Wed 27-Aug-08 04:05 AM | edited Wed 27-Aug-08 07:53 AM by jrp
The rumor mill can now take a rest. At the stroke of midnight EST, Nikon has announced the arrival of the D90.
(Edited to add front and back images)
---------according to Nikon USA: "The D90 will be available throughout the United States beginning September 2008 at an MSRP of $999.95** for body only and $1299.95** for body and lens outfit that includes the new AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens."
"Shoot everything f/16 at a 100 and let the lab boys worry about it."
Wed 27-Aug-08 05:06 AM | edited Wed 27-Aug-08 05:22 AM by DigitalDarrell
Nikon rules! But, we already knew that!
============================================== Darrell Young (DigitalDarrell) www.pictureandpen.com "Better too many words than not enough understanding." ==============================================
Wed 27-Aug-08 09:28 AM | edited Wed 27-Aug-08 10:03 AM by Sepheebear
Wow! It looks awesome and the specs are nice. But for some reason Im not all that excited about it. D300/D700 seem like the next "photographical" step for this Nikonian after having owned a D80. I think that's because the D80 is *just that good* so this is a "500,000 mile service update" to an already wonderful design.
For me there aren't any real "wow" features in this model that make all that wait and the surrounding buzz/hype worthwhile. Actually, it feels a bit like a "D60X" type of release, even though its more capable. The updates are simply a reconfiguration of "what's new at Nikon".
Still a great camera to add to Nikon's already stunning line. If I didnt already have the D80, I'd probably be chomping at the bit to get my hands on one of these.
I must add that the video feature is pretty neat although not quite mind-blowing to me to be able to shoot 5 minute video clips at a time. I still believe video cameras are for shooting video. (How old-fashioned!!!) I find it quite interesting however, moving forward with this technology, to consider the implications of somewhere in the next 10-20 years, having someone be able to shoot feature-length movies in near darkness, at super high noiseless ISO, with their collection of AIS lenses. Color me wowed!
Seth -- If we knew what we were doing, it wouldnt be called "research". - A. Einstein
Wed 27-Aug-08 11:42 AM | edited Wed 27-Aug-08 11:43 AM by MstrBones
I felt the same way about the D80 when it came out. There was never a compelling reason for me to upgrade from my D70s - and the D80 is a fine camera - I have had the opportunity to shoot it and the D200 quite a bit, (and my brother's D200 sorely tempted me to purchase one).
However, the D90 represents two generations of Nikon engineering improvements for folks like me and is quite compelling for many photographers - most of the D300 functionality at 2/3rds the cost. Still, will most D80 users need it? Your mileage may vary!
I think your feelings are quite common when looking within a particular line of Nikon camera users. I've seen lots of D200 owners wonder if they should buy a D300.
Im in the same boat the D90 is very very cool and it is to the D300 what the D80 was to the D200. But I just got a D200(Well UPS comes today) so I am set with my D80 and D200. My next upgrade will be a D300 when the D400 hits the market and the D300 is under 1000$ like my new to come today D200 is. Plus I got a D200 so I can meter with all my wonderful MF Nikkors something the D90 will not do like my D80.
But again this is a very very cool camera and Nikon is really putting the heat on canon and that is good for all consumers.
I just looked at the video this is going to be the best top of the line PROsumer(I agree its in its own league not pro but definitely higher than the average consumer camera) camera out there. But I really wanted a D300 to meter with all my MF Nikkors but my budget just doesn't permit it but I got a great deal on a D200(Thanks Ernesto!).
If money was no problem a D300 and D90 would be the PERFECT pair but I am happy with a D200 and D80 team. Man it is a nice looking camera!
i think that the video capabilities is the best thing of the camera, i have know multiple younger people that did not purchase a DSLR because they did not have video capabilities. I think it is probably one of the best steps that nikon could have done in the competition against canon. If i did not have the d80 i would seriously be looking at purchasing the D90, but at this point i think that the d700 will be more my thing.
"there is more to be seen in one photograph then in a whole movie"
I see the D-Movie mode has gained some interest in this discussion. From my perspective as a former news broadcaster and photojournalist I was wondering how the camera can accomplish the video mode, with sound, and yet from all outside appearances without the traditional video buttons, dials and microphones.
I'm still looking into it-- but I have spotted the mike.
also-- in terms of shooting video (movies) -- I'd love to have this camera for typical family situations like picnics or travel vacations where my intended final product would be simple transfer of the videos via the Internet. In this mode, (shooting at less than the Hi-Def Max) you can pull off 20 minute segments instead of just five minute bursts).
"Shoot everything f/16 at a 100 and let the lab boys worry about it."
Join Nikonians at Photokina: Cologne, Germany; September 23 - 28, 2008: Hall 2.1, Booth E014
Having read several postings above from folks underwhelmed by D90 announcement, I have to say that, as a current D80 owner myself, I find myself to be just the opposite.
