Upgrade a D90 to...?

benners

benners

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,130
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
hi everyone
I appreciate there's a few threads on this, but I didn't want to gatecrash someone else's with advice on their particular requirements :)

I currently have a D90 and need to invest in a backup body, as i'm getting a bit more work. I shoot a fair bit of lowlight: gigs/concerts, starting on weddings, evening events.

My options are:
- buy a 2nd D90
- buy an upgrade to the D90, and use the current body as the backup

If I upgrade the D90, which bodies would be a natural progression?

D700:
highly regarded and great for lowlight, but is FX so most of my lenses would be redundant.
I would need new batteries, CF cards, etc.

D7000:
more of a sideways movement from a D90?
however is DX so could share all my current lenses, batteries, SD cards, etc.

D300s:
not read up much on this but is a possibility?
 
Y15HAL said:
What lenses do you currently have, and what budget have you got? :)
Click to expand...

lenses are in the link to my profile/camera bag:

Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 DC EX HSM
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 SP AF XR Di LD Aspherical
Nikon 35mm f1.8 G AF-S DX
Nikon 55-200mm f4-5.6G IF-ED AF-S DX VR
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM

budget is enough to buy a D700, but not really enough to then go and buy a couple of FX lenses (or a D3!) :D ... but if everyone recommends a D700, I'll have to conisder it!
 
Last edited:
Won't the Sigma 70-200mm and Tamron work OK on FX? If so you have a good deal of the range covered already, and would go for the D700.
 
redddraggon said:
Won't the Sigma 70-200mm and Tamron work OK on FX? If so you have a good deal of the range covered already, and would go for the D700.
Click to expand...

ahh interesting, i knew the 70-200 would, but wasn't aware that that the 28-75 would... the plot thickens!
 
benners said:
ahh interesting, i knew the 70-200 would, but wasn't aware that that the 28-75 would... the plot thickens!
Click to expand...

Well I'm not saying it is, I don't know - but the 28-75mm range is normally a 35mm frame sort of range.
 
Y15HAL said:
I won't say anymore then! :naughty:
I upgraded from D90 and initial thoughts are :eek:
Doesn't help you much though in your quandry does it?? :thinking::suspect:
Click to expand...

haha!
the main negative i can see at the mo for a d700, is the need for a complete new set of batteries, cards, etc. and wouldn't be able to share them with the D90. Plus the need to buy a wide-angl/walkabout lens..?

i'd probably get a mbd10 grip too (for a 300/700)... i presume this takes en-el3e batteries?

I'm going to ask a lazy question, but it's because it hurts my head!
I presume 28-75mm and 70-200mm on an FX give those true focal ranges. So what are their ranges on on a DX?
 
benners said:
haha!
the main negative i can see at the mo for a d700, is the need for a complete new set of batteries, cards, etc. and wouldn't be able to share them with the D90. Plus the need to buy a wide-angl/walkabout lens..?

i'd probably get a mbd10 grip too (for a 300/700)... i presume this takes en-el3e batteries?

I'm going to ask a lazy question, but it's because it hurts my head!
I presume 28-75mm and 70-200mm on an FX give those true focal ranges. So what are their ranges on on a DX?
Click to expand...

Yep, The accessories does add a fair bit on top as i found when i plunged in!! :(

I got the afetrmarket grip for £40, and yes, takes the same batteries as the D90, thats the only thing that can be used in both cameras.

And, Yep, they are the true focal ranged on FX, on DX, i think there is a 1.5x crop factor? :thinking:

Might be worth thinking about how much you can sell your DX lenses for, and seeing if you can get a decent amount of cash for them ;)
 
Y15HAL said:
Yep, The accessories does add a fair bit on top as i found when i plunged in!! :(

I got the afetrmarket grip for £40, and yes, takes the same batteries as the D90, thats the only thing that can be used in both cameras.

And, Yep, they are the true focal ranged on FX, on DX, i think there is a 1.5x crop factor? :thinking:

Might be worth thinking about how much you can sell your DX lenses for, and seeing if you can get a decent amount of cash for them ;)
Click to expand...

i shall do some number crunching!
my gut reaction is to go with the d700 as it gets rave reviews and amazing in lowlight apparently.

has anyone got thoughts on the d300s? it's a year newer than the d700... and can share all my lenses... :thinking:
 
the d700 uses the same bateries as the d90 so that would be a little less of a pain for you. I upgraded from the d90 to d700 earler this year and have never once regretted upgrading.
 
for what you shoot - if you can afford the move I'd go D700. I love the d300 but I can see the benfits of the D700 for what you shoot. I'd be inclined to rationalise your lenses and stick with the tammy 28-75 and the siggy 70-200, then find a replacemnet for the wider stuff. (Do you find you use the 35mm much?)
 
