Not that I want to take anything away from the point you're making but surprisingly the D90 is not a discontinued camera and Nikon is still plugging away making more of them. I don't own a D90 nor have I ever shot one but given that people are still buying this camera given all the fine options out there really speaks to what a great camera this model must be.
planning to buy a new nikon
- Thread starter DilySetiawan
- Start date
Not that I want to take anything away from the point you're making but surprisingly the D90 is not a discontinued camera and Nikon is still plugging away making more of them. I don't own a D90 nor have I ever shot one but given that people are still buying this camera given all the fine options out there really speaks to what a great camera this model must be.
AC016
Senior Member
Henry's stopped selling the D90 for a few months. But I was surprised that they had inventory again recently. So I asked if these were refurbished, nope they were all brand new. They had to put it back because of strong demand. I never owned a D90 but would recommend it over the 5100 anytime.
AC016
Senior Member
I have a D80, so i can see the allure of the D90. When i put my 5100 next to my 80, the D80 is almost twice as big and the D80 fits very well into my hand. The allure is the fact that the D90 looks and feels like a "pro" camera and it is also well priced these days - especially for people who just can not get to the D7k budget wise. Basing a choice purely on specs, i don't see how anyone could choose a D90 over a 5100. With a D80 (D90) - if you remember where the buttons are - you can change many settings with the buttons on top, next to the small LCD screen. That is a plus of cousre, as is the in-body focus motor <someone just starting out in the DSLR world should not really worry about this in my opinion. Again, purely based on specs, the 5100 is the better camera. However, does it mean you will be able to take "award" winning photos with it and not the D90. No. But then again, as someone else mentioned, why choose the D90 - an outdated camera - when there are better things now and in the pipeline? To me, a store that take the D90 of the shelf/off their website and then brings it back on, does not mean that there is a high demand for it. Could mean they tried to off-laod them, but could not; therefore, they had to put them back for sale in store and on their website. In the end, they have to get rid of them, either by selling them themselves or off-loading them to some discount store/website. When the new models of Nikon come out (perhaps a 5200 & 7100.. others?), to keep selling the D90 at a slightly reduced price - or at all - would just be silly. I am sure people may still buy it - don't know why - but it would not make any business sense to have that overhead and the fact that they would be pushing a discontinued product right next to Nikons latest and greatest.
I love the D300 because it has all the features I like about a camera. I don't particularly care for the D300S because I don't need video in my DSLR. And "new features" to me doesn't necessarily translate into a better camera, just because they have all kinds of bells and whistles. To me, they're nothing but gimmicks that the marketing people sell new cameras with.
Look how old my D200 is! Yet it still does the job I want it to, without all the fancy gizmos that the newer cameras have. Those are my reasons and I'm sticking to them.
Look how old my D200 is! Yet it still does the job I want it to, without all the fancy gizmos that the newer cameras have. Those are my reasons and I'm sticking to them.
D7000 is a great upgrade for a D80 user looking for a bit more features, and wonderful picture quality. If you are used to the size of the D80, you might find the D5100 a bit small, or consider a discounted D90 still out there in leftover stock. but, personally, I would lean toward the D7000, or used D300.
I understand why people would prefer the D5100. I also understand why some would still prefer the D90. I understand why some prefer 1080p video than a 720. I also understand why some would prefer the in-body focus motor. I liked the 5100's bells and whistles at the same time I also like the feel of the D90. Btw, if you combine both camera features, will you have the D7000?
Stopping production doesn't mean you are out of stock. The remaining stock on hand should still be available for sale. But if I was the manufacturer and already announced to discontinue a product line, would it hurt my business if I re-start production again if there's a demand? Trust me it make sense. Imagine, minimal marketing cost just word of mouth.
If people would opt to buy a lower priced D90 than the "future" new models (which are rumours) will this hurt their business? No. Both are still going to Nikon's pockets.
Lastly, not because it was discontinued it means it's inferior to newer models.
Stopping production doesn't mean you are out of stock. The remaining stock on hand should still be available for sale. But if I was the manufacturer and already announced to discontinue a product line, would it hurt my business if I re-start production again if there's a demand? Trust me it make sense. Imagine, minimal marketing cost just word of mouth.
If people would opt to buy a lower priced D90 than the "future" new models (which are rumours) will this hurt their business? No. Both are still going to Nikon's pockets.
Lastly, not because it was discontinued it means it's inferior to newer models.
I'd just like to throw my 2 cents in this discussion. I have both the D90 and the D7000. From my observations, the D7000 is a better camera. But… (roll drum here please), for an amateur, the D90 probably produces nicer pictures than the D7000. The 7000's sensor is very sensitive to camera movement, read shutter and mirror movement. For someone not well trained, this usually leads to blurry shots. This is why there were a lot of complaints about the D7000 sharpness and focus issues.