From my perspective, it appears the D90 will finally bring to the table the one thing that the D80 most sorely lacked...namely decent low-light, long-exposure performance. I shoot almost exclusively at night, with exposure times typically ranging from 30 seconds to 10 minutes, but when I bought the D80, I hadn't figured on winding up in that niche; if I had, I probably would have wound up with a Canon 30D, which is also a fine low-light performer. The reality is, the D80, like all the other CCD-sensor Nikons that came before it, are really terrible low-light cameras, at least compared to compared to the CMOS-sensor Canon models they were competing against when they came out. The digital noise and "amp glow" made it almost impossible to shoot low ISO, long exposure shots and actually produce salable images.
So while on paper the D90 may not look like a quantum leap forward, I think the CMOS sensor will produce substantially better low-light images, with markedly less noise...the longer the exposure, the more you'll notice the difference.
I know most folks don't care as much about that as I do...but hey, I'm a night shooter!
"The reality is, the D80, like all the other CCD-sensor Nikons that came before it, are really terrible low-light cameras,..."
I can certainly get behind your enthusiasm for the new midrange model from Nikon, with it's CMOS sensor, but I must take exception to this comment. As a happy D50 owner I've been delighted with the low-light, low noise performance of it's 6mp CCD. From 2002 to 2006 Nikon produced several 6mp models but from what I understand the D50 got a unique sensor that gives it such (relatively) great high-ISO performance. I know this is an entry level model but I've been patting myself on the back for two years for my decision to get a D50 for my first "serious" camera. I've been trying like crazy not to jump on some of the great D80 deals I've seen lately (new grey market bodies for $379). I know I'll be glad I didn't succumb to temptation when I get my hands on my new D90.
I'm comming from one of the first production D70's (not S). The very big D90 advantages are: 1) The 3" LCD 2) Better high ISO performance. 3) Lighter weight than the D300. 4) Much better AF than the D70.
Disavantage: 1) Lower flash sync speed than the D70.
After having a D40 for a year, I'm feeling the limitations and am ready to upgrade. I've been waiting for the D90 announcement to see if that would be the one. It isn't. Nikon took away the ability to meter with MF lenses and I have a few very good ones. There doesn't appear to be mirror lock-up, although it could be that it just isn't mentioned in the specs. The video business turns me off completely, if I want video I'll buy a video camera. I also don't even like having Auto and the Advanced Scene Modes. So, I will be upgrading at least to a D200 and more likely to a D300.
This is actually a very big deal for budding videographers.
People pay more than the cost of the D90 body for an adaptor to use 35mm lenses with traditional video cameras. Now, the ability to use Nikkor lenses with HD video is available with the addition of a killer still camera.
I'm already thinking about the D90 as a backup body for my D300 and very cool way to shoot video!
Yes, I understand that people want video possibilities with SLR-lenses. But I want a still photography camera for taking pictures of birds, landscapes, people, sports etc. My D80 is good for that, but has some limitations. The D300 seems almost perfect, except for the size, CF cards, price and weight. That is why I was hoping for the D90. But I guess you can't have everything. And I think it would be bad for D300 sales if Nikon made a D300 in a D90 body...
Thu 28-Aug-08 05:11 AM | edited Thu 28-Aug-08 06:35 AM by NKerns
I've read several posts from folks who really almost seem to resent the inclusion of the video capability in the new D90. I'm kind of at a loss to understand this...
The D90 is positioned to compete with the Canon 40D, which sells for basically the same price, but has no video functionality at all, and is a 10.1 MP camera versus the 12.3 MP in the D90. The image quality fo the D90 should be indentical to the D300, and so I can't see how ANYONE currently in a Nikon system could be disappointed in this offering; I think it clearly solidifies and extends Nikon's overtaking of Canon as the best image quality & features for the money in the D-SLR market.
And if you ask me, a Nikon D90 with an 18-200 VR lens, with VR enabled (read: "steadicam") will make a pretty dang nice digital video camera...especially when you consider it's already built into the camera you're gonna be carrying around anyway!
>I've read several posts from folks who really almost seem to >resent the inclusion of the video capability in the new D90. >I'm kind of at a loss to understand this... > >The D90 is positioned to compete with the Canon 40D, which >sells for basically the same price, but has no video >functionality at all, and is a 10.1 MP camera versus the 12.3 >MP in the D90.
Well, I could very well go with 6 mp as in the D40, if it weren't for the lack of lot of functions.
>The image quality fo the D90 should be >indentical to the D300, and so I can't see how ANYONE >currently in a Nikon system could be disappointed in this >offering; I think it clearly solidifies and extends Nikon's >overtaking of Canon as the best image quality & features >for the money in the D-SLR market.
Again, there are e.g. not going to be the same AF system. Much bigger deal right now for me than e.g. 12 MP, live view or video...
>And if you ask me, a Nikon D90 with an 18-200 VR lens, with VR >enabled (read: "steadicam") will make a pretty dang >nice digital video camera...especially when you consider it's >already built into the camera you're gonna be carrying around >anyway!
I want to take great still pics in all conditions, not videos (even though it could be a bonus).
