Might upgrade from D90, questions

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by glocke12, Mar 1, 2011.

  1. glocke12 macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #1
    It is bonus time, and I have some money that I can put towards a new toy so I am thinking of upgrading from my D90 to a D7000. I was thinking of going from the D90 to a D700, but the price on a D700 is a tough pill to swallow.

    I like the D90, and have taken some great photos, but I like the idea of the increased low light ability of the D7000, and the two SD card slots.

    Thoughts? Suggestions?
     
  2. jackerin macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
  3. glocke12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #3
    I have the following lenses:

    Nikon 24-70 f2.8

    Nikon 12-24mm

    Tamron 70-300
    Tamran macro 180 mm
     
  4. danpass macrumors 68020

    danpass

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #4
    Go for the D7000

    you can also 'try before you buy' at www.lensrentals.com or get it from somewhere with a good return policy.
     
  5. pna macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    #5
    If you want a new toy and have a bunch of money to spend, than by all means pick up a d7000. You'll certainly like it, and I do like mine a lot. The low light capabilities are better, for sure, but unless you were really just on the verge of being able to capture low light scenes with your d90, I don't know that the d7000 really puts you over the edge. Faster glass (i.e. primes) would cost about the same as the upgrade (provided you're selling your d90), and give you the same or better low light capability. Or putting your money towards an off camera flash setup would potentially be even better and open up a world of creative opportunities.

    But really, if those are the only reasons that you're looking to upgrade, I'd think about something else to put your money towards. You'll be surprised how similar the images you take between the two bodies look with the same lenses.
     
  6. NEiMac macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Location:
    THe really dry side of the Pacific NW
    #6
    Im upgrading to the D7000 from my D200. Looking forward to improved high ISO performance for sure. The move from the D90 to D7000 would be harder to convince myself of I think. You may wait and see if they ever release the D400 too. The price of the D700 is a mighty tough pill to swallow, you have the price of the camera and then you have to deal with the cost of losing the crop factor and replacing lenses if necessary, most of yours appears to be fx though with exception to your 12-24.
     
  7. davidgrimm macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2006
    Location:
    North Texas
    #7
    I replaced my dead D200 (my fault - get stupidity insurance) to the D7000. In between then I was sometimes using my daughters D60. Really love the D7000, especially compared to the D60.

    I wanted to go to a D700, but Ken Rockwell's review (and the substantial price difference) persuaded me to go the D7000 route.
     
  8. El Cabong macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    #8
    I wouldn't upgrade from a D90 unless I needed better video immediately. I'd rather put the money towards a new lens, or save the money to put it toward the D400/800 that should be out in the fall.

    Of course, toys aren't about necessity.
     
  9. puckhead193 macrumors G3

    puckhead193

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Location:
    NY
    #9
    OP, how are you like the 24-70 on your D90 was thinking of getting one in a few months.
     
  10. glocke12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #10
    The 24-70 is easily the best lens I have in my bag, and is the lens i use 80% of the time.
     
  11. wilhelmreems macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    #11
    with all due respect, what would upgrading to the d7000 do for you that the d90 can't?
     
  12. glocke12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #12
    Well, that was the whole point of the post, to generate feedback to help with my decision.

    Basically, my reasons are as follows:

    1) Increased low light ability
    2) Higher resolution (d90 has 12 mp, d7000 has 16 i think)
    3) dual memory card slot (save raw to one card, jpeg to second card)
    4) better focusing system
    5) alloy body as opposed to plastic
    6) i also think the d7000 has slightly better weather sealing
     
  13. wilhelmreems macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    #13
    i'd wait for the D400 announcement to see if it's worth while, it might be even better than the d7000 in the focusing, weather sealing and possible MP.

    if you haven't checked out these sites for some perspective, i would suggest it. I like Thom Hogan's site for a much needed slap in the face when i get gear crazy.

    www.bythom.com and www.dpreview.com

    http://bythom.com/nikond7000review.htm
     
  14. Eauboy macrumors regular

    Eauboy

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #14
    The D300s doesn't intrigue you? I have a d80 which I love, but if I were to replace it now I'd probably lean toward the 300s.
     
  15. Sgt93 macrumors 6502

    Sgt93

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Retired'ville
    #15
    Go for the FX frame D700. You will not regret it. Or wait for the D800 that keeps getting pushed off.
     
