LL49Wat Spartanburg, US Registered since 21st May 2004
Sun 28-Feb-10 09:43 PM
"D90 vs. D5000"
Can anyone give me a personal comparison of the D90 to the D5000? A friend of mine is interested in the D90, but I am wondering if the D5000 might be a better match. This friend is a retired photographer who had always worked in film. They certainly can master any camera, but they have asked my advice and I can't comment intelligently since I haven't used either one. I have a Nikon D40x and a D300. LL49Wat
Apart from the focussing motor, the D90 has a pentaprism rather than a pentamirror/porroprism so the viewfinder is better, an LCD display on the top plate and two control dials. It doesn't have the moveable rear LCD. I have both and I think an experienced photographer will be happier with the D90. The D5000 is a very capable camera but the D90 is more complete.
You can compare the features in the Nikonians DSLR Comparison Chart at the following link: http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/body/chart/nikon_dslr_chart.html I have only passing expierience with both bodies. Given that your friend is a photographer, I think he or she would be much happier with the D90. Having to go into the D5000 camera menu to change settings can get old very quickly. Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!
I have looked at the chart, but it didn't give me the information that I wanted to know, which is a more intrinsic thing. However, just your having handled the two cameras makes a difference.
I'll pass the information on to my friend. When they first retired, they put aside their photography for a little while to experience other things, but the shooting bug is back--and now more fun because they don't have to!
I myself have been toying with the idea of upgrading the D40x; it's a great little camera, but it needs cleaning--not a big deal, I know. However, the thought of a self-cleaning sensor is very attractive. Upgrading is a problem, however, in that the D40x is a perfect digital size to be paired with my F3HP film body.
Hi - my first post here - I'm experiencing information overload and hoping for some help.
I am also trying to decide between the D5000 and D90: I've been reading the extensive info on both cameras over on Rockwell's site (which I know some folks do take issue with), and it seems like the key difference boils down to level of control. The D5000 doesn't have external buttons/dials to allow direct manipulation of settings (WB, ISO, etc.) and requires you to dive into the menu tree to make those changes; the D90 has dedicated buttons and programmable Function options for these features.
My question for those of you actually use the D5000: do you find the 'dive into the menu' design of the D5000 to be problematic/limiting for hands-on control of the camera? I'm coming from a film SLR world (Minolta), so I'm used to thinking in terms of direct control.
One of my other notes is difference in price and availability: a complete body/lens package for the D90 (body, plus the three lenses I've selected) would come in at around $1250 - and one of those would have to be picked up refurb, as new is backordered everywhere. Those same three lenses along with the D5000 would come in at $1000 - the backordered lens would come in the kit for the D5000. (In case you're wondering, the three lenses are: 18-55mm 3.5-5.6G VR; 55-200mm 4-5.6G VR; 35mm 1.8G.)
For that price difference, would you make the jump up to the D90? Or is the D5000 worth the 'gap'? Thanks.
KR's opinions are based on his particular shooting style and what works best for him! On occasion he has been known to write something controversial to increase traffic to his site.
>My question for those of you actually use the D5000: do you >find the 'dive into the menu' design of the D5000 to be >problematic/limiting for hands-on control of the camera? I'm >coming from a film SLR world (Minolta), so I'm used to >thinking in terms of direct control.
I don't have a D5000 though I have used one once or twice. I also find the controls limiting for how and what I shoot and given that I have been using Pro bodies for over 30 years that it is understandable.
The D5000 is an excellent body for someone moving up from a P & S that will be using the camera in "Auto" mode or one of the Vari-Program (Pictogram) modes. If you will be shooting in Manual exposure mode, it then becomes a question of what and how you shoot and the ambient conditions that you shoot in.
If you are shooting landscapes the added time going into the menu to change a setting is no big deal. If you are shooting action or sports in changing conditions, being able to change settings on the fly becomes much more important! In other words while you are going into the menu, you are missing shots!
Another advantage of the D90 over the D5000 is the D90 has an AF motor built into the camera body. This will allow the D90 to provide AF operation with every Nikon "F" mount AF lens ever made with the exception of the 80mm f/2.8 and the 200mm f/3.5 made for the F3AF in 1983. This provides the ability to use lenses like the AF 50mm f/1.8D ($123.00) instead of having to buy the 50mm f/1.4G AF-S ($469.00) if you want AF.
>For that price difference, would you make the jump up to the >D90? Or is the D5000 worth the 'gap'?
It sounds to me that you like to shoot in Manual mode, to have total control over the image. So the question becomes what do you shoot? If you can take your time to capture an image the D5000 should be more than capable of doing the job. If you shoot fast and hard in changing conditions and/or want to be able to use a much wider range of lenses get the D90! Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!
More-or-less in support of what you say, I use the D5000 paired with the new version of the Sigma 17-70mm as my "chuck in the back of the car" camera. I'd rather have a compact camera with me but until the manufacturers re-introduce optical viewfinders.....
I've programmed the fn button to adjust the ISO values as this is the setting I'm most likely to want to change quickly but not having bracketing available without going into the menus could be irritating in the future.