Before I bought my D50 in Jan of '06 I was convinced that the D70s was what I was going to get. After reading many reviews and customer comments at various internet sites I came away with the D50. It has served me well for close to 3 years. I am now ready to upgrade. I've hit plateaus with some of the limitations (mostly fps, buffer and command dial).
Recently I had seriously looked at the D300 as my next camera body. Even after reading the rumors about the D90 I was still going to get a D300. Now after reading a few hands on previews, seeing the specs that the D90 is actually offering and taking into consideration my needs and wants I am moving my thoughts towards the D90.
The move up from 2.5/3 fps (D50/D8) to 4.5 fps is big for me. As hobbiest who shoots upwards of 900 images a year of little league and college level baseball do I really need 6 or 8 fps. Now the 20 RAW image buffer on the D300 is nice, I think I can get away with 6 (the D50 is only 4). For the rest of my shooting, the new processor is great (mostly vacations, family candid's & portraits, and cityscape stuff)
The fact that I can now have a real working battery grip AND wired remote is a big upgrade for me. Better auto focus with more auto focus points.
I could have gotten some of that stuff with the D80, but there is now more of an upgrade gap/reason to go from an entry level such as the D50 or D40 to the D90 and you don't have to skip all the way up to the D300 to get most upgrades.
I've spend the better part of today reading everything I could find on the D90 and it looks more than promising. Now I just need to see some images. Especially those at the high ISO's. If they are like the D300 as many preview places are saying, I may have just found my new camera body. For the same price of a D300 w/battery grip I can get the D90 w/battery grip and also get the 18-200mm VR lens (instead of my current 18-135 non VR lens).
>The move up from 2.5/3 fps (D50/D8) to 4.5 fps is big for me. >As hobbiest who shoots upwards of 900 images a year of little >league and college level baseball do I really need 6 or 8 fps. >Now the 20 RAW image buffer on the D300 is nice, I think I can >get away with 6 (the D50 is only 4). For the rest of my >shooting, the new processor is great (mostly vacations, family >candid's & portraits, and cityscape stuff)
This a nice improvement, the 4.5 fps.
However, even the 11 AF points is sometimes limiting for birding, and I guess shooting sports will be no different. But I haven't actually compared the AF systems side by side to be able to say if it would be a big difference.
We also have a D50 and have waited for the D90. However, the D50 has been a great camera for us since we first purchased it in June of 2005. We have taken it all over the world on several cruises and it is easy to use for us retired folks.
So while the D90 looks like a good upgrade for us, our recent purchase of the 18-55 VR lens extended the D50's useful life for us. We have a verbal order for the D90 at our camera store and will take a hands on look when it arrives. Since we do not have a video camera and do not use that format, the inclusion of it in the D90 does not add value to us as we would probably not use it.
FINALLY! My D50 has been a great little camera, and I'm absolutely keeping it as a backup. The final specs are more or less what I was looking for. A 15-point AF system, 5FPS, and a bigger buffer would've been nice, but this'll work just fine. I've got $1k waiting for the first place to start shipping it!
P.S. Is anyone else digging the fact that Nikon is reusing the battery grips? MB-D80 grips have already had their 2 years on the market and are now reasonably priced at $125.
P.P.S. I'm of the opinion that the video mode is an added bonus. Sure I want a D300/D700/D3, but I can't afford those. I'm buying the D90 for still images first, and if the video works well, then that'll make a sweet camera even better.
Yes, finally! I have been looking to upgrade from my D40 for a few months now and was seriously comtemplating on the D80. But after posting on these boards, several Nikonians advised that I wait for the D80's replacement given my needs...and now that replacement has arrived in the form of the D90.
The D90 seems to feature everything I need in an advanced amateur-level SLR...1) AutoFocus with non-AF-S/I lenses. I currently own two non-AF-S/I lenses (Nikkor 50mm 1.8, Tamron 28-105mm 4-5.6) that I would like to AF with my camera. Ive tried manual focus but images just dont come out as sharp as when theyre auto focused. 2) Built-in wireless CLS capabilities. Even though I own an SB-800, Id like to use it off-camera without having to use the SU-800. In other words, Id like to trigger the flash directly from the camera. I know the D40 can trigger the flash remotely by setting the SB-800 to SU-4 mode but even then its limited. 3) The ability to print extra-large prints. I do quite a bit of cropping and find myself restricted to max print sizes of 11x14, and sometimes 16x20. Now I wouldnt normally make enlargements beyond 16x20, but would like the ability to if needed. 4) Good sensor for low-light shooting. This was a big problem for me while considering the D80.
So long as the above holds true with the D90, it appears to be the right upgrade for me. Like a poster said above, the video feature is just an added bonus. If it performs well, I'll find a way to utilize it...if not, I won't bother much with it.
Now, the question is, to buy the camera body only or opt for the 18-105mm kit? My D40 will be given to my significant other along with it's 18-55mm kit lens. Opinions will be appreciated. Thanks!
Man! It's like you've been reading my mind. As a fellow D50 owner I have been lusting for the D300 but I just can't stomach the price. Not when I could take that cash and put it into some pro-level glass. The D90 sounds like the best parts of the D300 without the expensive magnesium frame & high FPS. I enjoyed your gallery, BTW.
