I still would rate the D90 as one of the best bags for the buck of any camera I have ever used. Selling mine used would bring to little for it's practical value. I still have not ordered the D7000 based on hot and dead pixel issues with that camera. Only advantage I see in the D7000 is better video and if it has pixel problems that are very noticeable on HD video I'd rather wait. Bottom line is the D90 still looks GREAT based on what I know now.
[D90] - Is the D90 still worth it?
(33 posts) (18 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
You could do a dual body setup so you swap lenses less often, it's not a bad idea to keep a spare body around.
I'm not advising you to bash your equipment, but it's nice to have not-so-nice equipment around so you don't feel as bad bashing your equipment. I take my point and shoot and do shots with it I wouldn't do with my DSLR because I'm not afraid of bashing the point and shoot.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Davey, I was just in your shoes, until I made the decision to buy the D7000 last night. The D90 is a great camera that I've used for almost everything for the past two years. It will be a great backup camera for a at least another two!
I bought the D7000 because I'm beginning to shoot more weddings, which makes it a lot easier to have two bodies. I actually thought about buying another D90, but after reading reviews, and actually checking for dead/stuck pixels in-store before buying, I went ahead with the D7000.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The d7000 would be a sensible buy in 2 years, come on people it's a non full frame camera that Nikon can only make so much improvements to. I agree that it's a great backup camera (I have one) but if you're serious about what you photograph you would get into the wonderful world of Full Frame Cameras. Even the lens behave better, sharper, brighter and very fast. Don't waste your time discussing a APS-C sensor, GET A FULL FRAME CAMERA D700 or it's impending replacement
Posted 2 years ago # -
Interested on this thread as well.... Me too on the wall between D90 and D7k.
Heart says D7k to have all the so called latest tech.
Head says most of the features will not be used so don't waste on it.
:(
Posted 2 years ago # -
@sincejan: Welcome to NR. I believe this is a great site. I own quite a few Nikon film cameras and D100 thru D700. I still use the DX format far more as there are practical tradeoffs. I use the D700 with 20-35 Nikkor and 70-300VR but many times the D90 or D300 get used more. For what it is worth we use our D200 more than our D700. FF may be wonderful but to me they are tools. I miss my 8x10 and 10x30 camera some days, but not often. FF is not the only camera worth using. I have been comparing my DX 12-24 with my best wide angle Nikkor and I am not certain there is enough difference to impress me. Still the camera I most often check this site for is news of a FF D700 replacement. I have shot with the D3s and D3x and have no personal interest in owning them. To me they are excess baggage.
Posted 2 years ago # -
DaveyJ said:
@sincejan: Welcome to NR. I believe this is a great site. I own quite a few Nikon film cameras and D100 thru D700. I still use the DX format far more as there are practical tradeoffs. I use the D700 with 20-35 Nikkor and 70-300VR but many times the D90 or D300 get used more. For what it is worth we use our D200 more than our D700. FF may be wonderful but to me they are tools. I miss my 8x10 and 10x30 camera some days, but not often. FF is not the only camera worth using. I have been comparing my DX 12-24 with my best wide angle Nikkor and I am not certain there is enough difference to impress me. Still the camera I most often check this site for is news of a FF D700 replacement. I have shot with the D3s and D3x and have no personal interest in owning them. To me they are excess baggage.Hi Davey,
I see the D7K as a terrific option for upgrading from a D90 - assuming it will eventually live up to its specifications, but I am also somewhat interested in either the D700 or its replacement, and that is a rather 'eh' somewhat. I am on the golden side of my years (clearly ironic - whoever came up with that moniker _wasn't on this side_) and my current need for the full frame is probably not existent. My limited market takes no note of it. I regularly make enlargements for lobby displays to poster size with no complaints, and don't plan to make any thing larger.
The D7K would use all the 14 or so lenses I currently have without further investment in FX lenses and wouldn't weigh as much as a D700 or its replacement, something I'd appreciate.
I guess I can easily talk myself out of a D700, but I would be interested in yours or anyone else's comments as to the good reason's one should consider a D700 or D3s.
I would enjoy anyone's comments and input. Thanks to all.
My best.
Mike
Posted 2 years ago # -
Hi Mike Gunter
My only suggestion to anyone buying equipment is buy the best you can afford, and use them for long enough, don't sell it after a year because a newer model might be coming out.Posted 2 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
