I plan on keeping my D90 until I've learned all the great things it can do, or until I win the lottery, whichever comes first. Seriously, the D7k sounds great, but I'm not ready to add another DSLR (I also have a D80). I've had the D90 for less than a year, and since I'm still employed full time, I don't spend as much time taking photos as I would like. Hopefully, that will change next year (Yay!)
Whenever a new body is released there is a period when attention is naturally drawn towards it as people debate its merits/demerits. Normal service will be resumed shortly
Will I be keeping my D90? For sure. It does everything I need it to doand more. When I can use it to its full potential then maybe I'll think of replacing it but I'm guessing the D7000 and its replacement will be old hat by then
I don't look on my cameras in the same way as other consumer electonics - like computers, for example - and have no desire to upgrade just because a newer model is available.
I have a D90 as my backup and lightweight kit camera. The images it gives me will still be as good as they were 2 weeks ago. I'm happy with that. I have no motivation to upgrade.
Gary in SE Michigan, USA. Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the camera. D4, D810, D300 (720nm IR conversion), D90, F6, FM3a (black), FM2n (chrome) YashicaMat 124, Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5 My Nikonians Gallery & Our Chapter Gallery
I will be keeping my d90, if I was to upgrade, the d300s or d700 are in my future. The d7k is not something I desire at this time. It looks nice but I would have to buy everything except flashes and lenses for it.
We haven't scheduled it yet. It will be posted in the Nikonians Chapters - North American forum as soon as we decide venue and date.
Gary in SE Michigan, USA. Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the camera. D4, D810, D300 (720nm IR conversion), D90, F6, FM3a (black), FM2n (chrome) YashicaMat 124, Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5 My Nikonians Gallery & Our Chapter Gallery
Sun 19-Sep-10 10:31 PM | edited Sun 19-Sep-10 10:32 PM by PAStime
I was out shooting family stuff with my D90 both yesterday and today. Great camera. I'm at 24,000 shutter actuations in about 18 months. Sure, the D7000 looks great, just like the D90 did two years ago. But it is not worth the $1K for the upgrade cost. My D90 is still serving very well, I'd rather spend the $1K on a 10-24mm lens, and like Dennis, would prefer to skip a generation to give me more time to exhaust this current body and get that many more upgraded features in the next (which might be the successor to the D300S, not the D7000, for me).
I have a D90 and a pair of D70s and need a fourth DSLR like a hole in the head. Considering the low value of this used equipment I'm going to have to be really attracted to a new camera.
The D7000 looks like a great camera but I'm not all that certain the new features are that much improved over a D90. I could care less about video for example. The auto focus and sensor would be great but I'm still learning all the advantages of the D90 and I suspect my next DSLR will be the replacement for the D7000. Lest anyone misunderstand me I think the D7000 looks very attractive and if it fit my budget AND I didn't have all the present DSLR bodies I might be tempted.
I have to wait for any move because the D7k will just not going to be available for a while here, and when it is, it will be over $2000. The soonest I could hold one would when my next trip to the US occurs....unless a kind hearted tourist coming to St Petersburg would bring one for me;>) It might be a little cheaper in nearby Finland but probably still over $1600 All the specs look great, the AF is a big question mark....is it an upgrade from the CAM3500? Processors and sensors sure have improved in the 4 years since that system was designed as well lots of valuable information has been gathered by the engineers. It would be hard for it NOT to be better. The low light quality on paper looks good, according to one pre-release user, as quiet as a D700. All the signs are that this is a worthwhile addition that would get used everyday, even on days when I would use the D90. Can't get rid of the D90, its cash value is a lot less than the personal value I place on it. I am not a frequent upgrader in anything. My newest car is a 1972 model that I would not trade any current car for(72 5 liter, 4 cam, aluminum mid-engine, ZF-transaxle, 8 barrels of Weber downdrafts....Bora Maserati that I can repair with a Swiss Army knife...but never needs anything), and usually not craving smaller gadgets or any personal electronics, TV/home theater or appliances.
But....this camera is a bargain, I can use it, and would be a fun toy that I would get daily satisfaction from. The three things in my life that I use everyday are my laptop, cork screw and camera all of which get a workout and then some. I have 45,000 clicks on the D90 in 2 years, 30,000 of those just this year so far. For the cost/pleasure ratio that camera sure beats the heck out of any gadget or girlfriend. Stan St Petersburg Russia
Stan in Russia: sorry to hear those are the only three things you use everyday. I try to keep a few more things in the fold.
