Worth buying a D90 before it's discontinued?

You were asking a general question. I did not see that it was a rhetorical question. I thought you were actually seeking examples.
I was not.
I'm looking at bodies with which I have experience. I haven't considered the D50/60/70/80/90/3000/5000/Coolpix cameras as I have no desire to use any of those.
Then you are missing out on seeing where the incremental changes can come from.
The D700 is essentially not a D300 replacement, it's the first model of a completely new product line - prosumer/low end pro body with a full frame sensor.
That may well be how it is marketed but the device is essentially a D300 with a D3 sensor. They may well differentiate the product so as not to take sales from other models - or they might market it in a way that does exactly that!
Have you ever used either of the bodies? The D300 is a huge improvement over the D200.....
I'm not saying that it is or isn't. Just that the 'huge improvement' was not one big jump from Nikon.
Didn't we establish on another thread you shoot old film cameras, and don't shoot any digital? or am I mistaken.
I don't have a DSLR.

My wife has a D700 though.
 
Forget it, I'm not even going to bother.
 
So ?

This was the time when there WAS a big difference from one generation to another.
Rather like Kaouthia, by considering them only as 'Professional' 'prosumer' and 'consumer' bodies you seem to be putting in place the marketing devices designed to blinker you to the incremental changes made in camera body development.
 
Voyager,

It is about the generations.

If the new D90 comes out and is better than the D300s in a few ways people will not buy it if they are D300s users (normally) they will wait a short while till the D400 comes out. The D400 might have a few of the extras that debut on another body but the jump is D300s to D400.
 
By NOT considering them as "professional", "prosumer" and "consumer" bodies, you're completely missing the whole ****ing point.
 
Rather like Kaouthia, by considering them only as 'Professional' 'prosumer' and 'consumer' bodies you seem to be putting in place the marketing devices designed to blinker you to the incremental changes made in camera body development.

Voyager you seem to be blinkered by your own argument. I don't treat them that way because they tell me to but because the camera I want is IN that bracket. I don't even care what is in the Dx000 ranges because they are too small and made of plastic. I did not change my D200 to a D300 or D300s because there was not a jump in spec or features that appealed to me. If the D400 comes out and has more features that I find useful I MIGHT change but I will NOT be changing to a D90 range camera because I like the D200/300 range pro bodies.
 
It is about the generations.

If the new D90 comes out and is better than the D300s in a few ways people will not buy it if they are D300s users (normally) they will wait a short while till the D400 comes out. The D400 might have a few of the extras that debut on another body but the jump is D300s to D400.
But that is all about marketing - not the innovation.
 
No, it's not all about marketing. It's about products aimed at specific audiences.

I'd never switch from a D200 to a D80 or a D300s to a D90, even if they did have one or two things better than the body I was using because they are lacking in features that I require. That's not marketing, that's solid fact.

Likely there are people out there who would never consider going from a D2x to a D200 or a D3s to a D300s for the same reasons.
 
Anyway I'm going out now with my Nikon EM and F80 cameras. I have a nice roll of Ektar 25 in my F80 and some B&W in the EM.

Cameras are tools for the job not badges. I buy the one that does what I want and keep it till it doesn't. I like the prosumer range because it is the right size and has the buttons where I want them. I will not buy a smaller camera because I don't want one! When the replacement for the D300s and D700 come out I MIGHT take a look but ONLY if they have features that I really WANT or NEED. Video and a few extra pixels are certainly not in that list.
 
Voyager you seem to be blinkered by your own argument. I don't treat them that way because they tell me to but because the camera I want is IN that bracket. I don't even care what is in the Dx000 ranges because they are too small and made of plastic. I did not change my D200 to a D300 or D300s because there was not a jump in spec or features that appealed to me. If the D400 comes out and has more features that I find useful I MIGHT change but I will NOT be changing to a D90 range camera because I like the D200/300 range pro bodies.
That might be the case, but that does not make the innovation in your current camera over the last 'monumental'.

Small changes on all the models gets you to the big jump you imagine. But they are not happening in isolation.

Nikon (probably all the camera makers) are working on small changes rather than big jumps in technology. It's how they sell stuff.
 
I really believe that he does not get it !
While I think it is you who really don't get it.