BazEP said:
for what you shoot - if you can afford the move I'd go D700. I love the d300 but I can see the benfits of the D700 for what you shoot. I'd be inclined to rationalise your lenses and stick with the tammy 28-75 and the siggy 70-200, then find a replacemnet for the wider stuff. (Do you find you use the 35mm much?)
Click to expand...

that's good advice Baz...
knowing that the 28-75 and 70-200 will work on an FX, does change my thinking slightly.

and would I be right in saying that the 28-75 on an FX is going to give me more 'wide angle' than it does on the DX D90. So (bear with me!), the 28-75 on the FX is going to give me a similar range to the 18-50 i'm used to on a DX?

i don't really use the 35mm a great deal, but i love having it in the bag... and when i want to shoot lowlight without a flash, it's a great addition to have.

so again, going from DX to FX, if I got myself a nifty fifty, that'd be similar.
 
benners said:
that's good advice Baz...
knowing that the 28-75 and 70-200 will work on an FX, does change my thinking slightly.

and would I be right in saying that the 28-75 on an FX is going to give me more 'wide angle' than it does on the DX D90. So (bear with me!), the 28-75 on the FX is going to give me a similar range to the 18-50 i'm used to on a DX?

i don't really use the 35mm a great deal, but i love having it in the bag... and when i want to shoot lowlight without a flash, it's a great addition to have.

so again, going from DX to FX, if I got myself a nifty fifty, that'd be similar.
Click to expand...

You're right with all of the above. Crop factor is roughly 1.5.

Its an interesting thread this. I was pretty close to buying a D300 last week but decided to hang fire and see what happens with replacements for the 300 and 700 (if nothing else it should affect used values). I'm pretty tempted to save like mad for a D700 but I'm really concerned that I'll not be able to afford the lenses I'd like to pair it to. I'd be really interested to hear how you get on if you do go down this route.
 
gad-westy said:
You're right with all of the above. Crop factor is roughly 1.5.

Its an interesting thread this. I was pretty close to buying a D300 last week but decided to hang fire and see what happens with replacements for the 300 and 700 (if nothing else it should affect used values). I'm pretty tempted to save like mad for a D700 but I'm really concerned that I'll not be able to afford the lenses I'd like to pair it to. I'd be really interested to hear how you get on if you do go down this route.
Click to expand...

glad someone else will find my ramblings and question useful! will certainly keep this thread updated =)

i'm very fortunate that I've had an unexpected little injection of funds I can put towards a purchase.

so if I just buy the D700 body, I could use the following without getting new glass:

D700 +
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 (which would be like having an 18-50 on a DX)
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (which would actually be 70-200 on an FX?)

D90 +
Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6
Sigma 18-50 f2.8
Nikon 35 f1.8
Nikon 55-200 f4-5.6
 
I am not sure why the D7000 has been so much forgotten on this thread.

It provides a huge step up from the D90 (IQ, High ISO, Video, Construction) and in the matter of High ISO/DR is as close to the D700 as a DX format camera can actually get these days.

You get to keep your lenses and have a wide angle one as well which really helps you save a big of cash since if you want to go wider in the FX format the lenses that go that far down are a bit expensive...
 
benners said:
glad someone else will find my ramblings and question useful! will certainly keep this thread updated =)

i'm very fortunate that I've had an unexpected little injection of funds I can put towards a purchase.

so if I just buy the D700 body, I could use the following without getting new glass:

D700 +
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 (which would be like having an 18-50 on a DX)
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (which would actually be 70-200 on an FX?)

D90 +
Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6
Sigma 18-50 f2.8
Nikon 35 f1.8
Nikon 55-200 f4-5.6
Click to expand...

Nice!
hope you've got broad shoulders and a decent bag...
 
vrapan said:
I am not sure why the D7000 has been so much forgotten on this thread.

It provides a huge step up from the D90 (IQ, High ISO, Video, Construction) and in the matter of High ISO/DR is as close to the D700 as a DX format camera can actually get these days.