As to the original thread question:
NO. I may wait for the D300(s) replacement, and go with that, if it has a similar price point as the current model plus maybe a few hundred. And that's by no means because I've outgrown my D90, its just I have large hands, and would like the larger physical frame.
I have no doubt the D7k is a worthy replacement, and will likely out perform the 90 in low light, autofocus, and pixels, but none of that is currently limiting my production or enjoyment in the photography world. As the Nikon offerings stand as of today, if I were to drop that kind of cash, it would be for a 24-70 f2.8 or a nice fisheye.
Dave F Franklin, Pa
"Always do right. You'll gratify some, and astound the rest." Mark Twain
I really hope this portion of the forum won't be dead, as I only bought my D90 five months ago!
I was aware when I bought it that it was probably coming to the end of it's manufacturing cycle but Nikon in the UK were offering £60 cash back on the body, which made the price a very reasonable £560.
I'd been using my D70 very happily for almost five years before I finally decided to get a new body and I hope to get five years use out of my D90 before I need to think about replacing it.
I think the D90 is a great camera and I love reading this portion of the forum, so I hope many of you will still be contributing for a little while longer.
I am in it for the enjoyment and passion of photography, my D90 is an awsome camera that produces consistently excellet photographs so I think I will bee keeping mine around for a long while. "IF" I had extra money for a camera, and I did'nt need one or two better lenses, then I would consider it. But for me the D90 is the bomb......for now.
Here's one more response that you can add to the list of those holding on to their D90s. There's a lot more capability in this camera than I have yet made use of in the two years I have had it. The IQ is great - even up to the 30"x40" prints that I've occasionally tried. The main thing on the new 7K model that makes my mouth water is the +/-2 f-stop bracketing. I wish that I had access to that for playing with HDR. But it wouldn,t justify the $1200 outlay. ...Don
Scratch the comment in the preceeding post concerning bracketing. I just realized that +/-2 f-stop exposure bracketing is already available on the D90. I had previously misinterpreted the manual's b1 menu instructions. Now to get on with HDR experimenting! ...Don
>Here's one more response that you can add to the list of >those holding on to their D90s. There's a lot more capability >in this camera than I have yet made use of in the two years I >have had it. The IQ is great - even up to the >30"x40" prints that I've occasionally tried. The >main thing on the new 7K model that makes my mouth water is >the +/-2 f-stop bracketing. I wish that I had access to that >for playing with HDR. But it wouldn,t justify the $1200 >outlay. >...Don >
The D90 does do the +/- 2 stop bracketing. read the manual its on page 92-93.
Even thought he default is +/-1, you change the value to +/-2 by holding down the exposure compensation button (+/- button) and rotating the sub-command dial in bracketing mode.
I own a D90 and I am truly pleased with it. There is always a new kid on the block. I can get drawn into the debate of the merits of the new over the old. However, it will take me a long time to master the power of my D90. I do not need another camera. Rather I need to become proficient with the D90, master my lenses, master post processing, and perhaps get additional lenses and accessories as I develop in my skills. Besides, I am still using my old FM2 and trying to master film photography from time to time. There is only so much a guy can do!
As a new owner (six months) of a D90, i´m not planning any DSLR body. So far D7000 doesn't seem that huge upgrade... maybe in a couple of years i´ll upgrade to a full frame, if i'll have improve my skills in photograph, otherwise...
Nikonians membership - Will be my most important photographic investment, after the camera.
I'm keeping my D-90 for sure. It teaches me something new every time I use it and I use it often. And when I do upgrade, which is no time soon, I will still keep it. But out of curiosity, if you were now a step or two down from the D-90 and were to upgrade soon, what would you upgrade to that would be within your budget and satisfy your expectations? StolenHorse
Heck ya--I'm keeping my D90 until I see a GOOD reason to upgrade! I mean, I still have my first Nikon, the great Nikon SP rangefinder camera, as well as my second, the equally great Nikon F. The only reason I'm still not using those are the great advantages of digital over film, especially for macro use, not to mention the discontinuation of Kodachrome 35mm film--RIP! Cheers, Dick
Dave, Right on! The stock f/1.4 lens was a great all-round as well. As soon as I received orders to my first ship in the U.S. Navy, I hopped the first available flight and flew across the Pacific on a prop plane to Japan where my ship was docked at the time. My first liberty took me to the Ship's Store on the U.S. Naval Base at Sasebo where the two top professional rangefinder cameras of the day were on display, the Nikon and the Leica.
