Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Wed Nov 26, 2014 4:21 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 6:13 pm 
For the past 4 years I had a Nikon D40 and now, obviously, it's pretty outdated. I've been thinking of an upgrade up to 550$. I was considering the D3100 but then I read some opinions saying it's more for amateurs and doesn't have many advanced options. When shooting, I need to have as much manual freedom as possible, with exposure, etc.. I'm not a pro, but I know my way around a camera and know how to use most of its options so I need something that I can freely use without the camera doing too much for me. I really don't know what to set on. D90 is pretty damn expensive, maybe D70? A cheaper version of the D90 would be nice.. I really don't know. I don't care about movies, convertible LCD or any of these additions.
And help, please?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 6:27 pm 
Ask yourself what your reason is for upgrading.

If you buy the D3100, then the only thing that you are upgrading is the image quality.

If you are fine with the image quality you currently have, then you could look into used more professional cameras.

Now im in the UK so I dont quite know the prices, but Ill work off your budget being the new price of a D3100?

For that money, you could buy a used mint condition D200 or probably slightly worse condition D90.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 7:38 pm 
I'm basically fine with the image quality now but getting something better would be nice too... my reason for upgrading is to have something i can do more with my pictures and have bigger control on my images and to push them further than i could with the D40.

I'll look into the D200 though, thanks :)


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 7:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 1388
Location: The Netherlands
kalwid wrote:
For the past 4 years I had a Nikon D40 and now, obviously, it's pretty outdated.
...
D90 is pretty damn expensive, maybe D70?

So the D40 is outdated, but you are willing to buy an even older D70 in its place? If you could stretch your budget the D90 (new) would be the best bet for now, or if possible a used D300.

_________________
- Wout -
Lowepro Nova 200 AW filled with Nikon D90 + MB-D80
18-70 DX, 70-300 VR, 35 1.8 DX, SB-700


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 9:35 pm 
Used D300's are still quite a lot I believe, theyre basically still the professional DX option


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 11:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:41 pm
Posts: 367
Dear Kalwid

You raise an interesting question. Basically, the D40 will give you most of the control you need. The newer, more expensive Nikons are slanting more towards sport/action capability (eg faster focus, more fps etc). It's more convenience you're getting than capability. For example, automatic exposure bracketing.

The most effective aid to better photos is a good software suite for post processing. I managed to get good 16 x 20s from a Fuji S6500, and a D40 has much better capability. For example Photoshop CS4 corrects distortion, vignetting and CA reasonably well. You may have already done this.

I bought my D40 after my D90 and there's no way I'm getting rid of it - capable and light, and a real pleasantness about images from that 6MP sensor.

By all means, get a D90 or similar if your budget will stretch. I'd also think seriously about the D3100 if the budget is restricted as it has a good sensor and more features than the D40.

_________________
HCC
Nikon DSLRs, film cameras from Leica to Linhof


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 4:24 pm 
I have to really advise against the D3100, D5000, or D5100 as all three of these are entry level cameras on the same level as what you already own. they may have slight improvements but not enough to justify the purchase.

A used D90 can be had for a good price if you look around and would be a good step up, but I would advice that if you aren't in need of an upgrade right away to keep shooting with the D40 for now and save up to get either a new D90 or a little longer and get the D300s Which is the best DX body on the market today and will be all you ever need if you aren't looking to become a professional photographer.

Then all you will need to do is invest in good glass.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 7:22 pm 
Yeah, thanks for your opinions, I already decided I'm not getting the D3100 or anything like that. I'll save up for the D90 or even D300s if I can. Why exactly is D300s considered the best body on the market? What is the difference between the D90 line and the D3100, D5000, etc?

thank you so much :)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 9:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Osijek
d90 ->2 dials, much more direct buttons, top mounted lcd, pentaprism viewfinder, built in AF motor for af d lenses, wireless flash comanding (should have), and more.. only thing that is kinda lacking in d90 is video capability (no full HD), and much better build quality!
d7000 even boosts that

d300s well you get magnesium body, faster continous shooting, much more af points, 2 memory cards slots, even more buttons....

but you need to ask yourself do you really need all that d300s has to offer, or will d7000 or d90 satisfy all you need..

