Wanting some opinions on a Nikon DSLR.

[Derrel]

And like I said the D5100 image sensor and video beat the shot out of the D90.>>SNIP>>> And I'll repeat - "The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it."

There is the crux of the matter for me: the D5100 has a newer, higher-resolution sensor, with better read electronics than the D90 has. The D90 was the first DSLR announced, by any maker, that shot video...the D5100 has newer, better, and more-refined video features. The lenses that a beginning or intermediate photographer will likely be able to afford are for the most part, going to be AF-S lenses which have a focusing motor built-in.

The majority of people who want an 80-200 f/2.8 two-ring zoom are simply NOT D5100 owners...and the 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D??? are you kidding??? The focal length range is ridiculous on a 1.5x crop-body Nikon...I know, I own one...shot a 35-70 on the Nikon D1,and frankly, the kit lenses offer better focal lengths...

Most of the people who buy their first or second d-slr are NOT going to give a rat's butt about old AF-D lenses designed 15 years ago...they want newer, smaller lenses that cost less, carry easier, and which have focal lengths that are appropriate for CROP-body cameras, and not film tanks like the F4 and F5.

 

[Valvaren]

So I've been presented with lots of good information and advice but i'm still torn, I was all for the D90, then between the two again and now i'm sort of leaning back towards the D90. I've been told it is a high quality camera and I do like the idea of it having a built in focus motor but then again you seem to say most lens have focus motors themselves or I can buy ones with it.

I was told by a friend who has a bit of camera knowledge ( I don't talk to him often but decided to see what he had to say) and he recommended to get the D90, a body only and look into sigma lens to start off with.

Is the D90 better for what I want to do : Macro, HDR, Landscapes and street, or would I have a better advantage for those with a D5100, I'm not really worried about video quality as I have my P500 for that and I don't really take videos that often except for slowmo vids.

I really appreciate everyone's help and opinions i've been learning a lot

 

[Kerbouchard]

And most photographers don't have DSLR's, so should we just tell everybody to buy a P&S because that's what most people do?

As far as the 35-70 2.8, I loved it on my D90. Still have it and use it on my D700. Yes, eventually, I will buy the newer 24-70 2.8, but I was able to pick up the 35-70 2.8 for around $300 off Craigslist and have gotten to use it for a few years now. If I would have had to wait until I had the funds for the 24-70, I would have missed a lot of shots.

Actually, I love your guy's perception and attitude. It only drives the price lower for those 'antiquated' AF-D lenses.

And like I said the D5100 image sensor and video beat the shot out of the D90.>>SNIP>>> And I'll repeat - "The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it."

There is the crux of the matter for me: the D5100 has a newer, higher-resolution sensor, with better read electronics than the D90 has. The D90 was the first DSLR announced, by any maker, that shot video...the D5100 has newer, better, and more-refined video features. The lenses that a beginning or intermediate photographer will likely be able to afford are for the most part, going to be AF-S lenses which have a focusing motor built-in.

The majority of people who want an 80-200 f/2.8 two-ring zoom are simply NOT D5100 owners...and the 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D??? are you kidding??? The focal length range is ridiculous on a 1.5x crop-body Nikon...I know, I own one...shot a 35-70 on the Nikon D1,and frankly, the kit lenses offer better focal lengths...

Most of the people who buy their first or second d-slr are NOT going to give a rat's butt about old AF-D lenses designed 15 years ago...they want newer, smaller lenses that cost less, carry easier, and which have focal lengths that are appropriate for CROP-body cameras, and not film tanks like the F4 and F5.

 

[Kerbouchard]

You are saying somebody should discount an entire line of lenses because they might get confused by having two redundant mechanical switches?

If so, you are right, if that is the level of photographer that the advice on this boards is centered around, then nobody should ever take my advice. I guess my advice is not centered around the lowest common denominator.

Yes, the 35-70 and 80-200 push-pull are outdated. You can also pick both of them up and still have room for a D90 for the same cost as the 24-70 2.8 AF-S. They may be old, they may be 'outdated', but they provide a tremendous value.

This isn't a stab at you or KMH. I just think/hope you are underestimating the people who are asking for advice on this forum. Surely, somebody who will take the time to become part of an online photography forum can learn how/when/why to operate a few mechanical switches. And personally, I don't care if you call me a tool. Doesn't bother me a bit. I learned in debates that when somebody resorts to insults, their argument has already fallen apart.

 

[Derrel]

SNIP>>>Actually, I love your guy's perception and attitude. It only drives the price lower for those 'antiquated' AF-D lenses.

What a tool. Kerby, you're really full of it, suggesting to beginners that the handful of AF-D lenses they cannot afford are better choices than easily-affordable, more-modern, better lenses.

