Which Nikon??

pedroeibar1

Holidays approaching and I have to bite the DSLR bullet. Help/advice needed please.
I’ve looked at dpreview and I’ll probably stick with Nikon, with 18-55mm and 55-200mm lenses. I never shoot video; all my photography is portrait & landscape. With the above kit prices are

D3000 @ +/-€700
D5000 @ +/-€800
D90 @ +/-€1000
I know the D3000 has 10.2 m pix and no video, but it has a different lens thread to the other two. Also, the D90 is out since 2008....... Any strong views on spending the extra money?
many thanks.
P.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Get the most camera you can for your budget. If you can afford the d90 buy it, you won't regret it. It's not all about age and megapixels, think about things like iso processing, sensor quality, functional control, af-points, lens compatibility (AF-D lenses compatible with d5000 & d90, but not d3000).

You don't want to be limited and looking to upgrade the body in a year or two, why not buy something that will last a while and meet your future, as well as current needs?

My 2c anyway!

Slidinginfinity

Pope is right, scrap the idea of the D3000.

I have a D90 and could not be happier.
Well, a D700 or D3 would be nice but way to pricey.:D

DaireQuinlan

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Get the most camera you can for your budget. If you can afford the d90 buy it, you won't regret it. It's not all about age and megapixels, think about things like iso processing, sensor quality, functional control, af-points, lens compatibility (AF-D lenses compatible with d5000 & d90, but not d3000).

AFAIK the D5000 is also unable to AF with AFD lenses, AFS only.

Slidinginfinity

It appears, as usual, DaireQuinlan is right.:o
Nikon compatibility for D5000

In light of this, if you can afford a D90 go get it!:D

Zagato

2 of my friends and I have D90s, love it! You should be able to buy it for much cheaper than you suggest (although unfortunately that is what I paid for it). One good place to buy it is London airports (gatwick I think) where one of my friends bought it ages ago for £600 sterling in Dixons with the 18-105 lens (which is pretty good), where I think they sell to everyone at a duty free price.

dinneenp

Just out of interest what do you currently have are what are your reasons for upgrading? (I have a Canon S90 and Panasonic FZ28 am toying with idea of getting slr as well- quicker, better in low light, better depth of field. I'm happy with what I have though- the FZ28 is good for all round and the Canon handy for everyday use).

Digital camera essentials did a best beginners slr article recently. nikond3000 is dslr clear winner 20/20. Categories were ease of use, features, image qual and value for money.
It won in every single category!

that article isn't online but look here and here


Have a look at this from Ken Rockwell.

Summary:

Buy a D40 instead, while you still can.

The D40 is a significantly better camera (and I haven't even gotten to how the D40 has a sync speed over twice as fast as the D3000), and the D40 costs less.

The only advantage of the D3000 is that it has more pixels, but considering how I have no problems making great 20 x 30" (50 x 75cm) prints from my D40 with its kit lens, I wouldn't get a D3000 for that.

Dara Robinson

I just bought a D700 before Xmas and its the best purchase I have made in many many years. While all I could afford with it was a battery grip and a 50mm lens I have still gotten tonnes of use out of it.

I got mine from HK so it was much cheaper than here in Ireland including the Import and Vat I paid in it. Even cheaper than buying in the UK, and by a substantial amount. PM me if you want a recommendation for the HK shop I got it from.

But if thats out of your price range, have you considered buying a second-hand D300? great camera.

My thoughts are to buy as best a body as you can. You can always buy in cheap a$$ lenses and upgrade them in a few years. Also you will find that you can take loans of lenses from others you know.

If you can afford it, D700 is your only man

melekalikimaka

d90, the other two are very very low spec slrs... a d90 is imo entry level. the d40/d60 are quite handicapped with lack of motor, in the long run you'll value the expense, look second hand, one the d300 popped out, lots ditched the d90

Nforce

Another choice would be a D80 and spend the rest of your budget on good lenses.

melekalikimaka

Nforce wrote: »

Another choice would be a D80 and spend the rest of your budget on good lenses.

its better than the dxxxx's but getting quite dated

pedroeibar1

Many thanks to everyone for all the comments. Much appreciated. The three Nikons I mentioned are compared SxS here -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=nikon_d90%2Cnikon_d3000%2Cnikon_d5000&show=all
I can understand the suggestions for a D700, but it is too costly; I couldn’t justify that amount on something that is not my main hobby. Also, a second-hand camera is something I would shy away from, the extra few quid is worth paying for “new.” So I’m tending towards the D90..... Will let you know!
Again, thanks.
P.

Dara Robinson

New D700 from HK can be as low as 1500, look into it before you commit at least Plus you can get a D300 for much less (like 1000 - 1200)

Thecageyone

I wouldn't say no to any of them, the D3000 isn't going to astound , it doesn't have Live view and the sensor is slower than both the D5000 and D90. but it'd be a not-bad-DSLR to start with. I've read side by side comparisons between it and the likes of the Canon 1000d, and the D3000 wins every time. It's supposed to have very decent image quality for the price.

I really want a D90, just cannot afford it as I'm out of work atm. I'd certainly not snub a D5000 either, aside from the speed, it's basically the same camera as the D90. Of couse the D700 users are going to rave on that, but we don't all have the money to splash on equipment, for some of us it's a hobby.

I'm stuck with a Fuji s1000fd ffs! But I take alright pic's

Visuelle

Go for the D90, I have one myself and you won't regret it, keep it in good nick and you will have a great camera for years to come.

melekalikimaka

Thecageyone wrote: »

I'd certainly not snub a D5000 either, aside from the speed, it's basically the same camera as the D90.

thats far from true... build wise, quality wise, feature wise, compatibility wise, they are light years apart

Thecageyone

Light years?

"In many ways, the internals of the D5000 mirror those found in the D90. 12.3 megapixel sensor in both? Check. 11 area TTL autofocus on both? Check. ISO 200 - 6,400 on both? Check. 'Course, you will find some differences, with the most notable being the lack of an in-body focus motor on the D5000 and the pentamirror viewfinder compared to the D90's pentaprism. That said, it shouldn't be too shocking to hear that the image quality from the D5000 isn't too dissimilar from that of the D90. In most situations, particularly for novices sticking with the stock lens, the D5000's image quality will be more than adequate."

http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/28/nikon-d5000-review-head-to-head-with-d90/

They don't think so in that head-to-head review. Obviously the D90 is the better built, better all round camera, but nowhere near light years ahead of the D5000.

SetOverSet

I have the D5000 myself and I'm more than happy with. The only issue I'd have is the lack of an in-body focus motor, restricting you to AF-S and AF-I lenses and their Sigma counterparts if you want to auto-focus. Here's a side by side of the three from dpreview.com. If you can stretch to the D90, I'd go for it, but apart from the in-body focus motor, top LCD there are not that many differences...

Slidinginfinity

SetOverSet wrote: »

the lack of an in-body focus motor

This is a Big difference in the long run. It means you can't AF on older, less expensive, but great lenses. It can, depending on your lens collection, pay for the price difference in no time.

melekalikimaka

Thecageyone wrote: »

Light years?

"In many ways, the internals of the D5000 mirror those found in the D90. 12.3 megapixel sensor in both? Check. 11 area TTL autofocus on both? Check. ISO 200 - 6,400 on both? Check. 'Course, you will find some differences, with the most notable being the lack of an in-body focus motor on the D5000 and the pentamirror viewfinder compared to the D90's pentaprism. That said, it shouldn't be too shocking to hear that the image quality from the D5000 isn't too dissimilar from that of the D90. In most situations, particularly for novices sticking with the stock lens, the D5000's image quality will be more than adequate."

http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/28/nikon-d5000-review-head-to-head-with-d90/

They don't think so in that head-to-head review. Obviously the D90 is the better built, better all round camera, but nowhere near light years ahead of the D5000.

engadget is hardly the best site for camera reviews but yes that is two differences, leaving out the complete omission of off camera triggering on the d5000 and inferior viewscreen.

but from my glances at reviews.

yes the d5000 is good if you know what you want the camera for and believe the d5000 cn provide that, if you thinking of getting into photography more and think you will advance beyond where you are now... the d90 will stand to you, the d5000...i'd keep the box

dinneenp

From Ken Rockwell

If price matters to you, I'd suggest the Nikon D40 instead. The D40 works just as well for taking fantastic pictures for half the price. I see nothing in the D5000 that matters to me to justify the higher price. If you see something important to you in the D5000, like choppy video or a real need to make ten-foot (3 meter) wide prints, then by all means get the D5000. You'll never see the difference in sharpness between 6MP and 12 MP unless you're printing at least a few feet wide. If you're only printing 13x19" (35x50cm) and smaller, it makes no difference.

If price doesn't matter, the Nikon D90 doesn't cost much more than the D5000, and is a far superior camera. The D90 is superior because it provides more direct-control knobs and buttons to allow you to make settings and adjustments faster than you can on the simpler D5000, D60, D40x or D40.

The D90 has significantly better utility than the D40, D40x, D60 and D5000 because the D90 adds many more direct control knobs and buttons to get to its extra features, while the D5000 and D40 share the same lack of buttons and rely more on menus for many settings, like ISO or White Balance. The D90 also adds many more features useful to skilled photographers not present in the D5000, like Kelvin settings for WB adjustment.

The more advanced (Gen 2) internal image processing of the Nikon D5000, D90 and D300 make them more likely to have highlights, shadows and colors that look better in any sized print than the older D40, D80, D200 and D2XS, if you're really picky.

If you want full-frame for superb hyper-ISO quality or hyper-wide angle lenses, get the D700. No DX camera, regardless of rated ISO, is anywhere near as clean as any of the FX cameras like the D3, D3X and D700.

Few people need hyper ISOs. You're far better off buying a a $200 35mm f/1.8 lens to use on a DX camera than shooting a slow (f/3.5~5.6) zoom on an FX camera.

All said and done, you'll notice I use several cameras to shoot different things. If I was a normal person and could only choose one camera for everything, the D5000 just might be that camera if I couldn't stretch for the D90.

The D5000 is the smallest, lightest Nikon that has technical image quality indistinguishable from Nikon's best D3 and D700 in good light.