Is the D90 right for me?

[akm3]

I currently have a D40 and I love it. It is my first DSLR, and I'm starting to want to grow. Looking at lenses, I see getting the 'AF-S' versions cost a lot more than older, but very good, 'non AF-S' lenses. So, I'm thinking about the D90 as a longer term investment that will let me buy high quality glass and ultimately save money.

Additionally, I'd like the bracketing feature to experiment with HDR (hopefully not horribly garish ones, I like converting my HDR's into black and white).

I'm also wanting to explore portrait and wedding photography, and nature/wildlife photography, as well as whacky studio photography with odd setups and bizarre creations.

Is the D90 a good body for meeting those needs?

I currently have the 18-200 Nikon VR lens, and will be getting a 35mm and 50mm prime shortly (I assume after I know if I need AF-S lenses or not!)

Thanks for your time and expertise!

-Allen

 

[clams]

Actually I would just recommend either a used D200 or D300. You'll find that both are excellent bodies with what seem to be better ergonomics (in my limited experience with Nikon at least). It's a nice heft compared to the D90 and will balance the 18-200mm VR really well. Also, you have the added benefit of a much more rugged body.

You mentioned studio work, and the D200 or D300 bodies would actually be a great for it. I know a number of people who use it for studio work.

The D90 is still a nice camera though. I just feel that it's a premium simply for the HD video feature which really doesn't seem worth it to me. Nikon simply hasn't developed their built in video features to the level Canon has. Regardless even the cheapest HD camcorders give better quality than either brands. If you wanted to go down the D90 path, just save money and get a D80.

Regardless, either is a good camera. Just go with whatever feels better in your hand.

 

[compuwar]

I currently have a D40 and I love it. It is my first DSLR, and I'm starting to want to grow. Looking at lenses, I see getting the 'AF-S' versions cost a lot more than older, but very good, 'non AF-S' lenses. So, I'm thinking about the D90 as a longer term investment that will let me buy high quality glass and ultimately save money.

Additionally, I'd like the bracketing feature to experiment with HDR (hopefully not horribly garish ones, I like converting my HDR's into black and white).

I'm also wanting to explore portrait and wedding photography, and nature/wildlife photography, as well as whacky studio photography with odd setups and bizarre creations.

Is the D90 a good body for meeting those needs?

I currently have the 18-200 Nikon VR lens, and will be getting a 35mm and 50mm prime shortly (I assume after I know if I need AF-S lenses or not!)

Thanks for your time and expertise!

-Allen

The D90 shares rthe D300's sensor, and that would make it over the other choices for me. I'd spend the dough on a rain cover and lenses rather than the D300 if I didn't already have a good selection of lenses. The D90 should meet your needs just fine.

 

[Markie0284]

In my somewhat bias'd opinion, I definitely think the D90 is a great upgrade for you. I never liked the D40/D60 cameras as first camera for those that end up becoming a bit more serious about photography simply because of the lens restraint. You can find some GREAT/cheaper glass that doesn't have built in motors compared to current AF-S lenses.

In terms of bracketing, it is a cool little feature. I have a D300 and use it when I don't know if I can get the exposure correctly, or for simple HDR shots. However, if this is the sole reason for an upgrade, I'd say its not worth it. I would assume you would be doing more HDR work in still life photography, which would enable you to just play with the exposure settings and meter accordingly instead of using the bracket feature.

The D80 and D90 are very different... if you are looking for a big upgrade from the D40, go with the D90 and stay away from the D80. The D80 is a great camera, but even D80 users are upgrading to D90s. As said in previous posts, the D90 uses a lot of D300 components (sensor, image processing, ISO noise reduction). The only places where it can't compare to the D300 is the ruggedness and the number of focal points. The D300 may be a bit overkill for you and may not be worth the price, it comes down to feel and how rugged you need the body to be. The D300 body is a bit bigger and is 100x better than the D90 for sports photography, but other than that the image quality between them will be identical.

All in all, get the D90 already and enjoy it! It is an awesome and worthy upgrade to your D40!

 

[OreoCookie]

The D80 and D90 are very different... if you are looking for a big upgrade from the D40, go with the D90 and stay away from the D80. The D80 is a great camera, but even D80 users are upgrading to D90s.

Really? I don't even feel tempted. The D80 is already a substantial upgrade in terms of usability (viewfinder + AF motor) which are reason enough to upgrade in my opinion. Sure, the D90 is better as it uses newer components, but for the OP, the D80 already is an upgrade and he could invest the difference in better glass.