The Nikon SP had just come out a few months before, but the Leica, of course, had been around for a number of years, and was the "gold standard" of the day. I tried them both out as best I could in the store, but opted for the SP, and I have always been happy with that decision.
Because of the obvious quality of the Nikon cameras and optics, shortly after I got the SP, I also purchased a Nikon binocular microscope from the Ship's Store that I later used through the first couple of years of biology grad school at Stanford University following the Navy. It turned out to be of much better quality than any of the microscopes that I had available to me at Stanford, so that turned out to be another good Nikon decision. Cheers, Dick
Hey Rod, Ahhh--the Kodak Signet--a really fine American camera of the day! In fact, that was my first good 35mm camera that I used all thru college until I was able to spring for the Nikon SP with my first Navy paycheck.
Problem was that I was restricted only to the first Kodachrome film that checked in at a munificent ASA 10, since neither Kodachrome 25 nor Kodachrome 64 had yet been invented! Oops--showing my age here... However, that ASA 10 color balance was outstanding, and fortunately carried over to the 25 and 64 films.
I remember reading somewhere that the Kodachrome colors would resist fading, and would still look good after 50 years. I'm not sure if any of us believed that back then, but Kodak was right on the money--my ASA 10, 25, or 64 slides still look as good today as they did back in the fifties. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for my Anscochrome (remember them?) slides. They all have faded pretty badly, yet were stored under the same conditions as the Kodachromes. Cheers, Dick
>Already did get rid of my D90, and now really wished I >hadn't! > I upgraded to the 5D2 and wish I had kept the D90. The 5D2 OutFit is now for sale. I will be picking up my D3100 tomorrow to tide me over till the D7000 arrives. We will see whether I keep it for hiking and trips. I hope the D700s does not come out before the D4. My NAS is really out of control. Now I can hardly wait for the AF-S Nikkor 80-400 VRII
I plan on keeping my D90 as my main camera and, at least for now, am passing on the D7000. The new camera has some very nice features but nothing that's a deal maker for me. I'm still learning to use the D90.
I also have two D70s and skipped the D80 upgrade. I'm guessing at present that I'll skip the D7000 and upgrade with its successor.
I was on the fence about this one for a while.. When the D7000 releases I'll still be within my no questions asked return period for my D90, and the kit price is approximately the same I paid for my D90 kit.
I've just gotten to know my camera more within the past few weeks, and I ultimately decided to stick with my D90 and shoot it until I make my jump to full frame, which I expect to do when they announce the successor to the D700. I'm really happy with my D90.
Sun 07-Nov-10 03:24 PM | edited Mon 08-Nov-10 12:12 PM by RRRoger
I got my D7000 and sold the D3100. It is better than the D90 in every way but three. 1. Sixteen megapixels is less forgiving, thus showing user errors better. 2. There are a lot more controls, thus more to learn. 3. Cost more.
I just purchase my D90 about two months ago and am still overwhelmed by all the features. It will be a long time before I upgrade. It is more camera than I need and does a lot more than I can grasp. I will enjoy learning the many ways I can use it and all the features it brings to the table. I upgraded from the D70s that I have used for almost five years. I will always keep my D70s. I have gotten really attached to it and is still good as new. I read this forum every day and have learned a great deal from those much more advanced and knowledgable than myself, so I hope this forum stays very active, because I need help with my D90. A big thanks to everyone here that spends the time to answer questions and teach. I really appreciate it.
I'm staying with my D90. It's an awesome camera that fits my needs perfectly. Spending money on a new body will not improve my photographs. What will do that is an upgrade to my photographic vision. I can do that for free through shooting and critiquing.
There is a dilemma though. Film bodies had long production runs and therefore you had good resale value for many years. With new models coming out every 18 months, the price of used digital bodies drops fast. If I keep my D90 for too long I won't get much for it on resale.
Still learning my D90 is just awesome. I photographed the fire department burning the hulk of my brother's house today, and the pictures came out really good (despite having tears in my eyes the entire time and was focusing manually). I would rather put that 1K into new lenses and keep my D90 rolling. I was tempted when I saw the dual memory memory cards, but glad I didn't pull the trigger. --
This is my first post to the Nikonians forums. I have been a member for some time and have enjoyed reading and learning from the different forums to which I subscribe. I bought my first D90 kit almost two years ago at Best Buy along with a AF micro Nikkor 60mm and the Nikkor 70-300 mm. I had been out of photography for years because my ex strangled the joy of shooting right out of my soul. Now I have come back to shooting with a vengeance. Last Spring I bought another D90 as a back up because I want to take photos of marsh birds and beach scenes (lighthouses, etc.) and we all know how cameras and lenses hate the sand and salt air. That said, I will unequivocally state that I will never get rid of my two D90s. Because I like the feel that the MB-D80s add to the D90s and the vertical shooting capabilities, I tried a D3x and decided that it fit my upgrade desires and have added it to my kit. Replace the D90s? NEVER!!
Well, given my uncontrollable urge to own the D7000 despite owning a D700 and a D300, I sold the D300, bought a used mint D90 and a new D7000. Brilliant, right? I plan to compare the three (D90/700/7000) and narrow my "keepers" to two. The D7000 arrives 11/11 from Amazon so write me if you want my impressions.
I am holding onto my d90 and would definitely not be upgrading to another Non Full frame Camera. My next investment would be the D700 or it's replacement. My D90 works great and it's always good to have a APS-C camera, ,Maybe in two years when the D7000 is replaced I may buy it but there really isn't much upgrading with a APS-C camera other than the resolution which can be controlled in Photoshop. Yep I am holding on to the 90er.
Next to my D300, my D90 is my 2nd favorite camera to shoot with. As a matter of fact, I'm still not sure which I like best. They're both great cameras. I keep my original 18-70mm f/3.5 - 5.6 lens on the D90. It was the original kit lens that came with my D70 and probably one of the best Nikon kit lenses ever. I was just looking at some pictures I took of my cat with the D90 and that lens. These pictures are as tack sharp as it gets with great IQ and perfect color control. When a camera works that well you don't get rid of it. Recently attended the PDN Photo Expo in NYC and the Nikon people at their booth all agreed that the D7000 fits in just between the D300 and D90. Glad to know I have both ends of the spectrum covered. I think the D90 is an excellent piece of photographic hardware and think that I probably won't ever be able to exhaust its photographic potential. When a camera like this, like my first D70, produces images with such great image quality, you don't get rid of it. Keep it and consider yourself very lucky to know what you have, just like the photographer who owns that very beautiful Nikon SP, a rare and lovely piece of equipment.
Vasudevan, Congrats on hanging in there with the new hip and retirement. I discovered a batch of K-25 and K-64 in the bottom of my freezer (about 14 rolls) and contacted the folks in Kansas (I thought), but no response to date. Would you be able to use them? Kodachrome development ends in just about a month. Dick
>Just got my D90 today,moving up to digital from the N80.Will >still be shooting film also.Recently retired,getting a new hip >and starting life over Congratulations for the new life. We are similar tracks, got a D90, my first DSLR after long being a film shooter, 26 months and 35,000 shots ago, had a hip replacement 28 months ago, and started a new life in another country(where the hip operation cost me $5700 for great VIP care as opposed to $90,000 that was wanted in California after my insurance denied coverage) etc. Only no retirement in sight, never had a job to retire from, been self employed since I was 14 and will always work, which is too much fun to stop. Just last night my GF and I decided to create a 3rd business which we can do together. Life really does start again after a hip replacement. Won a dance contest in my favorite disco 1 month after shedding the crutches, just 2 months post op.
Interesting discussion. I shoot with both a D90 and D300s. My go to body the majority of the time is the D90 mainly because it is so compact and yet powerful. Hiking is my other passion and I don't like the extra weight if I don't really need it. I got the D300s because of features that I like for landscape photography, but unless I am doing something very specific, I instinctively grab the D90. The D7k is very tempting as it has many of the features of the D300 in a smaller, more rugged body. I won't be getting it soon as it does not do more than 3 step bracketing (I know there are ways to get around that) and I really do like the ability to use a wired remote (primitive instincts from FM2 days?) for multiple exposures. In summary, I am keeping the D90. If anything goes it would likely be the D300s. If the issue were the D80, it would be a no brainer for the D7k.
Fri 12-Nov-10 01:43 AM | edited Fri 12-Nov-10 02:14 AM by tomlaub
I'm 7-8 months into my D90 and I'm just starting to understand all the features and settings. I'm convninced that this camera does everything I need at my level of experience and skill/understanding of Capture NX2. I'll be using mine until at some point I want to go to FX, or find a screaming deal on a D300s. I'll prob not trade the D90 in or sell it. It'll always have a place in my bag even if I hit the lottery and got a D3x.
The D7K just does not motivate me to do anything other than to read the reviews. I have yet to use the movie mode with the D90...it's nice to have I suppose...but jumping for autofocus and the few other "ups" are not a motivators for me. Like others have said...I'll wait for the "next" thing before plunking down cash for a body that does not have a positive cost/benefit when the D90 is doing its job just fine.
As wiser men than I have said..."think fast glass...not a new body!"
My evening mantra? I light up a stick of Nag Champa incense, put on a CD of some contemplative schmaltz and it's about glass..."Nikkor 500mm prime...Nikkor 500mm prime...Nikkor 500mm prime..."
Well, we can only hope...
Tom L. Marietta, GA USA
"As the spirit wanes form appears" Charles Bukowski
I have a D70 and until I can master that not moving up. Plus I am so not into video HD or otherwise. I bought a Flip video - sucked in by the upload to Facebook/You Tube - and did not see a need to use it. Gave it to my 9 year old grandson. I like capturing moments and filming minutiae
>As wiser men than I have said..."think fast glass...not a >new body!"
You bet! I contemplated the D7K and decided I'd get more bang for my photography buck by getting an ultrawide lens. So that's the plan: new glass at Christmas (thanks to the support of my loving wife). Peter
My 2 cents: I don't have a D90, but a D80. When the 90 came out, I didn't feel it was a big enough upgrade, and also I was still learning the 80. I have since done 5 weddings for friends, and felt bad about not having a backup. Also, I now think I would enjoy playing with video, which seems to be better implemented on the D7K. And of course being able to shoot at higher ISO's, with a greater burst speed, is enticing. I'm not getting rid of the D80, but today I sent an order for the D7000 (I located a body in stock)
Not only am I keeping my D90, I just bought another D90 body (on the way from a fellow Nikonian)! To be precise, my wife bought it. We decided that having two cameras was a small price to pay for continued marital bliss. I've also managed to acquire enough lenses in a short period of time to equip both cameras, particularly since we tend to shoot different things.
I've only had my D90 for a few months, so I'm still on the steep part of the learning curve. It seemed to make sense for us to learn one camera together than struggle individually with the quirks of two...
We both have a long way to go to get to the point where the camera is a limitation.
A new camera won't make you a better photographer. People are getting great images with their 5mp cell phones for crying out loud. High ISO allows for night images. Big whoop. I'm not usually skulking around the dark for shots. And I haven't used the video capability in my D90 for anything other than "shooting" the dogs.
I'm keeping my D90. If I get another camera, it will be after I have mastered that camera and actually believe I can take better pictures with a pro camera. That, or just continue to use my FM as long as I can get film for it.
Sun 21-Nov-10 07:49 PM | edited Mon 22-Nov-10 09:27 PM by MarcG19
Answering the OP........
It all depends on what the D7000 has over the D90, and whether or not that's worth the extra $$$ you spend.
According to Ken Rockwell, the D7000's advantages are (sorted in order of my value for them):
- custom settings mode - this can be a big deal. Just this morning I was fiddling with auto ISO and all that when I saw an opportunity shot with a bunch of ducks who were next to the landscape shot I was setting up . But would I be better off with a second camera for cases like this?
-very fast autofocus
- "Extraordinarily clean images at stupid-high ISOs". Useful for animal photography (which I do) but not necessarily life-changing over the D90. Maybe it's gained 2-3 usable stops?
- magnesium body vs. plastic body
That's it as far as I see it. I doubt I'll be able to realistically sell my D90 for more than $500.
Are those things worth $700?
My answer is "no". But then, I still use my D70s (1/500 flash sync speed!!!!)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "90% of my best life's work could have been made with a manual body, a 24mm lens, and a telephoto zoom in the 80-200 range" - Galen Rowell -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I purchased the D90 a few months ago before the D7000 was out. I really like the camera and there are so much to learn about D90. If I have to make the decision between D90 and D7000 today, I'll still choose D90 since a lot of stores are discounting the camera right now.
>I purchased the D90 a few months ago before the D7000 was >out. I really like the camera and there are so much to learn >about D90. If I have to make the decision between D90 and >D7000 today, I'll still choose D90 since a lot of stores are >discounting the camera right now.
I agree. I purchased my D90 back in the spring of this year and it is a much better camera than I am a photographer (though I am learning!) I just took it with my new glass (70-300mm VR) on a trip and decided that the purchase of a good lens, made a lot more sense than buying a new model camera.
You might be selling the D7000 short if you are contending that a $500 difference (body is $1199 and D90 body only is about $700) is not worth upgrading for. For most people the relative small difference in performance difference between other upgrades seems to be reason enough to do it. but with the D7000, it is not a modest enhancement in a body, it is jumping and hurdling over whole classes of cameras. In IQ, it is not being compared with D90s or D300s or any DX but D700s. For sports it is being compared to D300s is AF speed and accuracy and even frame rate in 14 bit mode, for studio, controlled light, high DR use it is being compared to the D3x, not a D90, 300, 700 or D3.
There really is a lot more than this list. The most important two are pro style AF accuracy and speed, but for some the real revelation is the low ISO lack of read noise. For studio, landscape or portraiture that is a very big deal. It is a very big improvement over the D300 or even the D700 or D3, you can actually see the increased DR and smoother tone gradient. Nothing in the Nikon line is competitive in that regard except the D3x. All for the price of a mid level zoom lens or prime. As people get more experience with it( it does appear to have a steeper learning curve than lower res cameras) they are reporting increasingly greater success with the AF, some saying it is as or faster their D700 That is a big deal for sports and wildlife photographers. The new high res metering sensor aids in all aspects of exposure including metering and AF performance. The use of many more lenses might be useful and pay for itself instantly. Real mirror lockup makes landscape and other tripod shooting visibly superior to the D90. Having a IR sensor on the rear makes remote triggering useful also. For the action photographer the higher performance Expeed II processor means the 6fps speed in 14 bit uncompressed is FASTER than a D300, the main reason many cites for spending $1900 on a D300. A more sophisticated AWB system is getting rave reviews. The greater options in cropping or retaining detail in improperly exposed images over cameras with higher base read noise is a major difference also, not just between the D7000 and D90 but between the D7000 and anything. I love my D90 and it is a great value and reliable rugged performer but it is not just a reduced function D7000. The differences, in skilled hands should be visible in every shot with the DR bar moved so far up. For those who MF or frame tight, or use Macro, the brighter 100% VF is a big deal. I won't get into the video capabilities, not personally interested in it. All these add up to be visible differences in every shot regardless of your current lens collection. Even the old 18-105vr is getting a new respect when used on the D7000 by a knowledgeable user. These traits add up to worth the difference in cost for many people. For most however the differences will not change the enjoyment of making photos because the D90 did not suddenly lose performance September 15th or whenever the D7000 was announced.
New member here. I plan to keep my D90 as long as possible. It is more camera than I've ever owned and that means I have some learning to do. I was thinking that the only reason for me to upgrade would be to buy a full-frame body such as the D700. That's not going to happen any time soon.
I'm keeping the D90 like all the other Nikons I've bought but I a having the D7k. You betcha!! Just wait until you handle it & process a few shots. If you don't really need FX (who does?) this is the flagship DX Nikon, bar none!
Keeping the D90 and passing on the D7000 (sort of). I had an opportunity to get the D7000 for as good a price as can be expected right now. After spending a few days with it, I've decided to return it. It is a great camera and has a few features that I would like to have, however, I had the hot pixel issue in video and back focus issues. I don't shoot much video so that by itself was not a deal breaker and the back focus could be fine tuned at around -10 for most of my lens collection. Ultimately, it gave me a chance to compare the two cameras and I don't think there is enough of a difference for me and how I use the camera right now.
So, the issues combined with my re-evaluation, I've decided to wait for the D300s successor or maybe consider FF.
Sat 11-Dec-10 09:22 PM | edited Sat 11-Dec-10 09:28 PM by Gremlich
Yes. I can take images like this one with my D90 on a monopod. It's the head, not the camera that means the difference between okay and good. Guys using the D300s have asked me how I did it. Easy peasie. No D7000 for me, nice though it probably is.
I have so much fun with my D90. I like to keep cars and cameras as long as I enjoy them. I would rather get a Nikon zoom wide angle and keep my D90 current. I learn new aspects of this camera all the time and don't leave home without it!