Advice from Nikon users

paulusdu

Guys,

Im looking to upgrade my well used and well looked after D60. After some reading around on different Nikons (I'm staying with Nikon, as i am used to and love the feel of them). I've edging towards the D3000. From reading, it takes the D60 and tags on some good extra with autofocus, metering, etc.

But there is only so much that i can get from reading about them and i get most of my advice, information on here. Has anyone any recommendations on an upgrade? Is the D3000 a good path to take or is it just a D60 with a few extras. I know a few of you use the D3000, how do you find it?

I'd mainly be using it for outdoor photography, cityscapes, landscapes, nature, a few home portraits, nothing too specific.

Any suggestions/advice/warning will be greatly appreciated.

Paul

mrmac

A Nikon D3000, body only, can be bought for £309 in Calumet, or for £329 from Jessops.

The Nikon D5000, body only, can be bought for £429 from Jessops, or £449 from Calumet.

Both of these shops are physical "bricks & mortar" stores, in Northern Ireland.

If you can stretch the extra money for the D5000, I'd fully recommend buying it.

HTH.

magicbastarder

do you find anything about your D60 limiting?
i diubt you'll see an awful lot of difference between the two cameras.

trican

I'd say the first question you need to ask is what limitations are you finding with the D60 thats making you consider upgrading? That should drive your decision.

Also I'd imagine a D3000 isnt much of any upgrade on your D60 in terms of features. What about a D90?

mrmac

The D3000 has very little different to the D60.
If you are planning an upgrade, then the two Nikons I'd suggest, in that category, would be the D5000, or the D90.
Here is a link, with a side by side comparison of the features of these cameras.

For the money, the D5000 is great value imho.

paulusdu

Cheers for the replys guys.

The main limitations would be the autofocusing on the D60. I have a Sigma 300mm lens and i can only use the manual focusing on it as the autofocus is not supported on the D60. and while it is fine if i am focusing on something static, anything moving means that 9 times out of 10 i don;t focus right.

I also find that at some angles, the lack of a live view on the D60 is limiting to the extent that the photo is vey much hit and miss as to what i get

Quality wise, i don;t think the D60 lacks anything, the pictures are sharp, they are clear and look good.

So, as you have suggested, maybe the D3000 is not a good option to go with, maybe a d5000 or a d90 ?

Paddysnapper

I'd say without doubt if you really believe upgrade is what you want to do, the only route is the D90, the rest are far to close to appreciate any difference. The D90 will also open up the wonderful world of Nikon lenses, the D90 has a built in body motor....Personally I would save for a D300s! I have a D300 and love it to bits, no upgrades for me for a long time yet! You could be lucky enough to pick up a new D300 still in stock, there are a few still about:)

mrmac

The D5000 doesn't have a built in focusing motor either.
So you'll still have to manually focus the Sigma.
A lot of Sigma lenses have built-in motors, suitable for your D60 etc.
Have a look for ones, with HSM on them, stands for Hyper-Sonic Motor.
These will auto-focus on the D60, D3000, D5000 etc.

The D90 does have a focusing motor, but the price is starting to go up.
Amazon.co.uk currently have the best price for body only, at £610 sterling, or £780 with the 18-105 VR.

HTH

magicbastarder

i've seen the D200 (body only) for (i think) about €500 s/h around town; might be an option?

trican

on the plus side the D200 can meter with old AIS manual focus prime lenses, which can be picked up relatively cheaply and they're of high quality. But if the low light performance of D200 is anything like that of the D80 its very poor (the reason I'll be selling my D80 soon)

My vote is still for the D90 (if the budget won't stretch for a D300).

alternatively if its just the autofocus issue thats annoying you get new suitable lenses for the D60 (sell that current lens on adverts.ie/ebay) - lens hold their value so much better than camera bodies

paulusdu

Looking at the specs for the D90 and the D300, both look excellent and have exactly what i would want to justify an upgrade. Although price wise im a bit stumped as to why the D300 is so much more expensive compared to the D90 but both seem to be full of options.

I think i need to call into a few shops and try out both to get a better feel.

at the moment the D90 is looking like a good option, i am adding up the fact that i won;t have to upgrade my Sigma lens to a motorised one either

I appreciate the advice guys, good to get people opinions.

mrmac

Another option - sell the Sigma, and buy an AF-S / HSM lense, suitable for your D60.
The D60 can take great images, and as already said, it's better in invest in good glass, than the camera itself.

What exactly, is the Sigma lense?
(Range, F-stop, all the letters & numbers)

paulusdu

MrMac you are far to sensible for your own good. There was me thinking about increasing my debt levels in line with the rest of the country and you go and throw me a wobbler.
Its a good idea with the lens alright.
I currently have a Sigma APO DG 70-300mm1:4-5.6, its not the flashiest lens in the world, but i have great time for it (apart from the manual focussing)
I can see that Pixmania do have an option of a this guy

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/741927/art/sigma/70-300-mm-f4-5-6-apo-dg-m.html

looks like the same lens that i have, but with a motor.