I said in my first post on this topic "It is currently not in the interest of this economic model to make large jumps in innovation." and you, instead of looking at Nikon innovation, digressed in to looking at changes in the ranges that are marketed.
 
While I think it is you who really don't get it.

I said in my first post on this topic "It is currently not in the interest of this economic model to make large jumps in innovation." and you, instead of looking at Nikon innovation, digressed in to looking at changes in the ranges that are marketed.

Not really, when I joined in this arguement/discussion that is what we were talking about.

There are THREE ranges than have interest to me which are the two professional ranges Dx00, Dx & D700

I have NO interest in other ranges but I am aware of them

D100 launched
D200 MASSIVE boost from previous model
D300 incremental boost
D300s less than incremental boost

D1/D1x launched
D2(x/h etc) MASSIVE boost from previous model
D3(s) MASSIVE boost and change to FF

D700 launched

I have NO interest in anything else so....

If I had the D100 and the D200 was launched I would probably have bought it but the D300/D300s were not enough of an increase and would rather spend the money on glass.

I bought a D700

I had a D1x and sold it to buy a D700 had I had enough money I would have bought a D3

So to me WHEN there is a big enough increase in the models I have an interest in AND if I can afford it then I will upgrade IF IT IS THE RIGHT MOVE FOR ME.

I appreciate that you are saying that Nikon are only doing small regular changes but unless you look at the particular cameras you have an interest in you will not see a difference. If Nikon launch 4 cameras a year over 6 ranges with 1 change each then YOUR range of camera will get 6 changes for each iteration (and basically a major update every 18 months) but each new camera (every 3 months) might only add 1 change. If you are not interested in the other ranges you would not get the updates until your range gets updated every 18 months.

The last two times Nikon changed their Dx00 range (both small changes) I felt the changes were nothing more than incremental so did not change my camera but the change previously ie D100 to D200 was a massive change.

The last two times Nikon changed their Dx range (both were massive changes) I would have changed my camera BUT could not afford to and when the D3 was launched I ended up getting a D700.

I can't keep explaining this any differently till you get it this will just have to do.
 
That might be the case, but that does not make the innovation in your current camera over the last 'monumental'.

The D200 (the last camera in that range that I bought) was a monumentally big upgrade from the D100

The D700 was the first of it's breed

:shrug:
 
When has a replacement ever been much better?

That is a question if my eyes don't deceive me.

But what happened to other (Nikon) cameras in the meantime?

You are just looking at one model - others in the Nikon range were getting the incremental updates too. Put them together with whatever they did for the D FX series and you think see a 'big' change. But it isn't really.

I'm struggling with this. Of course technology within a company will be worked on and improved and probably (the latest incarnation of) be seen in the newest models. How is that bad? There was a massive jump in terms of technical spec from the D100 to the D200 and from the D200 there was a jump in High ISO performance, better, faster AF and improved battery life when the D300 was introduced. That's a big step in my book. What else do you want - the D300 suddenly to turn into a mirrorless camera?

I was not asking you a question. I was just asking Rob 80386 what replacements would be 'much better' as generally I agreed with his prognosis.

No you weren't - you were asking When has a replacement ever been much better?

....For instance the D700 is essentially a D300 with the D3 sensor, the D300 was a D200 with updated electronics. The D80 was essentially a D200 in a more 'plastic' body. And so on ad infinitum.

But the minutiae of differences are essentially not important - it is just the range of cameras forever changing and it is the marketing that is designed to make you feel that old kit is worthless and new is better. Even though it is not - otherwise who were the mugs buying all that old tat?

This whole thread isn't about whether marketing works or whether we're being fooled by marketing speak or the consumerism of modern society. It's about a bloke who asked whether he should buy a D90 before the replacement comes out....

(I could go on quoting you but I fear my fingers will wear to bloody stumps from typing replies)

Safe to say, it seems Voyager is not subscribing to the idea of new models being released and their merits. There have been lots of updates and new generations, some accepted with acclaim, some seen for the tweak they really were.
 
There have been lots of updates and new generations, some accepted with acclaim, some seen for the tweak they really were.