You get to keep your lenses and have a wide angle one as well which really helps you save a big of cash since if you want to go wider in the FX format the lenses that go that far down are a bit expensive...
Click to expand...

thanks for throwing the d7000 into the ring vrapan, I mentioned it originally but no-one has since. I'm thinking that the d700 is probably the most hi-spec body i'd ever need to buy... i'm very tempted by its great ISO capabilities, and might think that i've still got another upgrade to go if i had a d7000. but what do others think?

BazEP said:
Nice!
hope you've got broad shoulders and a decent bag...
Click to expand...

ahh nuts, you're right... i've not budgeted for the gym membership / multigym for home!
 
I don't know your level or what type of photography you do but I think I will be hard pressed to find stuff that would benefit my photography that a D700 does that the D7000 does not. Please anyone correct me if I am horribly wrong.

And yes the D700+FF glass will need some muscle to carry about/use! I find my D40+50-150 sigma mildly uncomfortable already adding an extra couple kilos would not be an option for me.
 
Last edited:
sorry, but I (still) don't see the D7000 in the same league as the d300/700.
 
BazEP said:
sorry, but I (still) don't see the D7000 in the same league as the d300/700.
Click to expand...

i have to agree with Baz... although i'm sure the d7000 is an awesome camera, i can't help but feel it'll be a sideways step from a d90, or a small advancement.

by getting a d700, i'd feel that i wouldn't need to buy a 'main' camera ever again (at least until technology develops so much that the d700 becomes antiquated!). apart from getting a d3/s/x, there's no higher up the scale i can go. and with the lowlight shooting i do, the reviews of the d700 are very positive.

i love some of your Flickr photos vrapan, but your portfolio seems to be mainly hobby, holiday, etc... whereas i need to get a 2nd body for paid work I have got coming up :)
 
Whatever the D7000 is, it is not a sideways step - especially for someone looking to do lots of low light work, it is certainly an improvement. It depends on how much you are planning on holding onto your (predominantly) DX lenses. Planning on holding onto them? I'd go for the best low light DX camera, which is the D7k. Planning on selling them and transitioning to FX glass? The D700, if your budget allows. Simples as that, IMO.
 
freecom2 said:
Whatever the D7000 is, it is not a sideways step - especially for someone looking to do lots of low light work, it is certainly an improvement. It depends on how much you are planning on holding onto your (predominantly) DX lenses. Planning on holding onto them? I'd go for the best low light DX camera, which is the D7k. Planning on selling them and transitioning to FX glass? The D700, if your budget allows. Simples as that, IMO.
Click to expand...

i think because i'm keeping the d90 as a backup body (the main objective), then i'm not so forced into making the decision of either DX or FX... I can actually keep the lens set I have and get decent focal range coverage on both formats.

this then means that my budget doesn't HAVE to include a new body and glass... so in theory I can invest a bit more in a body/accessories (mb-d10 grip, batteries, cards, etc.)

i have no doubts that the d7000 is brilliant, but i can't help but feel if i got one, i'd always be thinking "when can i upgrade to the d700?"
 
i got the D300s lasy year and have never looked back its a fantastic semi pro body which will never let you down,i use it at motocross meetings which are very dusty and because the 300s is totally sealed it preforms brilliantly and never had any issues. i have built up sone FX lenses as i want to get a 700 as my second camera in the future but as a step up from a D90 i would say the 300s is a great step you have to remember if you go for the 700 ALL your lenses will have to be FX so the cost will go crazy! i looked at the new 7000 but it just didnt feel as quality as the 300s i have also bought the Md10 grip i looked at the the cheaper ones but i thought would you bye a Porche and then put a cheap ebay spoiler on it ??!!!! and it is invaluable when you have the Nikkor f2.8 70-200mm lens on it! happy buying mate!
 
perrano said:
you have to remember if you go for the 700 ALL your lenses will have to be FX so the cost will go crazy!
Click to expand...

you're right.. though I do already have a 28-75mm and 70-200mm which both work on FX, so I've got some decent coverage already :)

and i can use the other DX lenses still on my d90, as my backup :)
 
benners said:
i have no doubts that the d7000 is brilliant, but i can't help but feel if i got one, i'd always be thinking "when can i upgrade to the d700?"
Click to expand...

I'd say the D7000 is half a step up and half a step sideways from a D90, but the D7010 might be just what you need! :D

If you want a real improvement in high ISO performance NOW then it has to be the D700. Surely?
 
petehb said:
Can't you use the DX lenses on the 700 in crop mode?
Click to expand...

this is why I love this place! i had no idea such a thing is possible... is it?!
 
