Upgrade from Nikon D60

str1nger

str1nger

Messages
213
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a Nikon D60 kit at the moment. Im thinking of selling it and upgrading to another Nikon camera as i have a 150-500 Sigma lens to fit Nikon bodies.

I mainly take landscape and wildlife photography. Not too keen on people in photos or pets.

I will be getting a nice bonus at the end of next month and want to upgrade.
I'm thinking of the D90, but does anyone have better ideas.

No more than £800 for the body only.

Cheers
Mike
 
For £800 I think the D90 is bang on. You should get it for less than that, even around the £600 mark and end up with change for a lens or some goodies if you wanted to spend more :).

I have the D300, but quality wise the 2 are really no different. And for landscape or wildlife the D90 is more than sufficient.
 
If that's your budget, get the D90. I did the same upgrade from a D60, the difference will blow you away.
 
D90 is a great next step and you're £800 will get you one with money to spare. You could probably get a secondhand D300 for that as well but could it be a step too far, I shoot a lot of wildlife with a D90 and its stunning.

Andy
 
You'll pick up a decent D300 for that money:thumbs:
 
ok, so what are the main differences between D90 and D300?
:thinking:
 
Main differences you'd notice straight off are the build of the camera (it's a heavier more rebust body), it has 8fps with a battery grip, 51 AF points.

I honestly think that the D90 sith 4.5 fps, 11 AF points is fine for your requirements. Also, I wouldn't worry too much about the build quality unless you intend dropping it or carring it in rainy conditions :lol:
 
yeah the d90 sounds good, what about lenses?

is the kit lens any good?
 
I'm wanting to upgrade from my gripped D40x sometime this year, and have been wondering about the whole D90 vs D300 thing too. Looks like this thread has answered my questions. One step at a time rather than a two step jump to the D300
 
For landscape I would recommend a Sigma 10-20mm or a Tokina 12-24mm. With a range up to 500mm on your other lens you seem to have the wildlife range nailed already.

I don't have the particular lens that comes with the D90 so I can't comment on it I'm afraid. Maybe there's others who can.

Just to clarify, if anyone asked "D300 vs D90" it's situation specific. If you were a sports photographer I might be advising you differently :lol:. D90 would do just the trick in my honest opinion though.
 
recently "kerso" gave me the very lowest price I found for a D90 body

send him an email...!!
 
worth looking at Ken Rockwell review (c) on Digital Wide Angles.........."link"
 
str1nger said:
yeah the d90 sounds good, what about lenses?

is the kit lens any good?
Click to expand...

The kit lens is very good for its price if you get the kit. I find it sharp, the 18-105mm range makes it a nice walkaround lens and the VR works well.

The only down side is the barrel distortion at the wide end, although if you shoot jpeg or use ViewNX/CaptureNX it is automatially corrected. I have not yet noticed the CA that it is also criticised for, but that is also corrected in body or in PP.
 
Unless you need the weather sealing and frame rate I would stick with the D60 and stick your money into Nikon glass. Bought well, it barely depreciates and there is a lot of truth to the old maxim "***** in, ***** out" - i.e. the camera will only ever be as good as the image that it is getting from the lens.
 
infra_dread said:
Unless you need the weather sealing and frame rate I would stick with the D60 and stick your money into Nikon glass. Bought well, it barely depreciates and there is a lot of truth to the old maxim "***** in, ***** out" - i.e. the camera will only ever be as good as the image that it is getting from the lens.
Click to expand...

Whilst very true the D90 does enable you to capture better images in some instances.

If you dont have a massive needs for playing with DoF the ISO capabilities of the D90 will let you shoot in much lower light and get great results, removing the need for 'fast' glass.

Obviously if DoF is something the buyer is after then glass is the way to go.
 
Thanks everyone for their input. I think i will go D90 rather than the 300

HOWEVER

as i only have one separate lens....the Sigma 150-500 Nikon Fit



should i sell that too and go for canon instead of the D90?

maybe the EOS 500D or the EOS 550D

any opinions?
 
str1nger said:
Thanks everyone for their input. I think i will go D90 rather than the 300

HOWEVER

as i only have one separate lens....the Sigma 150-500 Nikon Fit

should i sell that too and go for canon instead of the D90?

maybe the EOS 500D or the EOS 550D

any opinions?
Click to expand...
Speaking from the perspective of buying a D90 a month ago, I fully agree with those who've posted about it's plus-points ^^^ in the thread so far. However, if you're still undecided and also considering changing to Canon then I suggest you nip to your local camera shop, e.g. Jessops, and try out a few different brands & models to get a feel for their ergonomics, menu system, etc... Then you'll have something tangible to help make up your mind.