_________________
nikon d90 --->af-s dx 18-105mm; tamron 90mm macro

add me up on:

flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bakica/

deviant art:
http://tbensic.deviantart.com/

----:>bakice ce vladati svjetom<:----


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 12:37 am 
Yeah, for now I definietly don't need the D300s because I'm not advanced enough yet. However, I think, D90 would definietly do it. I'll save up some more money and get it when I get a chance :)

thank you a lot for your answers, it helps so much.

oh and it's not worth getting the D80 from the same line?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 5:12 am 
Hi Kalwid,

Here's how I look at it: cameras are like knives. They all cut.

The D300/s are the swiss army knives of the DX bunch. The D40 is your good quality kitchen knife.

Now if all you do is cut, then the swiss army knife is overkill. What would you need a built-in screw-driver for. If you only turn screws very very rarely, well then even the kitchen knife works.

90% of a good image, comes from you, the shooter. 8% of the rest comes from the lens and 2% from the body.

I have and use both the D40 and the D300. All in all, I think that the D40 produce better images than the D300. I've printed both 6 and 12 MP images at 12X18 inches and there is zero evidence in my eyes, that the extra 6MP makes ANY practical difference whatsoever.

Yeah in theory, if you're an eager cropper of your images, 12 MP is better. And that is true...but I'm not a cropper.

The only reason I have and use a D300 is for paid event-gigs, where I need buttons and dials for everything so I can make changes fast and easy. Decidedly not because I believe it gives me better images. In fact, the weight of it, along with my metal flash-bracket and umbrella-holder, makes it too damn heavy to be pleasant when doing a 12-hour job.

It's also handy for off-camera flash, because it has built-in flash command. So I use the D300 for that too. And for the AF-D lenses, the built-in AF motor in the D300 is handy, but the AF-S lenses focus faster, so it's not critical. The settings-banks where you can switch a whole SET of almost every setting all at once, is handy. But also not critical.

The D40 has 1/500 flash synch which is far far superior to the D300, for example. The very fact that the file-sizes are inherently so much smaller too, really is helpful in terms of buffering. The D40 can shoot an entire card full in one long fast sequence, the D300 fills up it's buffer every now and then, and you wait.

In other words, it's very important to decide what is important to you and what it's worth. And always held up against: what else could you get for the dosh?

If 99% of all your images are only seen on a monitor, the D40 is much much better, because the image is not compressed as much. A 24-inch monitor has just over 2 MP.

But if you are just interested in a body that allows you more direct options to play and experiment with - bracketing or faster shooting etc. and just the sheer joy of having a more hefty and feature packed camera - with video and audio recording even, then just go for it and never look back.

Cheers :-)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 10:45 am 
Thank you for that post, it's really helpful. i'll keep this in mind :) For now, I can do with the D40, but then I'd like to update to D90, since I want more than just the imagine quality. I don't know if I'll ever go to d300. maybe. depends on how i develop in photography and if that step up will be necessary.

Now I always wanted the Sigma 10-20 lens and now I have about 500 dollars that I could get it for. before, this money was supposed to go for a new camera, but since I'm putting that off for a while maybe I should invest in a lens? is it worth getting the lens and using my D40 to the max with better lenses or should I just save up for a camera?

Decisions, decisions...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 10:55 am 
one word: D90. great step up camera,with a lot of great features & very good image quality


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 1388
Location: The Netherlands
I would get the D90 first, with the added top LCD you will be able to switch your settings much faster. The menu based switching of settings is already taking a lot of time when you could be shooting pictures (and learning photography).

_________________
- Wout -
Lowepro Nova 200 AW filled with Nikon D90 + MB-D80
18-70 DX, 70-300 VR, 35 1.8 DX, SB-700


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 2:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 3:52 pm
Posts: 2177
Location: The Netherlands
A new lens is almost always better than a new body. So if you want the Sigma, go for it and forget a new body until you have some money again.

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group