I've found it interesting to see that the majority of people talking about upgrading to the D90 are those coming from a D50 and not a D80. It seems that for many D80 owners the differences are not sufficient.
I went from a D80 to a D300 and wondered if I should have waited for the (then) rumoured D90. The autofocus might be better from D80 to D90 but still only 11 AF points (and still only one cross type sensor?). The CMOS sensor will likely improve high iso shooting and as someone here pointed out, a D90 + 18-200 VR lens for the price of a D300 sounds tempting, but all in all I don't regret not waiting. All the hype will surround the video facilities and I want to take pictures - not make films.
I've been shooting a D80 since sometime in 2006 and am seriously considering adding a D90 to the stable. The sensor should be a major improvement, my average ISO is 500 (data mining EXIF can be entertaining) so the improved high ISO performance should be great. All of the other improvements individually might not warrant and upgrade but collectively add up to a (hopefully) much better camera.
The D90 still only has 11 focus points, but it has the Scene Recognition and 3d tracking from the D3/D300 which I think will make it do a better job than the D80 on moving targets.
This has been a very informative discussion so far. Thanks to all for your comments.
I noticed in a few posts the mention of a zoom Nikkor kit lens being referred to as an 18-200. Be careful on that item guys and gals.
The AF-S DX 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR in the D90 kit was just released, while the AFS DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR has been out since 2005.
Nikon specs describe the new 18-105 as 15 elements in 11 groups (with one ED glass element and one aspherical lens element). The 18-200 specs are listed as 16 elements in 12 groups (two ED glass elements, three aspherical lens elements).
According to Nikon's Press Release announcing the F90 kit 18-105mm on August 27, 2008: "The AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens is scheduled to be available at Nikon authorized dealers beginning September 2008 at an estimated selling price of $399.95. It will also be available as part of the D90 18-105mm VR lens kit for an estimated selling price of $1299.95."
Of course that's Manufacturer's Suggested Retail -- so I'm sure the bargains will soon be found. Meanwhile, the popular AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR can now be found in the $650 to $750 range from most of the established online dealers.
For more specs on the AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR check Nikon's specs here.
For more specs on the AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR check Nikon's specs here.
Have you ever wondered what all those "Alphabet Soup" lens designations mean? -- (like G IF-ED VR) -- Nikon explains them in their online NIKKOR lens glossary.
(Edited to add side-by-side lens comparison image)
"Shoot everything f/16 at a 100 and let the lab boys worry about it."
Join Nikonians at Photokina: Cologne, Germany; September 23 - 28, 2008: Hall 2.1, Booth E014
Well folks seeing this is going to be my first DSLR I can't see any other choice but a D90 and a 18-200 VR lens. A freind of mine just got back from Oshkosh (the largest airshow in the world) and had some spectaclar photo's taken with a Nikon D200 that could never have been attained with a p&s. As far as the video function being added to the camera the purests claim they will never use it, I beg to differ. There are always situations when 5,10 or even 30 seconds of video can tell the story much better than a single still and to be able to do it with any lens you want. Well all I can say is Nikon is going to sell a butt load of camera's.
I have a D70s, and was just about to pull the trigger on the D300. However, I find the video capability of the D90 to be very compelling. I tend to shoot HD landscape video with my Sony HC1 when I'm out shooting stills with the D70s, and the D90 will prove very valuable in that I can use my superwide Sigma 10-20 and other Nikon lenses, as well as achieve DOF effects that I can't with my camcorder. I'm hoping that for many times when I'm out I would no longer have to lug two cameras with me.
Even without video the D90 is a nice upgrade from the D70s. I can understand D80 oiwners not being overly excited, as I wasn't excited when the D80 was released.I'm looking forward to the extra megapixels for cropping, and I'm hoping I'll haave better highlight control and dynamic range in my shots.
THis is a sweet looing camera. I was looking at the D80 or D200 as an upgrade, but this looks sweet! For the price of a D300, I can buy a D90, get my D40x IR converted, and still save some money, ecpecially since I won't buy it any time soon, but I bet I will at some point.
As for video, I think it's a great idea. I don't much care for video, but I don't mind having it (the D90 would be this price with or without video, just like the D80) and I would like to put it to use.
My favorite parts are either the LCD screen or high ISO performance, and focusing moter (the 2 mp from 10 is near enough unoticable)
I realize it's only been around for a few days, but I'd be interested in some comparisons between the apparent capabilities of the D90 and the D300.
I am probably going to move to digital underwater shooting from film (I've used a Nikonos for 30+ years with success) very soon. I started looking at the 300 (underwater housings start at about $1500 at the low end and go to about $5,000 all tricked out at the high end). As you might expect, every Nikon body needs a different housing (no one-size-fits all), so choosing the right body for me is an important and long term choice.
The things that both the D300 and the D90 seem to have of great benefit to divers would be the live view option, with an edge going to the D90 for its one button operation. Good low light performance is particularly valuable, although I would want to use a strobe at most depths under 15 feet or so. Still, both are probably great at reducing shadow noise.
