Help with Nikon upgrade please

[batman44]

Hi Everyone,

I need some Nikon opinions here.

I currently own a Nikon D40 and would like to upgrade. I'm finding that lenses (leaning towards a decent zoom) are hard to find for this camera, and a friend suggested the Nikon D90. I currently have the kit lenses from my D40 (AF-S 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 and AF-S 55-200mm 4-5.6) and an AF-S 35mm 1.8.

I tried searching online - many mixed reviews.

I'm not wanting to spend (much) more than $1000 US.

I have narrowed it down to the D90 or the D5000, while I must add the D300s is sweet, but until I start making money I can't justify that body just yet!

Can anyone give me some help, opinions, anything.... besides the obvious difference in price?

Thank you soooo much!!!!

[Shadowman]

Difference between entry-level and semi-pro cameras?

Kori,

sift through the above link and you will find answers to your questions and if you have any more it will benefit others as the thread increases.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Kori,

Great to have you back again

The D5000 won't give you access to any more lenses than the D40, due to a lack of an in-body focus motor. The D90 is, I think the way to go, but I'm not sure why you can't find a lens for the D40?

After the D90 is bought, won't you then be needing a budget for a lens?

Cheers,

[batman44]

Hi Kori,

Great to have you back again

The D5000 won't give you access to any more lenses than the D40, due to a lack of an in-body focus motor. The D90 is, I think the way to go, but I'm not sure why you can't find a lens for the D40?

After the D90 is bought, won't you then be needing a budget for a lens?

Cheers,

Thanks Dave!
The lens issue I'm finding (through online as I don't live in an area where we have a decent camera store), I'm looking into purchasing a fast zoom lens. The land we own has great opportunity for some nice wildlife shots, but, with the canopy of the trees makes it low light. I found ONE lens what would work on D40 for AF ( I don't trust my own eyes for focusing ), so it had me thinking if I upgraded to the D90 (or something) I may not have this problem. A friend (who owns Canon so she can't completely help me) mentioned teleconverters, also the reason for fast lens. Looking at these also seems to have me puzzled when it come to the D40.

So I wasn't sure if I should sacrifice what I really want for what I have to make due with because of the camera, or if I should upgrade. The D90 isn't to bad at $779.95 (US) and I would still have some extra $ left over to add to the fund of zoom lens before summer.

I think I need to stop typing now, seems like it's getting confusing all over again! sigh!

[batman44]

Difference between entry-level and semi-pro cameras?

Kori,

sift through the above link and you will find answers to your questions and if you have any more it will benefit others as the thread increases.

Thanks for the link!

[Bill44]

Well mate, I have the D90 and am very happy with it. You would be too for quite a few years to come.

[Keith]

Hi Kori,

I have a D40 and a D90.
When I upgraded from the D40 I considered the D300, when I looked at both the D90 and the D300 side by side I purchased the D90 in favour of the D300 for the following reasons.
It has a body size in between the D40 and the D300.
It is lighter than the D300 but very comfortable to use.
It has all the buttons to change settings available as opposed to having to access menus on the D40.
The processing power and image quality are a clear cut above the D40 and on par with the D300.
The lens choice available is far superior to the D40 and on par almost to the D300.
The build quality is not as good as the D300 but is still very good with a nice solid feel.
Remote shutter release accessories are available for the D90, only the nikons own infra red release is usable on the D40.
Continous shutter speed at 4.5 frames per sec. on the D90 is respectable, with live view available and a basic form of mirror lock up available too makes the D90 very versatile.
In camera picture settings and the ability to set up your own picture settings are extremely useful.
This feature is useful as images using Nikons own picture settings are less sturated than the D40's.

I believe the D5000 is not as well equipped as the D90 in a lot of important areas (to the user) as the D90, which is a lot closer to the D300 in that respect.

Hope this helps

Keith

[Dave Humphries]

I believe the D5000 is not as well equipped as the D90 in a lot of important areas (to the user) as the D90, which is a lot closer to the D300 in that respect.

They are all 12MP, but D5000 and D90 share the same sensor, which I believe to be different from the D300S. The latter gives a higher frame rate and has a larger buffer, I believe. (but I could be at least partially wrong here)

The lack of a focus motor and the ergomonics are the major differences between D90 and D5000, although the D5000 has many buttons and one "wheel", I think the think the D90 has more - for me, the clincher was the tiltable screen on the D5000, which I do use on occasion and is always turned to protect the screen when the camera is put in the bag. The other good thing is the D5000 does have the D90's excellent AF system (minus aforementioned motor).

