Used D90 and good lens, or new D5200 and kit lens?

Messages
507
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
I've had a couple of DSLRs in the last few of years. I had a D90 with entry level lenses (18-55 kit and 70-300 Sigma non-VR), then a D7100 with Tamron 18-270VR.
I sold both and more recently bought a Sony DSC-HX300. Whilst this is a very good camera, I'm missing the full DSLR experience and have decided to get back into it.

As an amateur user, I don't feel I really saw the benefit of the D7100 over the D90 in terms of day to day quality. Sure, more AF zones etc was good but I didn't use the video or live view so I'm not too sure it was a justified upgrade for me.

So I now have some choices to make....
I would like to spend up to £600 but am flexible.
Most use will be landscape and general family stuff.
Often I see people being advised to keep older bodies and buy new glass, so should I...

  1. Buy a used D90 (18k shutter count) for £234 (@WEX) - or D300S (£349 @ WEX) if I can get one cheap and a slightly better quality glass?
    I think I would want two lenses - maybe something like a Sigma 17-70mm DC OS Macro HSM f/2.8-4 (£209) to live on it most of the time and then maybe a 55/70-200 of some kind? Looking at my previous photos I'd rarely need longer than 200 I think.
    Or would the all-in-one Nikon AF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED DX VR (£260) be up to the job? VRII seems to be an additional £89 just for a lock switch?

  2. Go for one of the newer range, like the D5200 which Currys are selling with an 18-55 VRII lens, extra battery and remote for £429. Seems like a steal, but it's a kit lens...

Thanks for reading; your thoughts will be very much appreciated!
 
The d90 has af motor in body! I don't think the d5200 does! I've got a d90 as back up! I've had it 4 years and I love it! It's worth nothing second hand so I'll never sell it!
 
Good glass on a lesser quality body better than a d4 with cheap lens on it
 
Definitely go with a D90, but I would choose Tamron 17-50 2.8. I think It should be less than 200 and is a great lens.
 
The D90's still an extremely capable camera by any standards. I upgraded from a D90 to a D7100 but as Mark said above, decided to keep it because quite frankly it's worth naff all really and if I ever wanted another body I couldn't replace it with anything better for the money I'd get from it.

Amy (my wife) uses it mostly now but it acts as a second body/spare on any shoots I do for people.
 
Thanks all, good to see everyone on the same page. So I'll go for the D90. Now just to decide what lens... I see the 18-200 VR is rated but user reviews seem to suggest it's poor at both ends. Maybe two lenses (one being the Tamron 17-50 2.8) is the way to go? How about the Nikon 70-300 VR? I've had the non-VR and was disappointed.

*EDIT: Nikon 55-200 VR @ £100 (used) seems a good option to accompany the Tamron 17-50... Too good to be true?
 
Last edited:
I have the 55-200 and it is a very good lens for the money. Since I have bought my tamron and now my 28-105 afd the 55-200 has not been used.

The 70-300 is a better lens but it is heavy.

There was a tamron for sale on avf at £140.
 
D90/D300
Tamron 17-50 vc
Tamron 70-300 vc

If you drop lucky then you will get them just about in budget, but if not then will be around £700. The D300s sounds good to me if it's in good nick though ;)
 
Im a D90 user and love the camera though now have aa d700, i would never sell the D90 as it is a good back up if ever needed and i also have the tamron 17-50 always been happy with the results from it
 
D90/D300
Tamron 17-50 vc
Tamron 70-300 vc

If you drop lucky then you will get them just about in budget, but if not then will be around £700. The D300s sounds good to me if it's in good nick though ;)

I agree with you here David , but for me I would also consider the D7000 over the D90. To me it's just a better camera and worth the extra few quid.
 
You could get the d5200 sell the kit lens and get the 17-50 tamron with you budget. A d7000 and the tamron could be had too.
 
Back
Top