Big plus for the D90: the price difference of about $700, although you could say that with all the other costs, what's $700? (Answer: one or two lenses.)
Modest plus: Video. I agree with most that if I want to film video, I'll get a video camera. But it would be nice to take one rig down and not miss that 10 seconds of shark going by while I'm shooting stills of something else.
A few negatives that I haven't decided matter: Limited autofocus controls on the D90 with Live View activated. Does anyone know whether I should care?
D90 has fewer focus areas (11 vs.51) than the 300. Undecided whether I care.
Slower shutter speed max on the D90. Probably don't care.
Can anyone help identify other differences that might make a difference in my upgrade choice?
Just a quick note, I'm living in South Korea right now and one of the local camera shops has the availability of the D90 for September 19. Not sure if it'll be different for the US but I can't wait to get my hands on it and test it out! I do some video editing and there's been a lot of times when I was only out with my camera and wish I could capture some video. I have a P&S but the video quality isn't high quality enough to use in client videos.
I have to add my voice to those somewhat confused about the dislike of the video capabilities. I just found out about the release announcement last night and I'm a bit overwhelmed with the feature set on the D90. I'm wondering if it isn't so good that it will draw a few people away from purchasing a D300.
I have a D80 and a D200 so I probably won't be looking at the D90 for myself but it's possibly the first camera I'd recommend to anyone interested in purchasing their first D-SLR or to anyone shooting with one more than 3 or 4 years old. I think it's a great camera with some truly stunning capabilities. I'm betting Nikon is going to knock Canon's socks off with this camera and whether purists like it or not, allow me to make a prediction that video is going to start popping up on D-SLRs throughout the middle price range. I'd rarely use it but I'd love to have it. Every once in a while a bit of video brings you the scene with the sounds and movements that no still image can capture.
In my opinion, Nikon scored a bullseye with this one!
Based on the specs this seems to be a significant upgrade for the D80. The D90 is what the D300 was to the D200. I am planning to upgrade my D50 and was leaning towards picking up a D200, but the D90 is at about the same price point. When I compare the features of the D90 vs the D200 it seems like the D90 may be the better choice. I will need to think about this one.
It would seem that for anyone looking to upgrade from a D40/D50/D60/D70 this would be a great choice. Some significant features in common with the D300 are the sensor (high ISO) and the LCD screen.
Regarding Video this is a nice to have. But to me it is like Live View, which is a big deal to some and no big deal to others. I agree with the another post that you will probably be seeing video included in all midrange DSLR's in the future.
I agree that the D90 is a significant upgrade. The CMOS sensor with lower noise at higher ISO is reason enough for me to upgrade, and the larger LCD monitor with higher resolution is icing on the cake. I probably won't use Live View or the video, and the self cleaning sensor seems like a gimick -- I still had to use wet swabs to clean my D300 when I had one.
I am very happy that the D90 size is the same and the weight is just one ounce heavier than the D80.
Many say knock off the video the price will come down. But lets look at it from this point the video is free as the D80 was $999 when it was introduced. I know thats what I paid for it so Nikon gave us a D80 with several improvements ie CMOS and high ISO(even though I shoot ISO 1600 all the time with great results from my D80), tweeked Cam 1000 AF system, more FPS, GPS support and yet we get free movies!
Sun 31-Aug-08 01:05 AM | edited Sun 31-Aug-08 01:08 AM by James23p
Well we had the N/F50 and N/F55 and the N/f70 and N/F75 and I do believe the N/F75 was the last new consumer camera so I would guess D65 and D85 or D95 etc.
Plus the N80 was a replacement for the N70 but the N75 was of a different level being a replacement for the N65 which was a replacement for the N60. Confusing huh Nikon has plenty of numbers to play with. How about the how Nikon gave the D70 a face lift and called it the D70s, maybe the D90 will have a D90s or D90x. Who knows Nikon has always kept their future plans close to the vest.
While perusing amd comparing the specs of the D90 and the D300, I noticed a difference in the RAW formats supported. The D300 offers both compressed and uncompressed NEF format options, while the D90 only offers a compressed NEF format. Now I'm no expert on file formats and what not, but I know that in general, when you compress an image file, you generally create at least some loss in image quality.
So while the sensor and the EXPEED processing between the D90 & D300 are theoretically the same, it may be that the RAW format capability differences between the D300 & D90 might ultimately lead to the D90 actually NOT matching the D300 in final image quality, which I had assumed would be the case when I read about the same sensor and processing system. I suspect others may have assumed the same as well.
So...does anyone else have any more expertise on the differences between the compressed NEF format and the uncompressed options included on the D300?
>Now I'm no expert on file formats and what not, but I know >that in general, when you compress an image file, you >generally create at least some loss in image quality.
You only lose quality if a lossy compression algorithm (like JPEG) is used. If you use lossless compression (like PNG) then there is zero loss in quality. I can't say for sure but I'd be EXTREMELY surprised if Nikon was using lossy compression for raw.