I own lots of AF-D lenses. They are fine, for people who have experience, like me. And the financial ability to buy expensive lenses that are no longer in the lens lineup. But the vast majority of newer AF-S lenses have better optics. And full-time manual focus override on lenses likely to need it. See, the "bad" thing about AF-D lenses and newbies is the lenses have A/M focus switches, mechanical ones, PLUS there is also the BODY's focusing switch. Kerby, you look quite foolish trying to make a case for setting newbies up with AF-D lenses that have slow, loud AF, and which require them to slide or twist a mechanical switch just to override or touch up focus. Would you also suggest setting up 16-year-old new driver up with a sports car with a 5-speed manual transmission on Day 1?

AF-D Nikkors are fine for a guy like me who has 30 years in the Nikon system. I'm intimately familiar with many AF- and AF-D Nikkor lenses. But, and this is the thing Kerby, newcomers to the system are an entirely different customer segment than people like you. Unfortyunately, you do not seem to understand how confusing the LENS-based A/M switch is in conjunction with the CAMERA-BASED focusing switch located to the left of the lens mount. You are recommending old, outdated technology to newcomers. Your advice in this case is mostly centered around your own, personal biases and experiences, and ignores the target customer. Your jabs at me, and KmH make me call you a tool because, frankly, you've been acting like one. When giving advice in-person or on-line, the advice giver needs to tailor his advice to the actual customer at hand---and that is something that KmH, and myself, are actually pretty good at, I think. You, OTOH, are sitting here making personal jabs, and trying to defend your own product buying history or choices. And that is not what this place needs...it needs advice geared to specific people and THEIR situations...not knee-jerks comments...

For the newcomer to the Nikon system, buying UP-TO-DATE, current, modern equipment that is not five,six,or seven generations removed from the present makes the most sense. Unless you're REALLLLY sure of what you need, don't go back to 1995 for your lenses..but instead, buy the NEW models that work seamlessly with TODAY's equipment.

 

[Kerbouchard]

SNIP>>>Actually, I love your guy's perception and attitude. It only drives the price lower for those 'antiquated' AF-D lenses.

What a tool. Kerby, you're really full of it, suggesting to beginners that the handful of AF-D lenses they cannot afford are better choices than easily-affordable, more-modern, better lenses.

I own lots of AF-D lenses. They are fine, for people who have experience, like me. And the financial ability to buy expensive lenses that are no longer in the lens lineup. But the vast majority of newer AF-S lenses have better optics. And full-time manual focus override on lenses likely to need it. See, the "bad" thing about AF-D lenses and newbies is the lenses have A/M focus switches, mechanical ones, PLUS there is also the BODY's focusing switch. Kerby, you look quite foolish trying to make a case for setting newbies up with AF-D lenses that have slow, loud AF, and which require them to slide or twist a mechanical switch just to override or touch up focus. Would you also suggest setting up 16-year-old new driver up with a sports car with a 5-speed manual transmission on Day 1?

AF-D Nikkors are fine for a guy like me who has 30 years in the Nikon system. I'm intimately familiar with many AF- and AF-D Nikkor lenses. But, and this is the thing Kerby, newcomers to the system are an entirely different customer segment than people like you. Unfortyunately, you do not seem to understand how confusing the LENS-based A/M switch is in conjunction with the CAMERA-BASED focusing switch located to the left of the lens mount. You are recommending old, outdated technology to newcomers. Your advice in this case is mostly centered around your own, personal biases and experiences, and ignores the target customer. Your jabs at me, and KmH make me call you a tool because, frankly, you've been acting like one. When giving advice in-person or on-line, the advice giver needs to tailor his advice to the actual customer at hand---and that is something that KmH, and myself, are actually pretty good at, I think. You, OTOH, are sitting here making personal jabs, and trying to defend your own product buying history or choices. And that is not what this place needs...it needs advice geared to specific people and THEIR situations...not knee-jerks comments...

For the newcomer to the Nikon system, buying UP-TO-DATE, current, modern equipment that is not five,six,or seven generations removed from the present makes the most sense. Unless you're REALLLLY sure of what you need, don't go back to 1995 for your lenses..but instead, buy the NEW models that work seamlessly with TODAY's equipment.

You are saying somebody should discount an entire line of lenses because they might get confused by having two redundant mechanical switches?

If so, you are right, if that is the level of photographer that the advice on this boards is centered around, then nobody should ever take my advice. I guess my advice is not centered around the lowest common denominator.

Yes, the 35-70 and 80-200 push-pull are outdated. You can also pick both of them up and still have room for a D90 for the same cost as the 24-70 2.8 AF-S. They may be old, they may be 'outdated', but they provide a tremendous value.

This isn't a stab at you or KMH. I just think/hope you are underestimating the people who are asking for advice on this forum. Surely, somebody who will take the time to become part of an online photography forum can learn how/when/why to operate a few mechanical switches. And personally, I don't care if you call me a tool. Doesn't bother me a bit. I learned in debates that when somebody resorts to insults, their argument has already fallen apart.

Well, this is confusing. Seems like you deleted your post and then reposted it, so now my reply to your post is before your actual post...weird.