I do have some old film era AI lenses, which I have to use without AF and without metering, completely manual - taking a test shot and reviewing the histogram and highlights screen to set exposure - this slows me down but is acceptable for now because it makes me think more before I press the button for 'the shot'. I don't think these would be any better on a D90 though, as they're non AF, 'no electronics' lenses.

Cheers,

[PeterL]

Kori

I could have almost written Keiths post above myself. I also have a D40 which I recently upgraded to the D90 for the exact same reasons. I could have got the D300s at an extreme financial stretch but with my sensible head on and after having read many reviews it boils down to them both using almost identical sensors (I have even read a couple of reviews that state the noise is better handled on the D90 than the D300s) you are going to get near identical image quality so it comes down to whether the controls suite you and if you really need the extra fps and focusing points of the D300s and the magnesium body and weather sealing. From my experiences of the D90 so far I think I made the right choice.
Pete

[batman44]

Thanks for all the information and opinions! I think I'm leaning to the D90 now.... but I will probably toss this around yet before diving in. It's nice to get personal opinions compared to just "technical reviews".
Thanks again All!!!!!

[uspandey]

Personal opinion, Batman? Apart from D5000 having a 12MP sensor and Live View (and HD video capability, if you care), there is not much of an upgrade from D40 to look forward to. D90 is the way to go, if not a D300s.

[Dave Humphries]

Personal opinion, Batman? Apart from D5000 having a 12MP sensor and Live View (and HD video capability, if you care), there is not much of an upgrade from D40 to look forward to. D90 is the way to go, if not a D300s.

I agree (and I have a D5000), from where you are, the D90 is probably the best bet.

I would have gone there myself except for wanting the tiltable screen.

[batman44]

Thank you! I am 99.9% sure I"m going to order the D90 now. (I do like the tiltable screen though, but....)
Now - once I have it in hand...I know I'm going to be deciding what new lens I want????

[Dave Humphries]

Now - once I have it in hand...I know I'm going to be deciding what new lens I want????

Hi Kori,

I'd start looking at those lens prices now if I were you, especially if there's no family holiday fund to pilfer

.. or you may end up with one but not the other, although I guess halfway there is better than not starting.

Cheers,

[GiantTristan]

Hi Everyone,

I need some Nikon opinions here.

I currently own a Nikon D40 and would like to upgrade. I'm finding that lenses (leaning towards a decent zoom) are hard to find for this camera, and a friend suggested the Nikon D90. I currently have the kit lenses from my D40 (AF-S 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 and AF-S 55-200mm 4-5.6) and an AF-S 35mm 1.8.

I tried searching online - many mixed reviews.

I'm not wanting to spend (much) more than $1000 US.

I have narrowed it down to the D90 or the D5000, while I must add the D300s is sweet, but until I start making money I can't justify that body just yet!

Can anyone give me some help, opinions, anything.... besides the obvious difference in price?

Thank you soooo much!!!!

I don't quite understand your problem. There are plenty of Nikon lenses that work fine with your D40. Just go to the Nikon site and look at all their lenses. Then check whether the lens you are interested in has a "silent wave motor". If the answer is yes, the lens will work fine with your D40. Your 35/1.8 prime should give you good results with the D40. You should also consider lenses with the "vr" attribute in their name, vibration reduction allows you to still get sharp exposures at low shutter speeds.

The best Nikon zoom lenses have a constant f/2.8 aperture over their entire focal range and work well with teleconverters. However they are quite expensive.

For your particular interest - wildlife- you might want to consider the 70-300 F/4-5.6 vr.

Getting a new camera will not help you very much. First get the best lenses you can afford, work on your technique and only then buy a better camera. A good lens will serve you for many years, but every new camera you get will become "obsolete" pretty fast.

[Dave Humphries]

I don't quite understand your problem. There are plenty of Nikon lenses that work fine with your D40. Just go to the Nikon site and look at all their lenses. Then check whether the lens you are interested in has a "silent wave motor". If the answer is yes, the lens will work fine with your D40. Your 35/1.8 prime should give you good results with the D40. You should also consider lenses with the "vr" attribute in their name, vibration reduction allows you to still get sharp exposures at low shutter speeds.