It seems the D300 has 3 RAW modes, uncompressed, lossy compressed and lossless compressed. The difference between lossy compressed and uncompressed has been discussed in depth in posts comparing the D80 and D200, and also in the D200 forum. This article shows the differences between tham to be imperceptible in practice.
>other than the video - what are the advantages of the D90 >over the D80? > >Is the low light level performance any better? > >Anything else? >
It will have D300 low light performance (unless something goes drasticlly wrong) better frame rate, live view, self cleaning sensor (which does work better than none, but not a be-all end-all for cleaning)
As the above poster mentioned, the D90 will inherit the critical components from the D300 that should allow it to totally blow the D80 out of the water in low-light, long-exposure situations. Two things specifically make it an absolute MUST for long exposure photography.
First, MUCH less digital noise! I shoot almost exclusively at night, usually by the light of a full moon, and at ISO 100-200, the exposure times usually range from 2 to 6 minutes, and with long exposure NR enabled, total time to finish an image is 3 to 9 minutes. What you find in this type of image from a D80 is substantial digital noise, particularly in the darker areas, and ESPECIALLY in the upper corners of the image, where the well-known "amp glow" phenomenon can usually be seen if the corners are dark night sky, for example. The D80 is in fact a terrible camera for this application.
Now compare that to a D90 which, if all the obvious assumptions hold true, will mirror the D300s low-light capabilities. I have an associate out in California who shoots almost the exact same style of photography as I do who made the switch from a D80 to a D300, and he absolutely RAVED about the improvement in image quality.
Here are some quotes from him regarding his experiences with the D300 after a few months of use:
"...I almost never use LENR. Just this weekend, I shot a 16-minute photo on ISO 200 w/o LENR, and it's very clean. I don't see any chrominance noise, and it's also quite smooth in terms of luminance noise. In short, the image is very usable right out of the camera. 4-minute and 8-minute exposures (ISO 100 / 200) absolutely do not need LENR. This alone makes the upgrade worth it if you can afford it. The purple / noisy corners are a thing of the past as well..."
"I absolutely love the D300. It is a huge jump from the D80...much more than an evolution IMO. Other features that I really like: a sensor cleaning system that really seems to work. I had a spot on the sensor, and I ran the cleaning option a few times...it seemed to do the trick. I have it set to clean on start-up / shut-down as well. Live view is handy, but not terribly useful at night. Another very useful feature is that you can press a button and view the info that's on the top LCD on the back of the camera. Definitely comes in handy when you're in an awkward position. The high-res screen is excellent as well..."
"My opinion is that the D300 is a no-brainer for nighttime photography when compared to the D80."
Which brings up the other reason why, if you shoot a lot of long exposure night stuff, you need the D90/D300 as well...the virtual elimination of the need for Long Exposure Noise Reduction! This ALONE would be a huge plus for someone like me...by disabling LENR, YOU IMMEDIATELY BECOME 33% MORE PRODUCTIVE when shooting at night, and with the CMOS sensor, you image quality still improves over the D80! No more waiting 2 minutes for that 4 minute exposure to process; you close the shutter, you got the image! I can't tell you how big a deal that is to me.
So in short...I'm simply dying to get my hands on one. I've got a major project coming up in October that will be SO much more enjoyable with a D90!
>It will have D300 low light performance (unless something goes >drasticlly wrong) better frame rate, live view, self cleaning >sensor (which does work better than none, but not a be-all >end-all for cleaning)
If you are careful with your lens-changing technique the need for sensor cleaning is actually minimal in my experience. I bought various sensor cleaning gizmos early on in my D70 ownership and have yet to get most of them out of their packaging.
Looking down the comparison chart there are very few items that werent improved from the D80 to the D90, and most of those areas that arent in the green dont really matter much. · Improved sensor, now a CMOS 12.3MP · Improved resolution up from 3872x2592 to 4288x2848 · New, highly advanced exposure system* · Sensor cleaning system · 3D Tracking added to the focus system · Better high ISO performance, i.e. better low-light performance · "Smart" Exposure Program recognizes VR on/off · High-endurance shutter mechanism, 100,000 cycles · Active D-Lighting · Active D-Lighting can be Bracketed · WB now includes a Database driven component · Additional Picture Controls · Storage for up to nine custom Picture Controls · LCD 3 920,000 pixels vs. 2.5 230,000 · Live View · New image processing engine (EXPEED) · Additional in-camera retouching options · Scene Recognition System · Face Detection · Calendar Display · New information display on main LCD · Vignetting control in-camera · HDMI output · GPS support
· When they were announced in late August, 2007 (almost exactly a year ahead of the D90), the D3 and D300 marked a significant advance in exposure metering technology. Nikon's 3D Matrix Metering had long been an industry standard for exposure accuracy when faced with tough subjects and difficult lighting conditions, but the D3/D300's system took Matrix Metering to a new level. Changes in the optical path for their 1,005 elements RGB exposure/white balance sensor greatly improved scene-recognition accuracy. This technology has now been brought forward to the Nikon D90. Although its RGB exposure/white balance sensor has fewer elements (420 vs. 1,005), this improved scene-recognition technology promises improved exposure accuracy for the D90, beyond the already-excellent performance of the D80. Source http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D90/D90A5.HTM
I fully agree with you Brooks P...I don't quite understand all the folks who are saying, "meh...the D90 isn't a big enough jump over the D80 to make it worthwhile". What are they smoking? I think these folks are just people who compare megapixels and what not without really looking into the subtler, qualitative differences between the D80 & D90 that really add up to a MUCH more sophisticated and capable camera. The image quality on the D90 will be substantially better in all lighting conditions, but I think most folks will REALLY start to notice the difference as light levels drop...that's where the D90 will really shine, I suspect.