And some laughed at when they fail miserably (D-TTL, anybody?) ;)
 
Safe to say, it seems Voyager is not subscribing to the idea of new models being released and their merits. There have been lots of updates and new generations, some accepted with acclaim, some seen for the tweak they really were.
I think that is exactly what I'm suggesting. :thinking: Anyway, there will always be lots of new models, lots of incremental improvements and the manufacturers will market them in such a way that makes you want to believe that your old kit is worth replacing.

The D90 is a good piece of kit and whether it 'worth' getting one now is always the 'how long is a piece of string' question - and obviously will depend rather on what they bring out next and what it's costs.

I don't think it needs replacing yet - unless they want to harmonize model range names. Will it be a D9000? I think history suggests to expect the D300 to become a 16MP(?) D400(?) and the D700 to be made into a competitor to the Canon 5D MkII (perhaps with the sensor from the D3x?) before there is any need for an update for the D90.

But I do wonder how much the global recession has altered the release of new kit - and Nikon is well behind Canon with the adoption of video...
 
I think that is exactly what I'm suggesting. :thinking: Anyway, there will always be lots of new models, lots of incremental improvements and the manufacturers will market them in such a way that makes you want to believe that your old kit is worth replacing.

The D90 is a good piece of kit and whether it 'worth' getting one now is always the 'how long is a piece of string' question - and obviously will depend rather on what they bring out next and what it's costs.

I don't think it needs replacing yet - unless they want to harmonize model range names. Will it be a D9000? I think history suggests to expect the D300 to become a 16MP(?) D400(?) and the D700 to be made into a competitor to the Canon 5D MkII (perhaps with the sensor from the D3x?) before there is any need for an update for the D90.

But I do wonder how much the global recession has altered the release of new kit - and Nikon is well behind Canon with the adoption of video...

We have all been saying over and over that we will only buy IF we feel that the update is worth it. The D700 with a D3x sensor would be a different camera though as the D3x sensor is RUBBISH at high ISO and pretty much a specialist product. The D700 really does not need a replacement nor does the D90 and neither of them will be replaced this year ;) The D3000's incremental upgrade is likely to come (as has been stated elsewhere D3100) and from the information I have there will be another camera BUT the D90, D300s, D3, D3x and D700 will not be replaced ;)
 
The D700 with a D3x sensor would be a different camera though as the D3x sensor is RUBBISH at high ISO and pretty much a specialist product.
Well, I would expect an 'incremental' update on the big sensor too, wouldn't you?
The D700 really does not need a replacement nor does the D90 and neither of them will be replaced this year ;)
I agree for if you are considering purely stills photographic use - but the 5D MkII and 7D are cleaning up in professional DV production and Nikon are losing market share to these two big time as the D90 isn't really up to it.
The D3000's incremental upgrade is likely to come (as has been stated elsewhere D3100) and from the information I have there will be another camera BUT the D90, D300s, D3, D3x and D700 will not be replaced ;)
I think there has to be a 'pro' DSLR video coming and I'd do it with the 'next' D300 body if I were Nikon with the D700 replacement doing video as well later. Unless they plan to take a leaf out of Panasonic's book with their AG-AF100 and make a specific video camera to take on Red/Panasonic/Sony/Arri.....
 
Well, I would expect an 'incremental' update on the big sensor too, wouldn't you?

Well you said "perhaps with the sensor from a D3x" so I replied that it would not be suitable and would create a different kind of camera. The D3x is rubbish about 800 ISO and isn't all that good approaching that level I am lead to believe.

I agree for if you are considering purely stills photographic use - but the 5D MkII and 7D are cleaning up in professional DV production and Nikon are losing market share to these two big time as the D90 isn't really up to it.

I think there has to be a 'pro' DSLR video coming and I'd do it with the 'next' D300 body if I were Nikon with the D700 replacement doing video as well later. Unless they plan to take a leaf out of Panasonic's book with their AG-AF100 and make a specific video camera to take on Red/Panasonic/Sony/Arri.....

I would expect a D90s and D700s early next year but neither of them is falling behind against the Canon equivalents unless you are talking about video (as you appear). So changing the software etc and creating S variants would make sense especially as they already have a D3s but the D700 is still taking customers from Canon. The D90 feels quite long in the tooth now though.
 
if i llike the look and spec of a camera i'd buy it regardless of what else is coming out , the camera you buy will still do the same job tomorrow regardless of what its successor is capable of
 
As much as i'm enjoying reading the posts on this. I'm not going to lie, i'm learning alot about history of nikon camera's on this thread.