The best Nikon zoom lenses have a constant f/2.8 aperture over their entire focal range and work well with teleconverters. However they are quite expensive.

For your particular interest - wildlife- you might want to consider the 70-300 F/4-5.6 vr.

Getting a new camera will not help you very much. First get the best lenses you can afford, work on your technique and only then buy a better camera. A good lens will serve you for many years, but every new camera you get will become "obsolete" pretty fast.

Hi Kori,

There's a lot of sense in the above.
I have just had a look at the Nikon (UK) website and as far as I can see, any lens that includes "AF-S" in the name will work on a D40/D40x/D60 or indeed a D3000/D5000.

If you get a D90, then you can add the lenses with just "AF" to those available. Given that these are (probably) older lenses, maybe that makes them cheaper - I haven't compared prices. But VR is worth having IMHO.

Cheers,

[batman44]

Lots of good points here!
I don't have my list handy...but I was looking at a zoom lens and I found one I liked and wasn't breaking the bank - but it wouldn't AF on my D40.... it just got me thinking maybe I needed to upgrade. I checked out teleconverters too - they are said to loose some quality of image when used also - besides the stop or two you loose so need to buy the F2.8 etc....
I thought if I was going to dish out the money for the zoom to work on my camera, maybe it would be better to get the upgrade and a lens what would AF (while the funds are here and not spent on my kids LOL)
Now I'm back to do I or don't I.... ohhhhh
Good thing I don't buy on impulse!

[PeterL]

I found it fairly easy to justify upgrading from the D40 to the D90 - I actually wanted to be able to use lenses like the 50mm f1.8 and some of the older ones so the body motor was essential for me. I agree that you shouldn't just buy a body because it's the latest and has a few more megapixels but I found that for me there are many compelling reasons to upgrade from the D40 to the D90. The higher frame rate (4.5fps vs 2.5fps) the much easier access to the cameras features via all the extra buttons, the larger clearer rear screen, the better body size/weight, the top lcd (very useful), the better focussing system, better metering, additional thumbwheel making manual easier to use etc.

I don't do wildlife photography but I assume a fast frame rate, good noise handling, maybe the 3d tracking on the autofocus and higher MP (giving better crop options) would be an advantage. I must say that the general speed increase alone on the D90 over the D40 has made it worth buying for me, I didn't buy it for better image quality (the D40 produces superb pictures) but for it's additional and improved features which would be a good justification in my book.

[batman44]

I agree that you shouldn't just buy a body because it's the latest and has a few more megapixels.....

I too agree - and that is why I'm NOT upgrading

The higher frame rate (4.5fps vs 2.5fps) the much easier access to the cameras features via all the extra buttons, the larger clearer rear screen, the better body size/weight, the top lcd (very useful), the better focussing system, better metering, additional thumbwheel making manual easier to use etc.

The higher frame rate was a big one for me, my husband races late model cars so that would be nice for the continuous mode.

I don't do wildlife photography but I assume a fast frame rate, good noise handling, maybe the 3d tracking on the autofocus and higher MP (giving better crop options) would be an advantage.

Yes for wildlife and for the racetrack - there isn't a lot of room in the stands so I usually stand on the back of our trailer - bringing me further away from the track
The wildlife on our land is also another example - those creatures don't like humans - they are not used to people being in their habitat as the land/cabin was vacant for about 10 years and we've only owned it 2 now.

I must say that the general speed increase alone on the D90 over the D40 has made it worth buying for me, I didn't buy it for better image quality (the D40 produces superb pictures)

I agree with the D40 taking some VERY nice quality pictures, I have many pictures that have turned out very sweet IMO I've taken pictures for 5 different people for graduation pictures and toddler shots and they were very impressed with the pictures- much more than I was. I made sure to tell these folks I am still learning so if they truly are not happy they don't have to buy! But they were all thrilled! That makes me feel like I am doing better and hope to one day do more side jobs!


Thank you for your input - I guess when it comes down to it, I would really really like to buy the D90 for those great points above.... If having the greater MP will help with cropping maybe I won't be sooooooo quick to buy a larger zoom or teleconverter. That is honestly something I overlooked - so thank you! My list of pro's and con's for buying this will have another pro now! (The list in my head LOL)