Based on what I have read, the D90 with 18-105mm kit lens will be available some time next week, and the body-only will be available later in October.
With this in mind, how many of you who have pre-ordered (or plan to order) a D90 opted (will opt) for the version with the kit lens? Or are you waiting for the body-only version to be released in October?
I'm pre-ordered (body only) through Amazon. I've got a big project coming in October though that I really want to have the D90 in time for though, so I may have to just buy the kit and eBay the 18-105 VR.
Amazon's got the 18-105 VR priced at $399...anyone give me $300 for it if I buy the kit?
Thu 04-Sep-08 02:47 AM | edited Thu 04-Sep-08 02:49 AM by AJsD90
>Based on what I have read, the D90 with 18-105mm kit lens >will be available some time next week, and the body-only will >be available later in October. > >With this in mind, how many of you who have pre-ordered (or >plan to order) a D90 opted (will opt) for the version with the >kit lens? Or are you waiting for the body-only version to be >released in October?
Just joined the forum after pre-ordering the D90 with kit lens from Amazon:
As a first time Nikon user i don't have any lenses so i figured id give the kit lens a try. Im going on vacation in december and i plan on testing out the D90 as best i can during that time.
Its good to hear that the body+lens package will ship very soon.
>As a first time Nikon user i don't have any lenses so i >figured id give the kit lens a try. Im going on vacation in >december and i plan on testing out the D90 as best i can >during that time.
The kit lenses tend to be good value - significant saving over the separate prices, and the lens quality is good too. Hopefully the same will hold true for the 18-105 too (especially as I have ordered the kit too!)
I've heard good things about nikon kit lenses too and I gained further confidance in my choice after reading a review of the 18-105 VR on SLR gear. The iPhone doesnt support copy&paste else I would post a link.
Looks an intersting camera although I'm not in the market for one yet. As you're going on holiday I thought I'd mention the Image Doctors podcast 73a and 73b with Thom Hogan. There is much talk about going away on a trip and I think you might find it very useful.
Been shooting a D70s for a very long time and agonizing over the D300. But sense I just upgraded my computer, monitor, photo printer, and bought a Spyder 3 Pro, I Can't bring myself to buy the kit when all I really want is the body. Heck, if shelling out about $1,300 for the kit was an option, I think I would have to go for the $300 and get the D300.
>Been shooting a D70s for a very long time and agonizing over >the D300. But sense I just upgraded my computer, monitor, >photo printer, and bought a Spyder 3 Pro, I Can't bring myself >to buy the kit when all I really want is the body. Heck, if >shelling out about $1,300 for the kit was an option, I think I >would have to go for the $300 and get the D300. > >I'll hold out for the body.
i'm in the exact same boat... haha. looking to upgrade from the D70s... but holding out for the D90 body only.
Having jumped into the digital SLR world only a year ago with my D80, which I am thoroughly enjoying, I won't be upgrading for a while. However, the two items that most attract me to the D90 are the improved low light performance (I agree with earlier comments that the D80 is not a strong performer in that arena) and the GPS interface capability. I haven't seen any comments here about the latter, but for me that is a big deal as I tend to forget where I've taken many shots when I'm travelling around the back roads!
I have the exact same dilemma. I have a 2004 D70 that has worked wonderfully. I am a diver, and I have finally made the decision to go digital under water. To do that, among other things, you need a housing that is camera body specific, so the choice of body is a significant one, financially. Housing and port combinations start at roughly $2,000. I want to get this right.
I've been weighing the pros and cons of the 90 vs the 300, and I've posted questions on a few boards.
The two biggest factors for me that push toward the D90 are the price and movie capability. There is little argument on price--the D300, even with a recent drop, is still about $600 more. There is a huge debate on the movie capability. It is somewhat limited in some circumstances: No autofocus once the take begins, only 5 minute clips available in HD, a few others. The purists tend to say, "If I want a movie camera, I'll get a movie camera." The other side says, "This is very cool, with all of Nikon's lenses available to boot."
I think I'm mildly on the pro-movie side. If I am diving and shooting a generally static object and a shark comes by, it might be nice to get a 15 second clip of the pass. I combine stills and movies (previously shot by friends) to make nice iMovies, and being able to do this with one gadget has a lot of plusses. Since there is no housing just yet (there will be very soon), there are no divers with experiences to share on this subject yet.