It is on some full frame cameras, which is why I asked the question, I would be surprised if you could not, the dissadvantage is that it will only use the central portion of the sensor and the file size of the image would be reduced but serviceable. As a stop gap it should get you through the period of changing lenses gradually.
 
petehb said:
It is on some full frame cameras, which is why I asked the question, I would be surprised if you could not, the dissadvantage is that it will only use the central portion of the sensor and the file size of the image would be reduced but serviceable. As a stop gap it should get you through the period of changing lenses gradually.
Click to expand...

just had a quick google and yes, the d700 produces DX 5.1mp useable images. which is better than nothing at all.

like i say, i have 28-75 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 which I could stick on the end of a d700 and use straight away... and can still use the 10-20 f4-5.6 on the d90 if I want to do wide angle stuff.

so... edging towards a d700 at the mo!
 
The Nikon 70-200mm will vignette wide open on the D700 - not sure about the Sigma. I use a D700 for low-light indoor shots (where I cannot use flash), but, quite often, a D90 combined with a f1.8 / 1.4 lens will do. The other lenses I use with the D700 are 50mm, and 35mm, primes. I've read the Tamron 28-75 is excellent on the D700, so I'm thinking to get one of those (but have slight reservations about the wide end being only 28mm)

I keep the D90 also for motorsports use, where the FX lenses are too expensive.

You might also want to look downloading a free trial of some decent noise reduction software.

The D700 is a larger camera, physically, and whilst if feels great, I prefer the more compact D90.
 
kartracer said:
The Nikon 70-200mm will vignette wide open on the D700 - not sure about the Sigma. I use a D700 for low-light indoor shots (where I cannot use flash), but, quite often, a D90 combined with a f1.8 / 1.4 lens will do. The other lenses I use with the D700 are 50mm, and 35mm, primes. I've read the Tamron 28-75 is excellent on the D700, so I'm thinking to get one of those (but have slight reservations about the wide end being only 28mm)

I keep the D90 also for motorsports use, where the FX lenses are too expensive.

You might also want to look downloading a free trial of some decent noise reduction software.

The D700 is a larger camera, physically, and whilst if feels great, I prefer the more compact D90.
Click to expand...

great info, thank you kartracer :)

hopefully i'll be in a good, flexible position, as I'll be keeping the d90 so will have a good variation of body/lens uses at no extra cost (apart from buying the new body!)

thank you for reminding me about noise reduction... I have been using noise ninja in photoshop, but have no idea how to use it properly... have just been using the default settings which tidies up images quite neatly.

i think i'll be happy with the 28-75 on FX for now... i love the 18-50 i have on DX, and if i've got my head round it (!), the 28-75 on an FX, will be pretty much the same through the viewfinder as the 18-50 on a DX?
 
Last edited:
is it a sign?!

just seen this in the bargains thread:
Nikon D700 = £1479.99 at Currys/PC World/Dixons + 3% Quidco

i'm guessing this is a pretty good price?
 
benners said:
is it a sign?!

just seen this in the bargains thread:
Nikon D700 = £1479.99 at Currys/PC World/Dixons + 3% Quidco

i'm guessing this is a pretty good price?
Click to expand...

Yes, seems a very good price, incidentally when I had the D3 I used the Nikon 70-200 with no problem, any vignetting was very slight.
Enjoy :D
 
Am I missing something here the Nikon 70-200 is a AF s lens designed for full frame and as such should not vignette at all.:thinking:
 
Y15HAL said:
Yes! Looks like a good buy to me!! :thumbs:



The VR1 is meant to vignette slightly, but it is only slightly, the VR2 doesn't have that issue.
Click to expand...

That's usefull to know as I am just about to buy a 70 - 200mm and was considering a SH VR1 but as at some point will go down the FX route may well get a VR11 still trying to get my head around why Nikon would produce a flagship lens that was designed for pro full frame use that vignettes and the lens is not even wide angle.
 
petehb said:
Am I missing something here the Nikon 70-200 is a AF s lens designed for full frame and as such should not vignette at all.:thinking:
Click to expand...

It is a FF lens, but it was released when the majority of Nikon's top end cameras were DX. Vignetteing is just a limitation of the lens design at the time the lens was released, thus the subsequent improvement in vignetting (or lack of) in the VRII.
 
grr starting to kick myself for not starting this thread earlier and getting a £1480 new D700 from offers online today, now sold out!

hoping that some more will come online over the weekend :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top