Body? D3000 to D90 or D3100? - UPDATE - WIFE HAS GIVEN GO AHEAD - HELP NEEDED

jamin100

jamin100

Messages
1,208
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys,

I'm looking for a bit of advise regarding upgrading my Nikon D3000.

First off, i currently have 3 lenses. Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 (I use this the most) 35mm f1.8 & 55-200mm non-VR (barely use this) all of these have built in motors so autofocus on my D3000. I also have a SB-400

I mainly take photos of my kids. The only thing that really bugs me with my D3000 is the ISO performance. Anything indoors shot at greater that 800 iso starts to get really noisy even at f1.8 See my flickr account for example photos (link in sig)

I think i have all the lenses i require for now, perhaps i would look at getting a better zoom when my son starts doing football etc, but for now I think i'm ok on the lens side of things.

So, looking a my options to upgrade i think its between a D3100 and a D90. I cant afford a D7000 so thats out the question and whichever I choose the D3100 or the D90 would have to be second hand with as few clicks as possible.

I'd need to sell my D3000 either body only or with the 55-200 to help raise the cash for the new body.

So, what do you advise? D90 or D3100. I've heard the view finder is bigger and better on the D90, is that true?

I'm not really interested in Live View or Video mode so not fussed about the 1080p that the D3100 has over the D90's 720p.

Thanks in advance.....

PLEASE SEE UPDATE IN POST 9
 
Last edited:
I think if you're not fussed about the modern bells-and-whistles of HD video or a mega high-res screen, the D90 is a better camera.

Should have better build quality and also has a top-plate LCD. The screen won't be as high-res as the 3100 (I assume, haven't checked!), but that probably won't be a problem if you're using the viewfinder to compose shots. I think the D90 has a superior AF system to the 3100 as well.

You might also find a good deal on a D5000 - I imagine a few will appear as people upgrade to the D7000. The D5000 has the same sensor and AF system as the D90, but lacks the top-plate LCD and has a smaller viewfinder.
 
Last edited:
Llamaman said:
I think if you're not fussed about the modern bells-and-whistles of HD video or a mega high-res screen, the D90 is a better camera.

Should have better build quality and also has a top-plate LCD. The screen won't be as high-res as the 3100 (I assume, haven't checked!), but that probably won't be a problem if you're using the viewfinder to compose shots. I think the D90 has a superior AF system to the 3100 as well.

H
Click to expand...

Thanks, from what ive read the screen on the D90 is actually better than the D3100

Something like 934k dpi on the D90 vs 234 dpi on the D3100
(Not exact figures just ball park ... ish)
 
Don't know about the D3100 but my D90 is excellent at hight ISO if that's any help. Also has the D3100 got a built in focus motor like the D90 as that gives you more choice in lenses
 
Hi, thanks for the reply.
No the D3100 doesnt have a built in motor so relies on lenses with motors the same as the D3000/5000.

Main reason for me really is to take cleaner images indoors of the kids. I know i can put use the noise reduction in LR3 but I find it looses the sharpness of the images..
 
jamin100 said:
Thanks, from what ive read the screen on the D90 is actually better than the D3100

Something like 934k dpi on the D90 vs 234 dpi on the D3100
(Not exact figures just ball park ... ish)
Click to expand...

Correct - both are 3", but the comparison ends there !
 
theres been some very good deals come up on used D300 so could be another option for you but still not as cheap as a used D90.

if its 90 vs 3100 then would be the 90 for me...
 
With d90 you'll get roughly 1 stop better as ISO1600 is pretty much as far as you can use to get noise levels under control.

Why not invest in a cheap yongnuo flash, say the yn465 which will be better than any new body/lens for indoor shots.
 
ok - Well in an suprising twist the wife has given me permission to go ahead and buy a new camera!

So i need to decide between these two BEFORE she changes her mind.

ok Pros and cons...

D3100 Pros
Smaller & Lighter
Better ISO
1080p video (but i'm not bothered about video)

D90 Pros
Better Screen
More customisable buttons
Can use older lenses
Bigger viewfinder

The only thing thats holding me back on the D90 is that its 2 year old technology..
I need this camera to last me at least 4-5 years!
 
While the wife is in this state of mind, bearing in mind you want it to last 5 yrs or so, just go buy a D7000 and be done with it, you'll get some cracking shots of her face when you get home and tell her!..............just an idea:naughty:
 
Lol she's not in that much of a good mood.....

Would a d90 last or would I always wish after the newer processor and more MP in the cheaper d3100
 
Newer isn't always better. Get yourself a second hand D90 with a few thousand clicks and save yourself a few hundred quid into the bargain. I did exactly this before Christmas and I've yet to regret it.:thumbs:
 
100% get a D90 over the D3100 if restricted to these.

Or go to £600 for a low usage D300 and better them both ;)
 
Joking aside the D90 would be a great choice, it has a great pedigree and a fantastic tried and tested reputation. Stuck between D90 or D7000 upgrade choice personally, don't know if the D7000 is worth the extra money, never mind the ear-ache, we'll see!

Jon
 
I contemplated the D7000 before seeing sense and getting the tried and tested D90. 2 year technology is irrelevant IMHO - just check out the FLICKR groups to see what's possible with even the kit lenses.
 