So, if you know what you're doing, you can get better shots with the 7000. But if you are just beginning, you probably would do better with the D90. In normal daylight shots, I still use the D90 and love the files it produces. For low light, the D7000 is better, but not if the photos are motion blurred...
Again, just my personal opinion.
So, if you know what you're doing, you can get better shots with the 7000. But if you are just beginning, you probably would do better with the D90. In normal daylight shots, I still use the D90 and love the files it produces. For low light, the D7000 is better, but not if the photos are motion blurred...
Again, just my personal opinion.
So you would re-start production of a discontinued, technologically outdated camera? I am glad you are not running Nikon!
Why do you insult people in this forum if their opnions are not the same as yours?
AC016
Senior Member
Sorry Jon, it was not meant as an insult. It was more in jest than anyhting else. If i were to insult you, you would know it because the explitifs would fly. Don't take anything i say the wrong way. I am only stating my opinion, as do others. Sometimes the way things are written may come off the wrong way. I am not really one to pull to many punches. Sorry that you felt insulted, that was not my intent. Happy shooting!
It must be the way of the world, huh? You research and research and then make your choice to buy camera X because it has all the features that you want it to have and because it's state of the art and you're happy with it. It doesn't bother you that others with older cameras think it's gimmicky and the features are unnecessary. Because unlike them, you're planning on using those added features. Then years go by and a newer model is released with lots of new features but you're not interested because who needs all those gimmicky items that are just meant to sell cameras, your old camera is more than enough for you. Until, that is, you buy a new model and the cycle begins anew.
AntrimHills
Senior Member
Don't ask me to explain it, the D90 feels better quality.
Not to mention the wider range of lenses.
Not to mention that whilst the D5100 has a movable LCD, which some may see as an advantage, I think it's something that might get broken easily.
Not to mention it has a pentaprism as opposed to a pentamirror,
nor less shutter lag,
nor larger viewfinder,
nor better battery life... and so the list goes on.
Yes, the 5100 has higher res movies, hdr, greater color depth, is smaller, lighter and cheaper.
Personally, I think movies are for video cameras, hdr is a shortcut to editing the photo yourself; smaller, lighter and cheaper doesn't instill confidence in its build quality, so to gain a little color depth is neither here nor there.
I would still pick the D90... that my opinion, for what it's worth
Not to mention the wider range of lenses.
Not to mention that whilst the D5100 has a movable LCD, which some may see as an advantage, I think it's something that might get broken easily.
Not to mention it has a pentaprism as opposed to a pentamirror,
nor less shutter lag,
nor larger viewfinder,
nor better battery life... and so the list goes on.
Yes, the 5100 has higher res movies, hdr, greater color depth, is smaller, lighter and cheaper.
Personally, I think movies are for video cameras, hdr is a shortcut to editing the photo yourself; smaller, lighter and cheaper doesn't instill confidence in its build quality, so to gain a little color depth is neither here nor there.
I would still pick the D90... that my opinion, for what it's worth
It must be the way of the world, huh? You research and research and then make your choice to buy camera X because it has all the features that you want it to have and because it's state of the art and you're happy with it. It doesn't bother you that others with older cameras think it's gimmicky and the features are unnecessary. Because unlike them, you're planning on using those added features. Then years go by and a newer model is released with lots of new features but you're not interested because who needs all those gimmicky items that are just meant to sell cameras, your old camera is more than enough for you. Until, that is, you buy a new model and the cycle begins anew.
LOL....ya got your shots at me in this post, didn't ya!
lolPhillydog1958
Senior Member
The desire and passion to grow is what drives man to expand current technology. It started with the earliest of civilizations. Innovation drives the market and delivers what consumers want and at a economic profit to producers. Its up to individual consumers to decide when to stop buying and find, "That perfect camera, the camera of cameras, my final purchase. " And, it's OK to be content with one's camera. As long as man can make, man will want. It's what drives the free market and society as a whole.
Phillydog1958
Senior Member
I think what I'm trying to say is, ". . . Whatever drives the market, baby . . . "
I think what I'm trying to say is, "Whatever drives the market, baby. "
I think you're spot on Phillydog1958 and this is what makes consumer driven capitalism successful. It's very Darwinian and if you're not providing what the people want, you will not last. Classic example is the Edsel. No matter how much Ford poured into that beast they couldn't convince the consumers to buy it. Funny thing is now they're worth a small fortune but back in the day they couldn't hardly give them away.
Phillydog1958
Senior Member
Yep! So true. The rejection of innovation is the beginning of the end. We don't want to end up as the last survivors of life as we know it, dwelling in some post- appocalyptic, Mad-Max world where gasoline and water are premium and drive what little market is left? Do we?
Last edited: