curious to know your thoughts on my considerations, maybe you've faced a similar problem yourself.