upgrade to d90 from D3100

[ross2788]

It sounds as if you are asking whether or not the D90 will make you a better photographer.

Answer this question...

If you trade a BMW for a Porsche, will you be a better driver?

Hope this helps.

of course it will make you a better driver,, if the porsche have more horse power, better handling, then who will win the race? the much better equipment of course ,the porsche,,
so if you can afford a d90, then go for it,,

 

[slowpoke]

How many actuations are on the D90? I would check this out first.If they're low(30,000) or less,go for it.You'll love the D90,I do.lol

 

[pistnbroke]

but you would love a more modern Nikon even more ....

 

[Bill4282]

When I bought my d90, the camera shop explained that, at the time, for still photography the only difference between the d90 and d300 was the case material. I'm not sure the same could be said for the d3100. In cameras, I truly believe one should buy the best one can afford. If necessary save up; a quick purchase will haunt you wondering if you did the right thing. When I purchased my d90 I passed on the lens and just bought the body. Now wondering if I should have got the 18-105. Oh we'll.

 

[Akiviri]

If it helps anyone at all - I traded my Canon gear in for the D90, after much research and deliberation. I just feel that for my uses - short of the D300 (primarily for weathersealing ... but then I'm not getting any younger so...) the D90 suited me best. If you want to directly compare cameras try here: Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page they head to head compare every production camera with HUGE images, helped me a lot anyway

 

[Whiskeyman]

When I purchased my d90 I passed on the lens and just bought the body. Now wondering if I should have got the 18-105. Oh we'll.

Bill, I purchased my D90 with the kit lens reluctantly, because it wasn't available as a body only in the time frame I needed. I would have rather used the extra money to put toward a faster lens.

I wouldn't fret about it, if it were me.

 

[Bill4282]

Whiskeyman, I passed on the D300 for the same reasons. A head-to-head comparison of the D300 vs D90 based on my type use wasn't worth the extra cost. Used the extra money to buy a light kit, flash and manfrotto monopod and head.

 

[Geoffc]

When I bought my d90, the camera shop explained that, at the time, for still photography the only difference between the d90 and d300 was the case material. I'm not sure the same could be said for the d3100. In cameras, I truly believe one should buy the best one can afford. If necessary save up; a quick purchase will haunt you wondering if you did the right thing. When I purchased my d90 I passed on the lens and just bought the body. Now wondering if I should have got the 18-105. Oh we'll.

If the shop summarised the difference between the D90 and D300 as the case material I can only assume you were in a shoe shop at the time.

 

[Bill4282]

Check out this comparison: http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D300-vs-Nikon_D90

 

[Whiskeyman]

Check out this comparison: Nikon D300 vs D90 - Our Analysis

That is a very useful site, Bill4282. Thank you for sharing it.
WM

 

[hark]

That is a very useful site, Bill4282. Thank you for sharing it.
WM

Yes the info offers a great comparison! What I'm wondering is how Adorama is pricing their D90 at $599 new when it sells for more at other dealers? And I've noticed this type of pricing with some Nikon things at Adorama. Does anyone know how their prices for new Nikon items can be so much lower than their competitors?

 

[Deezey]

Yes the info offers a great comparison! What I'm wondering is how Adorama is pricing their D90 at $599 new when it sells for more at other dealers? And I've noticed this type of pricing with some Nikon things at Adorama. Does anyone know how their prices for new Nikon items can be so much lower than their competitors?

I call that a deal. Hand over money, leave happy.

And I am a very happy Adorama customer. They could just have an overstock and need the space. Only they really know why they do things. And on steals like that....I don't question the seller.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Mike FM]

The D90 is a great camera, but past it's prime. For those in the market, you'll be better off paying a bit more with a D7000. If you can find a D90 on the cheap, it's still a great camera. The D7000 is just leaps ahead in features. Better AF (when tuned properly), higher ISO performance, better wheather sealed body, better video....the list goes on and on. I even picked it over a used D300. Just remember that it's just gear to get the shot easier. If you feel you've outgrown your camera, go for the next step up.

Buying a Porsche 911 Turbo won't make novice driver a better driver. All you get is a novice driver driving a Porsche 911 Turbo who will likely crash said Porsche 911 Turbo.

 

[daredevil123]

I will vote for the new D7100.

Just imagine D300 AF, in a D7000... and once you activate the additional 1.3 crop on APSC (final crop factor of 2, much like 4/3 system), the AF points will fill the entire frame. Will be awesome for bird shots!

 

[Akiviri]

Check out this comparison: Nikon D300 vs D90 - Our Analysis

Just a heads-up with snapsort. You may want to check what they post as 'facts' with another reputable site, as I have found them to be wrong on numerous occasions - even on basic functions or weather sealing - and as a result skip them entirely now. From what I have seen they haven't improved any lately. Just double-check is all I'm saying.

 

[LudwigVB]

I fully agree, Snapsort is not a reliable source of information and I also ignore it.

 

[everprentice]

The D90 has more features useful for "photography". The D3100 is a better photo/video hybrid.

 

[everprentice]

Buying a Porsche 911 Turbo won't make novice driver a better driver. All you get is a novice driver driving a Porsche 911 Turbo who will likely crash said Porsche 911 Turbo.

Couldn't agree more. I always tell my friends, only upgrade cameras and lenses when you figure out why you need the upgrade in the first place. That way you know which features you prioritize. I got a D300s vs a D71000 because I need some features the latter can't give me. I can sacrifice the new sensor for reliability and durability.

Also, whenever I decide to buy something, I try to look at the beautiful images taken with a D40, D2x or a D200 or film to remind myself that photography is not just about the gear.

 

[Dubiousone]

Couldn't agree more. I always tell my friends, only upgrade cameras and lenses when you figure out why you need the upgrade in the first place. That way you know which features you prioritize. I got a D300s vs a D71000 because I need some features the latter can't give me. I can sacrifice the new sensor for reliability and durability.

Also, whenever I decide to buy something, I try to look at the beautiful images taken with a D40, D2x or a D200 or film to remind myself that photography is not just about the gear.

Very well said!!! I have a D50, my first DSLR. I really like it but....I am beginning to outgrow it. Or maybe I'm just wanting...better. Yes I covet the D7100 but, I've been looking at a D90 because of some of the features it has which are better than what I have and D90's can be had very reasonably. Do I choose the D90 and use that money I saved on lenses (because the 90 would serve me very well) or, do I just get the 7100? Decisions decisions...hey, you have an F-3? How much? Uh....maybe I can wait on that 7100....LOL!!!

 

[Mike D90]

I have a D90 and absolutely love it. If I could have afforded it I would have gotten the D7100 but I couldn't. I think, for the money, the D90 is a fabulous camera and one of the best deals going on a DSLR. I love the fact that it will accept, and function, with ANY Nikon auto focus lens, not just the AF-S lenses.