  16. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #16
    1) The question is do you need more ISO?
    2) This means that poor lenses and poor technique will result in worse images- make sure you really understand the ramifications. If you're not routinely printing 13x19 or above, and you're not routinely cropping more than half the frame, this won't be an advantage for most images.
    3) Better off just saving raw and doing a batch convert after any adjustments IMO.
    6) A rain cover is cheap and useful no matter how "sealed" the body.


    It's only "pushed off" by the fanboys who will complain incessantly about the price once it's actually released. Nikon releases each camera body when it is ready, and they don't schedule production until they're happy with the performance of their prototypes. Now the earthquake damage very well could impact production- though Nikon is currently reporting no injuries amongst its employees and reports are that their facility in Sendai escaped major damage- no telling what that means for the components inside though. Canon's had damage to the plant, though they report that production will not be halted. Panasonic's Lumix plant is also seemingly affected and minor injuries have been sustained there.

    Paul
     
  17. glocke12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #17
    Picked up the D7000 last Friday. I have not had much time to play with it, but I am pretty impressed and have no regrets. The picture quality is excellent, and I am getting very sharp and clean images up to ISO 2500, 6400 seems to provide some ok images, but pictures taken at that level will probably need to have some noise reduction applied to them in PS.

    Compared to my D90, the D7k provides substantially better images in terms sharpness and color. The difference is so dramatic I am wondering if the D90 I had was a lemon.

    I did give the D700 some considerable thought, but I feel that I am just not ready to make the jump to FX as of now. Not only is the camera twice the price of the D7k, but I would also need to buy new lenses (right now I only own one fx lens, the nikon 24-70 f2.8). In other words unless I had 4-5k to drop on gear it is just to hard to justify the D700. This summer I might be able to afford the Nikon 70-200 f2.8, if I am able to swing that purchase than next year at bonus time I might seriously consider an FX camera.
     
  18. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #18
    You can save money by getting the 80-200 instead, which works fine on FX.

    Paul
     
  19. Big-TDI-Guy macrumors 68030

    Big-TDI-Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    #19
    I've been mulling over the D7000 as well. Currently have the D5000 - I'm very much noobish - but this camera just isn't cutting it for me.

    Big question I have for the D7000 - of which I cannot seem to find anywhere - is the grip / size. The D5000 is a bit too small, and is uncomfortable for me to hold. For some reason, I recall the D90 feeling wider to my hands, but I'm not 100% on this.

    Can anyone tell me? I even used Google looking for comparisons between the D5000 and D7000 - and didn't see any mention of physical size.
     
  20. glocke12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    glocke12

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    #20

    Nikon USA website has size comparisons.

    http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Digital-SLR-Cameras/index.page

    Ive read where some people say the D7000 is small and the recomend a battery grip. I dont notice it, but than again Ive never held one of the larger cameras, I also have small hands.

    Anyway, I highly recommend the D7000.
     
  21. cleanup macrumors 68030

    cleanup

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Location:
    Toronto
    #21
    The D7000 is really only marginally larger than a D5000 or D90. Just visit a camera store and try it out. Just have a look at the lens mount and compare the relative size of the grip. Of course, these images tell you nothing about thickness.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    A D7000 is the next upgrade on my list, but I'll definitely be waiting until the end of the year, or further. Hopefully the body price will drop to around $1000 by then.
     
  22. Big-TDI-Guy macrumors 68030

    Big-TDI-Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    #22
    Thanks for those pictures. I copied them into MS Paint (via Parallels - what a sad existence I reside in) Anyhow, I took the D5000 and created gridlines bordering the lens mount - as I figured that's a decent reference point - as they must be within a tight tolerance.

    Anyhow - after I scaled them up so the lens ring was the same size across all three, I created a silhouette of the D7000 (in red) and quite literally erased everything within the silhouette except for the lens ring grid markers.

    I inverted a D90 and D5000 and dragged the D7000 overlay until centered on the ring. It looks as if the D90 vs D7000 are pretty close size-wise, however the D5000 clearly looks smaller than the D7000.

    So after all this - I now firmly believe the D7000 is worth a look at in person. :D
     

    Attached Files:

  23. Big-TDI-Guy macrumors 68030

    Big-TDI-Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    #23
    Update: Looked at in person, D7000 is definitely larger than the D5000. Felt so much better in my hands in fact, that I now own one. :D
     

Share This Page