Nikon D90 vs. Nikon D7000

[Manfred M]

Thoughts on your two most recent posts:

1. Have have bought lots of used photographic equipment, but when it comes to cameras and lenses I will not buy something that I cannot visually inspect and test. So I would not personally buy from eBay unless the seller is a reputable camera dealer with a "no questions asked" return policy.

2. As a D90 shooter, while I do like the camera (I also have a D800), if I were in your shoes and were to chose between the D90 and the D7000 today; I would not hesitate to go with the D7000; it is a far newer design and a superior camera. The D90 is really very much a repackaged D300.

[John 2]

Some interesting advice so my two cents worth. I've upgraded from a D90 to a D7000 and eventually to a D7100. I have found worthwhile improvements from each upgrade. The areas that mattered to me were low light/high ISO performance (noise) and resolution. Why? - I am not very good at composing the final image in camera either because I cannot get close enough or I just see a better composition post exposure. I therefore tend to crop and it is the fact that the deterioration in image quality is less in this situation for the D7000 and the D7100 that makes these cameras a better tool - for me. As for lenses, I use the 18mm-200mm Nilkkor for probably 75% of the time. It's a good all round lens and it is sharp throughout its range. Outside of that I use a 70mm - 300mm for nature subjects and then occasionally I will see something that will benefit from a super wide - in my case an 11mm- 16mm Tokina. That's the way I arrived at my kit and IMHO you need to go through the same process against your areas of interest to arrive at what will do the job for you. One other thing I will say from experience is that don't be in a hurry to buy a bucket full of lenses. Start with something like the 18mm to 200mm and learn how to use it. Eventually you will begin to expose any shortfall in capability if any and that will help you decide what else you need in your armoury. There is nothing worse that buying an expensive lens that sits in your bag and is never used.

[Brev00]

I would agree that I would recommend a new D7000 over a new D90. That is obvious. But, that wasn't the question. The op said he was getting a package with the D90 package including more and/or better lenses. Others have questioned his math in terms of how much of a price difference there is and whether one can really get a significantly different set of lenses with the D90, but I was taking the op at his word. He should know the gear that is available to him and at what price. So, I was saying the D90 with a better set of lenses is preferable, in my opinion, to the D7000. He also did not say he was getting rid of the D3100 to get better iq. He said he wanted to expand his limits and skills. The D90 is great for exploring one's limits and skills. It is a very approachable camera in terms of ease of use, handling, consistent af, I also have some doubt about getting a used D7000. The quality control issues have been well documented. Used cameras offer no warranty most often. Dependability may not be exciting but it makes getting a used D90 less of a risk--at least in my mind. So, there are pluses and minuses. Is the D90 significantly better than the D3100? If the sensor is isolated as the only element under consideration, than no. I don't see it that way so I say yes. I can list all the attributes of the D90 but, I am sure we are familiar with them. Which would I choose right now for a shoot: the D90 by far.

[Flintlock]

Just my two cents:
1. D7100 is a much better model than D7000. So, if you're planning to use this new camera for the next several years, you might want to consider D7100.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D7100-vs-Nikon_D7000

2. If you're low on budget, you should probably look at D3200 also. D3200 has a much lower price, but has twice as many pixels as D90.
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Pro...492/D3200.html
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon_D7000