Like i said, i love the D60, and i love the quality of the images that i get from it.

mrmac

That's the correct version Sigma 70-300 you need, with APO & motor.

Here's what available in that range:

Nikon AF-S 55-200 (€240ish) voted "Best Entry Level Lens" TIPA 2007
Sigma 50-200 (€250ish) with HSM & OS (Optical Stabilised, same as VR)
Sigma 70-300 same as your example, but with OS (€380ish)
Nikon AF-S 18-200 VR (€580ish)
Sigma 18-250 (€480ish) with HSM & OS - voted "Best Entry Level Lens" TIPA
Tamron 18-270 (€530ish) with motor & VR -voted "Best Travel Lens" TIPA 2009

I don't have any of these, so I can't help you with any actual user advice. Do your research. I do have a Sigma EX 70-200 f2.8 - which I'm very happy with.

Here is a list of compatible lenses, that you can use as a guide, to get you going.
S/H Nikon AF-S and Sigma HSM lenses turn up on Adverts regularly.

Paddysnapper

paulusdu wrote: »

Looking at the specs for the D90 and the D300, both look excellent and have exactly what i would want to justify an upgrade. Although price wise im a bit stumped as to why the D300 is so much more expensive compared to the D90 but both seem to be full of options.

I think i need to call into a few shops and try out both to get a better feel.

at the moment the D90 is looking like a good option, i am adding up the fact that i won;t have to upgrade my Sigma lens to a motorised one either

I appreciate the advice guys, good to get people opinions.

The insides of the D90 and the D300 are virtually the same, the price difference comes about as a result of the D300 being pro. build, it's very sturdily built with mag.alloy body and superior weather and dust sealing, and weighs a ton in comparison with the plastic bodied D90, having said that my first DSLR a Nikon D70s was plastic bodied but always felt robust enough!

melekalikimaka

Paddysnapper wrote: »

The insides of the D90 and the D300 are virtually the same, the price difference comes about as a result of the D300 being pro. build, it's very sturdily built with mag.alloy body and superior weather and dust sealing, and weighs a ton in comparison with the plastic bodied D90, having said that my first DSLR a Nikon D70s was plastic bodied but always felt robust enough!

thats not true. there are differences

Sensor
The D300 has a 14 bit A/D converter while the D90 has a 12 bit. This difference doesn't matter if the selected format for the images is JPEG. However, if the images are recorded in a RAW format, the D300 has four times greater sensitivity.

AFS
There is a major difference in the auto focus system between the D90 and the D300. The D90 uses 11 sensors to calculate the focus point for the shot. The D300 uses 51 sensors. Sensors can be selected so a focus point is off center to create a more pleasing photograph. The larger number of sensors in the D300 enables a more precise placement of the subject of the photograph and enables it to be placed further off center.

The D90 does however have a video mode, the d300s also, but d300

paulusdu

I am guessing that the 51 AFS sensors on the D300 may be a bit of overkill when it comes to a hobbyist level of photography.
although it does sound like the D300s would prove to be pretty upgrade proof for a good few years.
But at a price.
After all the advice (all good, so cheers and i appreciate it), i think im going to upgrade the lens to ones with motors in them. Like i said the D60 is great and MrMac has convinced me that upgrading the body may not be worthwhile.
I'll make sure to post the first half decent image i take with the new lens.
My bank balance thanks you
:-)

melekalikimaka

wise me thinks

TinyExplosions

melekalikimaka wrote: »

The D300 has a 14 bit A/D converter while the D90 has a 12 bit. This difference doesn't matter if the selected format for the images is JPEG. However, if the images are recorded in a RAW format, the D300 has four times greater sensitivity.

It's not quite as simple as that I don't think... the differences between 14 and 16 bit A/D's aren't all that great, it's more a question of the difference in DR that is important (it's almost like the MegaPixel myth that we seem to have gotten away from)

this thread explains it a little more

mrmac

paulusdu wrote: »

.... i think im going to upgrade the lens to ones with motors in them. Like i said the D60 is great and MrMac has convinced me that upgrading the body may not be worthwhile.
I'll make sure to post the first half decent image i take with the new lens.
My bank balance thanks you
:-)

It's always better to invest in glass, than a camera, so +1!

As for the D90 Vs D300 - I'd still go for the D5000, as it's the best of both, except for a focusing motor, it's has all the good bits, at a really decent price.

btw - I do not work for Nikon. I'm just a normal Nikon geek!

Nforce

paulusdu wrote: »

I am guessing that the 51 AFS sensors on the D300 may be a bit of overkill when it comes to a hobbyist level of photography.

Far from it...especially if you're shooting sport/fast moving objects...it's 3D tracking is fantastic. Not as fast to AF/track as it's big brother D3...but probably not too far off of it. The D300 can shoot at up to 8fps(with a grip attached). The fact that you can meter with older lenses is a big bonus point too.

Just my 2 cents.:)

mrmac

Nforce wrote: »

The D300 can shoot at up to 8fps(with a grip attached).

Ya don't need a grip for 8fps! :cool: