Am I talking rubbish :) ?

Ziggy

Ziggy

Messages
969
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
Morning.

I have been trying to help a mate of mine for a few weeks, had not mentioned it on here previous as I felt I had it in hand, but after another discussion with him I feel I need to come here for some opinions, then I can show him this thread, or if it does not go my way, ignore it :D:D

He has a budget of £1000 to spend on a set up and having handled a few cameras wants to go the Nikon route. He has seen me get right into my photography recently and wants to join the masses, he has taken some pics with my stuff and has got the bug.

Now comes the problem.

I am trying to convince him that he should get a D80 or D200 and spend the rest on glass, but he keeps saying that he NEEDS a D90, even though he admits that he will never use the video function. He says it is a far better camera??

He has been reading Ken Rockwell and has been brain washed a bit I feel as he says not to buy either and go for the D90, or the D40 if on a tight budget.

Am I in the wrong here and should he go and get the D90, or is my advice sound in the eyes of you guys on here.

Have any of you upgraded from the D80 to the D90, or (unlikely I know) compared the D200 to the D90.

I just feel that he could get a used D80 for £350 and spend £650 and get some really good lenes, rather than spending £300 more on a body.

What do you people ( who have the knowledge!!) think??

All comments welcome, even if it turns out I am talking rubbish. :D
 
the D90 is a better body, but you can carry the glass through to any subsequent upgrade

Or you can get the D90 and get some little gems secondhand.
I bought my D90 over a D300 and still don't regret it.

Not at all helpfull I know :bonk:
 
Generally speaking you can take a lot of what Ken says with a pinch of salt. I listened to him an bought a D40 and whilst it was a great camera I outgrew it within a year.

Biggest difference going for the D90 over the D80 & D200 is going to be low ISO performance which would blow them out of the water. If he is likely to be doing any form of low light photographer I would say to go for the D90 without a hesitation.

The D80 and D200 are both certainly good cameras but digital is progressing fast and they are getting on a bit. If it were me I would most likely get a D90 with a sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 or something along those lines.
 
Personally I'd go for the D90 if only because it has the superior (to my mind at least) CMOS sensor.
 
You're no talking rubbish and your advice is sound.
But the D90 is a better body at the end of the day.
I haven't read Ken's D90 review but any gains in image quality he probably talks about will relate to JPEG only, some of the difference will be negated if your mate intends to shoot raw.
 
My best advise...Let him make his own decision.....If he takes your advise and isn't happy, you will cop the blame....Twas ever thus!:nono:
 
I think your mate has made his decision. There is no wrong answer and so long as he knows enough to make an informed decision, your work is done.

Besides you might be first in line for a nice barely used body if he doesn't get on with it ;)

Graham
 
Everyone who 'suggests going for glass' is offering sound advice. As to what body we hang it on is another. The D90 is a fine body, better than the D80. BUT going for the D90 is going to soak up the budget. We eed to look at the total effect and what pictures will be produced by the total set up. I would say that the D80, or even the D40 paired up with decent glass will out perform the D90 with a so, so piece of kit glass. The other thing, is he likely to want to move up the scale to FX? has a bearing on what glass you buy now, to avoid expensive losses on upgrading glass as well.

JOhn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top