The D3100 has much improved high ISO capability by all accounts, and is close if not better than the D90 (see DXOMark scores). However, if you wish to grow into a more advanced camera then the D90 is the obvious choice with it's advanced features and lovely big viewfinder :)
 
Im buying new, (jessops credit) so looking at the prices and specs this is what i have come up with.

D3100 + 18-55
Price (after £40 cashback) £420
Pros:
New sensor
More MP's
Cleaner at higher ISO
Cheaper

D90 + 18-55
Price: £700
Pros:
Built in Motor = cheaper lenses in the long run
Bigger Viewfinder
Better LCD Screen
More external buttons for settings


I *think* i want the D90 but i keep asking myself is it worth the £280 more over the D3100!

I wont be using the kit lens but i'll be putting that with my D3000 to sell.

I will be picking up one or the other tonight so only really have until 330 to make a decision!
 
Last edited:
Bear in mind if you decide to get a 50mm prime, you'll recoup some of that £280 difference - the D3100 will need the AF-S version which is more expensive... ;o)

Do you have enough Jessops credit buy the whole lot? If not, I'd really consider getting a 2nd-hand D90 and using the Jessops credit to buy other kit. Although bodies hold their price reasonably well, there is still a marked depreciation the moment you take a new one out of the shop. I regret being in a rush to buy my DSLR - if I'd been more organised I'd have got myself a used D90 instead of a new D5000.

That said, whatever you buy you're going to enjoy... ;)
 
No, I have £300 in jessops credit, couple that witht he fact that I am aiming to get around £300 for my D3000 with kit lens means i'd be able to stretch to a D90 and have change left over from a D3100

I currently have a 35mm f1.8 and a tamron 28-75 f2.8, those lenses will see me through for a bit but I agree that the 50mm lens is dirt cheap and any other lenses will be considerably cheaper because of the d90s built in motor.

I presume you can get 200mm zooms that dont have the motor on the lens.. what price would I be looking at for one of those?
 
No, it does help, all and any help / advice is appreciated.

When you say it has a greater dynamic range what does that mean?
 
jamin100 said:
No, it does help, all and any help / advice is appreciated.

When you say it has a greater dynamic range what does that mean?
Click to expand...

Some quick reading:

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=dynamic+range

In practice, high dynamic range means you can adjust the exposure in RAW afterwards and downwards and not lose too much detail in the highlights and shadows if you messed the original shot up e.g. the original image was too dark :)
 
jamin100 said:
I currently have a 35mm f1.8 and a tamron 28-75 f2.8, those lenses will see me through for a bit but I agree that the 50mm lens is dirt cheap and any other lenses will be considerably cheaper because of the d90s built in motor.
Click to expand...

I have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 too and it produces some beautiful results with the D90.

I've yet to see a D3100 image that matches the D90 at high ISO (i.e. above 800). One of the members of the camera club I go to has one and was raving about the cleanness at 1000ISO - until he some of mine shot at 1600 :D

Despite all the much vaunted improvements of recent Nikon bodies the D90 still gives the biggest bang-for-your-buck :clap:
 
Well I have to agree now being the new owner of a D90... its bloody brilliant!
 
jamin100 said:
Well I have to agree now being the new owner of a D90... its bloody brilliant!
Click to expand...

Good choice... now get snapping :D


(and update your camera bag and sig)
 
There is a d90 for sale on her with a few thousand clicks on it for £460.
 
jamin100 said:
Well I have to agree now being the new owner of a D90... its bloody brilliant!
Click to expand...

:thumbs:

good choice

here's a pic I took with the D90 at ISO 6400 with no flash, to give an idea of how good the low light performance is.....

4885104928_608a180df1_z.jpg
 
Coming here for impartial advice is a mistake - and as a 3100 owner what would you expect me say? I was in the same position as you a few months ago upgrading from a D60. I went into Jessops fully expecting to come out with a D90, but when I came it came to handling it, I found it huge and heavy, and to be brutal, very ugly. I could not see myself taking a casual evening stroll while on holiday carry it - far too big, far too heavy.

I suspect that the performance difference is negligible, but the D90 does give significantly more control and functions. So the choice comes down to you - do you need these functions? or would a smaller lighter camera enable you to take pictures that you would otherwise miss?
 
oldnick said:
Coming here for impartial advice is a mistake - and as a 3100 owner what would you expect me say? I was in the same position as you a few months ago upgrading from a D60. I went into Jessops fully expecting to come out with a D90, but when I came it came to handling it, I found it huge and heavy, and to be brutal, very ugly. I could not see myself taking a casual evening stroll while on holiday carry it - far too big, far too heavy.

I suspect that the performance difference is negligible, but the D90 does give significantly more control and functions. So the choice comes down to you - do you need these functions? or would a smaller lighter camera enable you to take pictures that you would otherwise miss?
Click to expand...

Mmmmm, good shout oldnick, thats an aspect that is often overlooked during discussions about camera choice..ergonomics. Tend to agree with you that picture quality between D90/D3100 would be a close call, with the extra pixels and expeed 2 processor it may well have the edge, understand that high iso's are good too. currently I do find that with my D3000 some extra easy access to controls would be very nice, don't know how far the D3100 have gone in addressing that, also disappointed to find out that it does not have wireless remote shutter release option which I use alot, other that that it is an awful lot of camera for your money, and as you say nice and compact too.

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