D90 or D7000?

[stradale33]

Question for wise heads

Hi,

the OP wanted to upgrade his D40 for various reasons. My question off the back of that is how far would the D3100 (the evolution of the D40, right?) go to providing increased low light capabilities as per his first question? obviously the D3100 doesn't have a built in motor for AF which was another requirement so I'm not suggesting the D3100 for the OP. But I am interested in working out how far up the tree I should go for a DSLR myself. I seem to end up taking photos indoors in pretty iffy light often so that is a big consideration. (Mind you I'm sure going from a P&S G11 to a D3100 would be a huge jump).

Anyway, buying a D3100 or D7000 (or other similar) either way would be a big lump of money to throw down so it's been interesting to read other peoples upgrade paths and how they would maybe do things differently. - Thanks I enjoyed reading.

Joel

Hi folks.

I've been shooting with a D40 for the past 3 years and have been wanting for a new body for a while. Though I had my sights set on the D90, I waited a bit too long and out came the D7000. I'm mainly looking for a new body for the following reasons:

1. The D40's low-light capabilities are really keeping me from doing low-light photography. I find that the D40 has far more noise and dirtier pictures than even my GF1 at the same ISO. Pictures at ISO800 and above are noticeably noisy even after resizing, and it's of course even more noticeable under heavier post-processing. As a result I mostly shoot in the daylight at ISO200/400 (since the D40 only does full-stop ISO increments), but would much rather have some more flexibility in the situations in which I can shoot. It really vexes me that my tiny GF1 gives me cleaner pictures than the D40!

 

[joepunk]

When the D7000 was released I was looking at just the camera and didn’t bother with the rebates as I didn’t need any lenses. And I decided to wait until around this time period for making any final purchasing decisions. However, now looking at the out of stock and possible price increases (probably not for the lower class dslrs) and that the rebates are expiring on April 30, I’m thinking about buying from costco the D7000+18-200 w/$250 rebate and selling the lens.

 

[gkarris]

Just sold off all my Canon stuff - not very ergonomic, but wanted the CMOS sensor for low-light photography (hate flash).

It was weird seeing low-light photos from Nikon users (low end dSLR's) that were as good as my Olympus low-light photos (Olympus uses a smaller sensor but has NMOS).

Nikon *finally* succumbed (I remember them saying that they could beat Canon's CMOS with their CCD's - LOL).

I got a D5000 - love it so far....

Get a D90 - they're really cheap now and have the internal focusing motor.

 

[runlsd]

When I had a D80, my sister's D90 didn't feel like much of an upgrade. But D80/D90 to D7000 will be a different story.

Having used both the D90 and D7000, I can say with confidence go with D7000 if you can afford it. D90 is a great camera and will undoubtedly be an upgrade from D3100. But D7000 is just a different beast.

 

[Ryan1524]

D7000. The AF and IQ improvements are worth it.

 

[khollister]

The D7000 is a very large step up from a D90 in build quality, AF performance, features and image quality. While not inexpensive, I think the D7000 is Nikon's best value in a higher end body in quite some time. Really a superlative camera. For the record I have a D700, D300s and a D7000.