Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 7, 2012, 12:23 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1
Default D90/D7000 for playful beginner

I will try keep it short.

Im kinda beginner in dslr photography but I think that I have good knowledge about digital photography and technology.
I have considered many options and I ended up with two candidates D90 and D7000. Im pretty sure that I dont want anything else (With Nikon body i can share some lenses with my friend, with autofocus screw i can use older glass, i dont like the orientation of D3100/D5100, i could go on but that is not the point why I started this topic.)

So I want to ask someone with experience, if I buy cheaper D90 will I lose some options in settings and functions of advanced body? I know that D7000 is superior in every way, but i dont need that, Im not a pro although Im pretty demanding, I just want to play with photography and pretty much explore every possibility that man can do with dslr.

So what I need to know is that if the D90 does the same things as D7000 only with lower performance? Or D7000 comes up with many new functions and gimmicks? ps. I should mention that Im not interested in video at all.

I want to shoot mostly portait, glamour and play with light in nature (you know that look when you exposure your photos during/after sunset) Im planing to use mostly those nikon prime lenses (Nikon 35mm f/1.8 ; maybe 55mm) and when I find some crisp zoom lens that I can afford.

Hmm as always, everything but not short I hope that now you know what is my problem and someone will help me. Thank you very much.

ps. sorry for my spelling it has been some time since I wrote something in English
SeraphinCZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 7, 2012, 2:42 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Koolpc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Under The Desk (UK)
Posts: 597
Default

I think a D90 will serve you well.
Koolpc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2012, 2:51 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

The D7000 has a better image sensor and several more advanced features than the D90, but it also costs significantly more. I say you should get the D90 and use the money you save to buy some lenses, which are always a better investment anyway
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2012, 7:43 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi

There are 3 major differences between the D7000 and the D90.
1-The D7000 has a 16mp sensor while the D90 has a 12mp sensor

2-The D7000's low light performance is better than the D90. My experience has been that with the D90 you'll get really good performance up to ISO1600.
The D7000 will give you very good output at ISO 3200 and ISO 6400 is usable.

3-The Auto Focus system of the D7000 is a good deal more sophisticated than the one employed in the D90.

All that being said, the D90 is still a fine camera and based on what you've stated, would be a good choice. Especially if you use fast lenses, such as the 35mm f1.8

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2012, 12:18 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Koolpc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Under The Desk (UK)
Posts: 597
Default

MP are not that important. 16MP v 12MP is neither here nor there.

Using ISO above 1600 is rare for most people.
Koolpc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2012, 4:45 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koolpc View Post
MP are not that important. 16MP v 12MP is neither here nor there.

Using ISO above 1600 is rare for most people.
SeraphinCZ asked for an explanation as to the differences between the Nikon D90 and the Nikon D7000. The 3 that I listed are, IMHO, the most important
differences between the two, based on the style and type of photography he stated that he was interested in.

I will leave it to him to determine wether or not the differences are important.

But as for saying that 16mp vs 12mp are not important and the difference is neither here nor there is a fallacy. If you happen to print your photographs for display or for sale, then having more megapixels allows you to print photographs at greater resolution - dpi.

As an example, printing an 11 x 14 print:
using the D7000 16mp allows user to print at 302 dpi
using the D90: 12mp allows user to print at 259 dpi

and, it becomes even more important the larger print you want to make.

Additionally, using a higher quality lens will also allow you to take advantage of the greater pixel count resulting in a higher quality image.

As for anything above ISO1600 not being important for most people, that's more a result of getting lousy quality from their current equipment. If most people had access to cameras that would provide them with acceptable photographs at ISO3200 and above, they would certainly take advantage of it.
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2012, 12:48 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Koolpc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Under The Desk (UK)
Posts: 597
Default

Not many people use ISO above 1600 even with cameras that can go to 3200.

12MP is more than enough even for cropping and enlarging photos into poster style prints. Its fallacy to think that bigger is always better as anyone in photography will tell you. Sometime you will get better shots with a lower MP sensor.

How did they manage in ther days when MPs were only 10MP or lower? Were the prints worse then than today? No!
Koolpc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2012, 5:24 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Kanyakumari (INDIA)
Posts: 45
Default

I agree to zig-123, if people have the luxury of having better images at higher ISO then they will surely go for it and if your work requires larger prints to be made then MP also plays a role
nidhin999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 12, 2012, 3:23 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
gadlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Gulf Coast of Florida
Posts: 10
Default Great info zig

Hey Zig - I dug up my old password for this site to express my admiration for your pictures which I saw from following your link and as someone who is looking seriously at the D7000 I appreciated the information. In my case I've always had and still have Nikon cameras and as I'm looking for that step up camera I've liked what I've seen with regard to the D7000. I'm particularly looking at the ability to have a remote shutter release - none for my 5700 or pocket Canon which I find a bit hampering and I'm really liking the ability to do the time lapse which seems fascinating. Great considered advice and great photography which shows me that you know what you're talking about.
gadlaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 12, 2012, 3:55 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gadlaw View Post
Hey Zig - I dug up my old password for this site to express my admiration for your pictures which I saw from following your link and as someone who is looking seriously at the D7000 I appreciated the information. In my case I've always had and still have Nikon cameras and as I'm looking for that step up camera I've liked what I've seen with regard to the D7000. I'm particularly looking at the ability to have a remote shutter release - none for my 5700 or pocket Canon which I find a bit hampering and I'm really liking the ability to do the time lapse which seems fascinating. Great considered advice and great photography which shows me that you know what you're talking about.
Hi Gadlaw,

First off, thank you for taking the time to look at my galleries and further, thanks for taking the time to let me know. It is much appreciated.

As for my responses to people's questions relative to equipment etc.
I try to be as honest and forthright as I can be while trying to avoid introducing my bias towards specific equipment.

If I've been able to give you some tidbits of information that you find useful in making an educated buying decision, I'm pleased to know that.

Good luck with your decision...And don't forget to come back to this site from time to time. There are a lot of knowledgable people here who are happy to help, if asked.

regards,
Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:53 PM.