I bought a D5000 over a D90 and am happy with my choice

[jack55]

Originally Posted by MarceloRSC

Why did you exchanged the (Sigma/Tamron?) 18-250mm for the Nikon 18-200mm? Is the image quality so superior to justify the change?

Did your prior lens had VR/VC ? Thats why the change? Is the stabilization better in the Nikon than Tamron/Sigma?

About 1000mm what lens did you use?

Actually, I sold the Sigma 18-250mm to get the Tamron 18-270mm VRII. The camera shop I got it from told me if I didn't like it, bring it back in 7 days with no penalty, which I did as I wanted to compare it against the Nikkor 18-200mm VR. After a few days, I decided the Nikkor was better than both the Sigma & Tamron. The Sigma & Tamron were just a tad soft at full zoom where the Nikkor remained sharper... not tack sharp, but better than the Sigma & Tamron and good enough for me. I'm pretty picky. That Tamron is a pretty darn good lens though. Plus, when I eventually sell the Nikon for a newer model, (I change every year) the Nikkor lens has better resale value, (providing that I sell the lens with the camera).

[MarceloRSC]

Thanks for the explanation.. So as many feedbacks Tamron is better than Sigma and Nikon is better than Tamron. And better enough to justify a smaller zoom (and being more expensive). I like powerful zooms, but despite these points I'm considering Nikon as 1st option...

[shoturtle]

If you do not print very very large, you will most likely not see the difference between the 3 lenses.

[TCav]

Another apparent difference between the D90 and the D5000 is that the D90, along with some higher end Nikon dSLRs, seems to have the ability to automatically correct for Chromatic Aberration. While Nikon has been silent on whether or not the feature exists, the data seem to indicate that it does.

No one has suggested that the D5000 has that feature.

[MarceloRSC]

Observing comparison specs the differences are small, but there are some.

About the mentioned feature,why Nikon would hide it? Are they afraid to admit that THERE ARE chromatic aberration on their lenses?

(I'm just studing the slrgear reviews...)

[shoturtle]

There is alway chromatic aberration in all lenses no matter how good they are. Canon admits to it even on their L series lenses, and I can choose to automatically correct for it on my T1i. Not sure why nikon just do not admit it.

[jack55]

Originally Posted by shoturtle

There is alway chromatic aberration in all lenses no matter how good they are. Canon admits to it even on their L series lenses, and I can choose to automatically correct for it on my T1i. Not sure why nikon just do not admit it.

Just curious... if you have a canon, why are you posting on this Nikon post?

[shoturtle]

Originally Posted by jack55

Just curious... if you have a canon, why are you posting on this Nikon post?

Because the discussion with marcelo has gone over many different tread and many different forums. And before I went with the canon. I borrow or rented a bunch of different dslr for shooting weekend or weeks. So I got to know them pretty well.

[vIZnquest]

I have both the D90 and D5000. I find I don't prefer either to the D40. I won't sell anything I have purchased. I still have my very first Panasonic LC40s and won't part with it. Oh and I do have a Canon G11 which I find over rated. Live and learn I guess.

Oh, and so what if someone with a different kit posts here.

[jack55]

Originally Posted by vIZnquest

I have both the D90 and D5000. I find I don't prefer either to the D40.

Since you have both, the D90 & D5000... what do you think of them? I'm toying with getting a D90 to go with my two D5000's.
Like, which one do you find yourself using the most and why?