I've ordered my D90 18-105 + 35mm + Battery Grip.

Thanks for the advice guys :)
 
As much as i'm enjoying reading the posts on this. I'm not going to lie, i'm learning alot about history of nikon camera's on this thread.

I've ordered my D90 18-105 + 35mm + Battery Grip.

Thanks for the advice guys :)

Oh no, they've just launched the D90x - £399 with 24px, free grip, FF, video, 256000 ISO and a free dish washer.
 
I would expect a D90s and D700s early next year but neither of them is falling behind against the Canon equivalents unless you are talking about video (as you appear).
No, I'm considering what Nikon might well be bothered about. Losing any market share to Canon is not something they will want to read about in the boardroom.
So changing the software etc and creating S variants would make sense especially as they already have a D3s but the D700 is still taking customers from Canon.
Well, my wife who works in film and TV, bought a Nikon for her photography! But is regularly working with the Canons on adverts and pop video shoots. :D
 
Oh no, they've just launched the D90x - £399 with 24px, free grip, FF, video, 256000 ISO and a free dish washer.

WHAT?! I've only just replaced the dishwasher, well that's life! ;)
 
No, I'm considering what Nikon might well be bothered about. Losing any market share to Canon is not something they will want to read about in the boardroom.

Well, my wife who works in film and TV, bought a Nikon for her photography! But is regularly working with the Canons on adverts and pop video shoots. :D

I'm stating that I know that there are no plans to replace the D90, D700 or D300s this year. Might be another camera though ;)
 
I'm stating that I know that there are no plans to replace the D90, D700 or D300s this year. Might be another camera though ;)

I'm sorry but i'm sure there is, Jessops litterally only have a few D90's left in stock, mine being one of the last 18-105's the rest being the 18-55 vr kits. And it looks very unlikely we are getting any delivered we've waited about a month for any D90's to turn up in store.

But i don't know you could be right, could just be a shortage!

We shall soon see :D
 
My info was something slightly different but nikon can always change their minds and alter their plans re the location of a camera in the line up. There is a shortage of D3s cameras but they are not changing that! It would be clearer I'd I could say what I know but I can't ;)
 
My info was something slightly different but nikon can always change their minds

Nikon can also feed misinformation to the general public to keep their plans secret. :)
 
whats the point in telling people you know something if you can't tell them what it is or how you know?
 
Nikon can also feed misinformation to the general public to keep their plans secret. :)

whats the point in telling people you know something if you can't tell them what it is or how you know?

Sorry but I can't say anything more BUT at the time the information came to me their plans were firm but that was 3 months ago and they can change their minds! Information from the same source has always been reliable. It is a new model BUT they could have changed their minds and use it to replace a current model instead.
 
so essentially we've got an unknown source, and an unknown prediction that might change

i just personally hate the whole cat and dog game that predictions follow, if you've got something to say then say it if you're not allowed to then why not keep it to yourself?

this isn't a personal attack on you cowasaki btw just my little bleat about something that irritates me :)
 
so essentially we've got an unknown source, and an unknown prediction that might change

i just personally hate the whole cat and dog game that predictions follow, if you've got something to say then say it if you're not allowed to then why not keep it to yourself?

this isn't a personal attack on you cowasaki btw just my little bleat about something that irritates me :)

I just pointed out the at the time I was told which was a couple of months or so ago the information was that the D90 and above would ALL still be with us in the new year. Thats enough information anyway :)
 
Last edited:
my thoughts exactly , school playground stuff !

Look above your post and add that I said there was another model. That is the information I have. I can't tell you who the source is.
 
I can't tell you who the source is.

Well, I was told that they're bringing out a D3s replacement at a D5000 pricepoint..

Can't tell ya who said it though. ;)
 
Well, I was told that they're bringing out a D3s replacement at a D5000 pricepoint..

Can't tell ya who said it though. ;)

Thanks for pointing this out I shall start saving up.
 
Back
Top