In any case, I haven't taken any stabs at you or KMH. Simply giving you my opinion, and yes, it is based on the research and choices that I have made. It's the only way I know how to give advice.

If budget is unlimited, I recomend a D3s, 24-70, 70-200, a few SB900's, a gitzo pod, an Elinchrom light setup, and heck, might as well throw in a 400mm 2.8. Unfortunately, I've never seen somebody on here whose budget was unlimited, so I've never been able to give that advice.

Instead, I try to give advice on what will get the best results for the dollar, even if it does take a bit of knowledge and learning to achieve it. Heck, there is a learning curve for anybodies first dslr/lens combo.

If you don't like my advice and think that anytime I disagree with you is a 'stab' at you, I would recommend the ignore feature. I'm sure you know where it is.

 

[sm4him]

My personal opinion is that you really aren't going to make a "wrong" choice if you go with either the D90 OR the D5100. I've had my D5100 for about 5 months now, and I love it! I considered a D90, but for my very first DSLR I wanted NEW, and I would have had to buy the D90 used.
My sister has the D90, and I love it too. Sometimes, I think I like hers a little better, because she DOES have one non-AF-S lens, and when I borrow it, I have to focus it manually on my D5100--I have vision issues and so don't really "trust" what I see as focused.
But then other times, I'm glad I picked the D5100...video, for instance. It also just has a little bit heavier, 'professional' feel to it than the D5100.
But I've never regretted getting the D5100, and I really think either way you go, you will be happy with it.

As for which is "better" for macro, HDR, landscape, etc. I don't think one of them is better than the other for a particular type of photo. That all depends on which lenses you use.
Get whichever camera you can get for the best value, and then spend whatever you can on the best lenses you can afford. THAT is what is going to really make the difference in your photos.

 

[KmH]

In any case, I haven't taken any stabs at you or KMH.

Sure you have.

Unless you have a pretty hefty lens budget, most of those "wider range of lenses" amej8 is referrring to are not inexpensive. The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it.

Granted there are some lenses, like the Nikon AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 (won't auto focus on a D5100) that costs half what the AF-S 70-200 mm f/.8 VR II (will auto focus on a D5100) costs. But the AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 is still a $1200 lens ( the AF-S 70-200 mm f/2.8 VRII is $2400). But here the difference in cost is about way more than just the auto focus motor.

In fact the D5100 image sensor and video pretty much beat snot out of the D90.

This is a load of malarkey...

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Have to say, I agree with you Derrel that you do give decent advice to the newbies, I always read your posts with intrigue. I only disagree with you on one point, that KMH gives decent advice to newbies.

I have once seen KMH give a newbie advice who wanted to buy a portrait lens on a budget, he advised him by telling him that he will need three lenses for portrait work. This is not useful advice at all. He also has a habit of coming across as highly patronising, I would like Kerby, deny this is a stab at you KMH. But it is most definitely a stab at you for giving misleading advice to people, which is dangerous in my opinion.

 

[Kerbouchard]

In any case, I haven't taken any stabs at you or KMH.

Sure you have.

Unless you have a pretty hefty lens budget, most of those "wider range of lenses" amej8 is referrring to are not inexpensive. The fact is, most of the lenses likely to be in your price range all have a focus motor in them so the D5100 doesn't need a focus motor in it.

Granted there are some lenses, like the Nikon AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 (won't auto focus on a D5100) that costs half what the AF-S 70-200 mm f/.8 VR II (will auto focus on a D5100) costs. But the AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 is still a $1200 lens ( the AF-S 70-200 mm f/2.8 VRII is $2400). But here the difference in cost is about way more than just the auto focus motor.

In fact the D5100 image sensor and video pretty much beat snot out of the D90.

This is a load of malarkey...

That wasn't a stab. I felt your advice was exagerated and went on to explain why.

In any case, I'll say the same thing to you that I said to Derrel a few posts back, "If you don't like my advice and think that anytime I disagree with you is a 'stab' at you, I would recommend the ignore feature. I'm sure you know where it is."

 

[paul85224]

I'd take a D90 over Britney Spears anyday.....

 

[Valvaren]

Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.

 

[Dillard]

Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.

Glad you decided! I also shoot a d90 and LOVE it, and I'm sure you will too. Don't worry about stirring anything up on here, it happens quite regularly and its in the norm

 

[TheFantasticG]

Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.

The D90 is a fantastic camera. I used one for a hair over 26,000 images. Used it mainly for macro work. When you had plenty of light and didn't need to go over 800 ISO, it was fine. I soon ran into the problem the problem that the 12mp did not provide enough cropping abilities, so I eventually upgraded to the D7000.

 

[JohnS.]

Ive pretty much decided on the d90 and though I know it is a big step up I'm willing to put in the time to master it. Thank you guys for everything and I'm sorry I caused a stir.

Good choice! You can't go wrong with a D90.

Every internet forum goes through this. Everyone has their own opinions and most threads asking for opinions usually leads into a lot of debate / arguing.