All that said, there are some technical advantages to the D300 that seem to push in that direction. I'm not sure I'd miss them if I went with the 90, but the techie side of me worries about losing them for a "mere" $600:
--14 bit vs. 12 bit capability --Uncompressed RAW v. compressed --Some limitations on the autofocus modes --Compact vs. SD card
I'm sure there are others. As you will likely find, there are more similarities than differences. Possibly the biggest plus to both is the improved low light performance over previous generations.
>--14 bit vs. 12 bit capability >--Uncompressed RAW v. compressed >--Some limitations on the autofocus modes >--Compact vs. SD card > I think I would add better weather protection to that D300 list. No movie is better than no camera...
>I'll show how uninformed I am but what do you mean the D300 >has "weather protection features?" I suppose I need >to look at the D300 features and descriptions! > >Thanks for the quick feedback!
It's my understanding that the seals for the working parts --buttons, dials, etc. -- in the 300 offer advanced protection against intrusion of dust, dirt and water. I do recall reading that somewhere. That sounds like a great feature, although I'm modestly surprised to learn that a newer camera, the 90, might not have it. It's either a cost saving decision (making it possible to offer an almost equally capable camera for $600 less) or a step backward.
>It's my understanding that the seals for the working parts >--buttons, dials, etc. -- in the 300 offer advanced protection >against intrusion of dust, dirt and water. I do recall >reading that somewhere. That sounds like a great feature, >although I'm modestly surprised to learn that a newer camera, >the 90, might not have it. It's either a cost saving decision >(making it possible to offer an almost equally capable camera >for $600 less) or a step backward.
It is no different from the other cameras in that "rank" such as the D70, D80, which don't have the level of weather protection that you see on the D200 & D300 (and the D3 etc.).
It is a cost saving decision - along with other things like the plastic body.
I upgraded to a D90 from a very old, but still working well, D70.
I bought a D90 (with lens) kit from B&H about two weeks ago. Then I sold the 18-105mm lens on eBay.
So far I'm impressed with: 1) Big files - Much better crops than D70. 2) 3 inch monitor - No contest, better by far. 3) If I set the center sensor to 'wide area' the AF-C focus mode actually works very well. Most of my AF-C efforts with the D70 did not turn out well. 4) Ease of use - If you have used a D70, you probably won't need to open the D90's manual for a few days. About everything is under a 'hot button'.
I'm not sold on the following feature: 1) AF-A - This focus mode doesn't work well for me. I use either AF-S or AF-C. Your mileage may vary. There needs to be more information about the various focus modes. The manual is not much help. 2) Viewfinder - Only a bit better than the D70, not as good as the D200, and not even close to the F3HP. 3) D-Movie - My wife likes to play with it. Frame rate is too low for my taste.
Summary - Incremental update from D70. If you have a D200 or a D80, I wouldn't jump on the D90 too soon. Unless, of course, you must have the awesome display.
Yes I knew they were out there, but they are taking the kit box and removing the lens. There really shouldn't be any problem with that but some people like me want the sealed box, call me parinoid. Wolf camera is telling me that Nikon has added the part number for the body only to the system so you can order the body only now but it may still be a couple of weeks before it is in you hand. Interesting enough Amazon has the body only available now but they want $1198.95 for it. I can wait a couple more weeks until it is in the mainstream.
>GFRAZZLE did you receive your camera ok? I would just like to >have Cameta as an option If I can't find just the body soon.
Yes, I got it Wednesday as promised and at the risk of using a grossly overused expression, IT IS AWESOME! I really like my D200 but I like this better. The hi ISO shots are far superior to the 200 and are excellent through ISO 1600, 3200 is respectable.
The menus are simpler and better organized and the MY MENU feature is very handy and fast.
The ML-L3 remote is a nice plus- no more plugging in an external receiver and one less thing to carry.
Don't wait- I have dealt with Cameta a lot and they are top notch. Honest, no hard sell, and their prices are great. They sell an extended warranty for the D90 pretty cheap as well.
Ok, just a note to let all that are interested know that I received my D90 (body only) from Cameta camera with no problems. I got the 18-200 DX VR with it and I couldn't be more pleased. Don't wait if you need one.
> >The biggest problem I had was getting Lightroom >2 to import the .NEF files. Really happy with the camera at >this point. > >Thanks, >Davis
Davis - As you probably already know, ACR 4.6 (adds D90 NEF) is available from Adobe Labs as a beta. However, They have not yet added the D90 to the incredible new "Camera Profiles" feature.
With my D70 I always used NEF files in order to get the exposure correct. The D90's large, fine, JPGs with 'Active D-Lighting' are causing me to re-think that approach. I may just save the wear-and-tear on the PC and go with JPGs.
I had a darkroom. Now I have a PC. PC smells better.
>i'm just wondering about that GPS-1unit. does anyone know if >it will work on a d-300? also what is the price? thanks for >any replies, waywest
The GPS-1 will use the rectangular connector used on the D90 for the GPS, rather than the circular multipin connector used on the D300 etc. So the GPS-1 won't be any use on a D300 unless it is possible to obtain an adapter cable.