The Upgrade Question - When is it worth it?

[D Pentney]

Ok, I have a D60, and two kit lenses. I can get some ok pictures but I'm aware that my camera really is bottom of the pile. I feel like I ought to upgrade, if only to be able to buy a wider selection of lenses and still have an AF facility!

The real question for me is; how far would I have to go to really appreciate the difference and that would keep me happy for a few years (to be fair, my D60 has done that compared to the bridge camera I had). I looked at a D90, then a D7000, and then I'm thinking.. why have a crop sensor, lets spend some real money!

As to budget; well, I can't see the point in just buying something a couple of models up only to do the same again if it's not that much of an improvement - I'd rather just save my pennies until I can get something solid. I don't want to upgrade just for the sake of it, put it that way. On the other side of the coin; my partner will hang me by my soft parts if I come sauntering in with a D3.

So, could I get away with a D90? would that satisfy my basic needs? Or how far up the scale would I have to climb?

Thanks for any advice!!

[ALwin]

Wait a couple of weeks and see how things go as rumors are saying Nikon will announce a new DSLR. Then see what comes in the second-hand market, who knows, maybe you'll find a decent D700 to play with. Also, lens: always check the second-hand market first, I got a lot of good gear that way because some people had to sell in a hurry for financial reasons.

But as always, my advice when you buy second hand: always buy from a trusted and reliable seller. Avoid online purchases if at all possible, just in case something goes wrong. It is easier to deal with a local photography store which sells second-hand items than an online seller who could be living half-way around the world.

[Troy]

I think you'd be happy with an upgrade one or two models up. There is no point going full frame straight from a D60 (to me anyway). It will be an incredible jump in technical ability, and the cost of lenses sky rocket with the body.

The D90 will be a good upgrade, as it has a lot more advanced options and is a good price. The D7000, however, is excellent. It is a lot of camera for the money, and being a newer model means it has some of the best technical specs of any Nikon at the moment.

Another option would be to go to D300s. This is the top of the DX range, and is built like a tank. It feels much like a D700, and comes with some excellent features. However, the rumours are that this camera could be replaced very soon, so you may want to wait if you like what you see.

To be honest, like everything, it depends what you want to do with it. If you want to end up pro, it could be an idea to go full frame now. If you just want to take some family shots, then a D90/D7000 would be more than enough.

[D Pentney]

I'm not arrogant enough to even consider looking at going pro. I am aware I can take 1 good shot in every 200! Realistically I have a young family, my partner and I work in a sort of shift pattern, and there are lots of tasks to get done before I pick my camera up - I simply don't have time to practice, which is what seems to be the name of the game. But I have been known to sell myself an idea only to have the idiocy of it catch me up later on when I realise the cheapest option wasn't actually the best option.

I actually hoped someone would say that the D90 will easily hit the spots you ask of it. I don't care about live view, or flip out LCD's, or HD movies, or any of the other 'extras'. I'd like a good sensor that produces a good image and that can handle low light shooting. I'd also like the AF motor to be in the body so I can justify getting some prime lenses. I know everyone says that the zoom lenses have improved but having seen some of my freinds results off a 50mm prime it seems obvious why people buy them. The other thing I really like the thought of is a larger veiwfinder. Seems a really small complaint, but with my D60 I can't actually see how good my focus is because the image is tiny! Which is another reason I'm put off using manual focus lenses.

But, I don't want to seem like someone trying to buy their way to being a better photographer... maybe I'll just wait and see what comes out in the near future.

[ALwin]

The D90 is certainly a great mid level camera in its days and the D7000 is a worthy successor. If you do decide to get a D90, you won't regret it. These days when friends ask me about buying a DSLR, I avoid recommending the entry level D3x00 and D5x00 solely due to the fact that it does not have the in-body focus motor. Lenses last years with good care, bodies need to be regularly upgraded every few years (3-6), so invest in a good body that will support the widest range of lenses as possible, because there are still a lot of AF-D lenses out there (the ones with the aperture ring) that work just as well, if you know how, as the newer AF-S (G series) Nikon lenses. And second-hand lenses are widely available, many with perfect glass elements even if the outer body has a lot of cosmetic damage, so the extra investment in a good body can be recovered in seeking out these good condition used lenses.

[Troy]

To be honest it sounds like the D90 will be perfect. It has everything you want of it and more. It will also be a great camera to grow with as you become more competent.

The D90 has a top LCD, which i have found to be great for changing your settings quickly and easily. One of the main limitations i'd have with the D60 (and one i have with my current D50) is the LCD. Although it is 2.5 inches, it only has a resolution of 230,000 dots. The D90 has the top dog of LCDs - 3inch 920,000dot resolution. It's the same one they use on the D3's and it is incredible. It really helps for reviewing your shots, and can highlight any focus/exposure problems immediately.

There is also no doubting the quality of the cheap 50mm prime. It's my favourite and also cheapest lens. However, they do have an AF-S version available, although it is a little more money.

[D Pentney]

Well, thanks for that guys, it's made me feel a lot better about going for the cheapest option, and my wallet thanks you even more.

I've had a brief look at lens compatability but I'm afraid I still can't seem to find a deinitive answer about if my current lenses will work on a D90. I know the AF won't work the other way, and I'm assuming I can't get away with just buying a D90 body and using my old lenses until I can afford new ones. So just to be sure; Will a D60 lens function (fully) in a D90?

This is also the reason I'm not going to purchase anymore lenses for my D60 as it doesn't make financial sense to buy lenses that I may not be able to use in the future!

[ALwin]

Apart from the really entry level Nikon bodies like the D3x00 and D5x00, the D90 and above will be compatible with all Nikon lenses that is an F mount. Of course the AF function will only work if the lens is an AF lens. But the lenses which may not work well with the D90 is the Nikon PC (Perspective Control-Tilt Shift) lenses.

[Troy]

Will a D60 lens function (fully) in a D90?

Yes. It will be an AF lens, meaning it has the ability to autofocus. Your D60 won't have the necessary autofocus drive, but the D90 will.

[footloose1949]

I'm going to put forward an option you probably don't want to hear ... Keep what you already have, buy a tripod and improve your technique so you squeeze the N'th degree of image quality you can from what you already own, before considering any kind of upgrade. I suspect you will find the use of a tripod, will significantly improve the images you take, and for vastly less money than a camera upgrade. Some of the benefits you are likely to see from a new camera are more likely going to be down to the 'Placebo effect' than anything else, unless, your technique is top-drawer.