I could easily throw in a 'stay with Nikon comment' etc etc, but won't as I think that although I am a Nikon DSLR person through & through, Canon and others deserve your physical judgement as I'm sure they are as good as the current Nikon line-up, and it comes down to personal preference at the end of the day.
 
This already seems to be turning into a D90vD300.

Get your hands on a D300, then a D90 Then make your decision.

It's the D300 ;)
 
As Foggy says - go try both and I think most people will decide on the D300. I have no doubt that the D90 is a great camera however if you are already trying to decide between them both then you will probably end up getting a D300. Getting it now will just save money :shrug:

Seriously though go nad have a play with the D90 and D300s in Jessops to see which you prefer ( and the canon ones if you think it may nbe a sensible change for you) as it is the only way not to make an expensive mistake.

HTH

Nick
 
Hey Mike, from what I know of the D90/D300, I suspect the D90 would better suit your needs. I think the D300 is a more "professional" camera than the D90 and will have functions you will not need. Also I would seriously think about upgrading your lenses with a move to a D90 first. I suspect it would be a bit pointless putting your sigma or kit 18-55 lens on a D300. The lenses would be the limiting element.

I would think a 2nd hand D90, an ultra wide and maybe a fast 30mm prime would be a good upgrade, and keep the Sigma.

Although you could borrow my lenses if you were to move to say a 50D :D
 
There's one very good point being made here that I forgot to make myself... go pick up a D90 and a D300 and see which feels better in your hand. Make your choice off that. I LOVE the feel of a D300. I still get goosepimples when i pick it up. For that reason I could never own a D90. On the other hand, a friend of mine is exactly the opposite. He could never own a D300 solely from the feel of it.

That should be the number 1 that drives your decision to be honest! And if you happen to handle a canon and think that feels better... (to be a controversial Nikon user...) make the move now before you get too deep in the chain... BUT! obviously that won't happen. As we all know, nikon is, like, MILES beter... :suspect: :lol:
 
Canon vs. Nikon

Why bother? Is there a feature on either one that you so badly want / need that merits a change of brand?

They're both equally good with a huge range of lens. Unless something specific, a function, or to share lenses with a dear / close friend, or to get better knowledge from your friend who has a specific brand etc. (you get the drift), then there is no need to jump ship!



D90 vs. D300

ISO, both are almost just as good at higher ISO limits; fps, do you really need anything more than 3 ~ 4 fps for your current shoot? Environmental sealing, D300 is slightly better, but none are guaranteed by Nikon to be weather sealed (I've read the, recent, other threads on this but the simple matter is that Nikon will not guarantee it ... if water / moisture seeps in then you'll foot the bill .. the same goes for sand / dust particles ... I've run afoul of the two scenarios and have had to pay for repairs); Focusing Points (51 on D300 vs. 11 on D90), how often will you need / want the 51, it may even be a hindrance (slows you down as you keep pressing the button to shift right / left / up / down); weight (D300 is heavier than D90); size (D300 is bigger than D90); Auto focus speed (D300 is slightly faster than D90).

That's a summary, I may have missed a bit on these two.

I've not used the two at the same time, but having used both I don't really see the jump from a D60 to a D300 to be the right way about unless there is something specific that you want / need!
 
I was recently stood in LCE with the choice of a new D90 or a used D300 and bought the D90. The D300 was just too big and heavy for me to cart around everywhere and as the D90 has virtually the same IQ (pedants begone) I didn't feel I was losing anything important to me.

(BTW, I was upgrading from a D60 too).
 
I have a d90 and bought a D60 as back up.....The D90 is a BIG upgrade, much better AF faster frame rate, better high ISO, etc. Auto ISO is brilliant for sports (in my case show jumping). Hard to fault the 90 really, D300? great camera and I hanker after one but cant justify the extra who needs 51 focus points? I use 1 and just reframe after focusing!!

(was looking at a Canon 450 at the time of purchase, er and it felt a bit Fisher price compared to the D60, let alone the D90!!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top