Come help me decide guys...

Atlas77 · Apr 21, 2010

The price leap from the D90 body to the D700 body is quite big. Although im sure you would be happy with a D90 body, the D700 is just too good to pass up.

One question though, what made you skip the D300s on your list? What made you go D90 or D700? The D300s seems like a nice compromise, or even the D300.

kundalini · Apr 21, 2010

It's a tough call Arch. My first thought is the D700, but as you've mentioned, your lens collection is in need of updating to FF. That should be paramount IMO and also a deal breaker for a quick decision. A question for you.... how long have you held on to the D50? You could easily multiply that time with a D90 because of the ISO capabilities and newer technologies. During the interim, build on the lenses for full frame. It doesn't need to be mentioned, but a FX lens works perfectly well on a DX body.

This also alleviates some anxiety for the upcoming trip. You have a new body with trusted (and compatible) lenses to shoot one of the most beautiful places I've ever seen.... the Lake District.

Wish you well in your decision.

Arch · Apr 23, 2010

Thanks for the extra input guys.

Atlas77 said:
One question though, what made you skip the D300s on your list?

Tbh, i would still need to save for the D300s which means i wouldn't be able to buy it before the trip and if im going to hold off and save, then id go for the D700

The trip itself will cost a few hundred £ .... i have already had to update some of my camping/hiking gear too... its going to be an expensive month!

kundalini said:
It's a tough call Arch. My first thought is the D700, but as you've mentioned, your lens collection is in need of updating to FF. That should be paramount IMO and also a deal breaker for a quick decision. A question for you.... how long have you held on to the D50? You could easily multiply that time with a D90 because of the ISO capabilities and newer technologies. During the interim, build on the lenses for full frame. It doesn't need to be mentioned, but a FX lens works perfectly well on a DX body.

This also alleviates some anxiety for the upcoming trip. You have a new body with trusted (and compatible) lenses to shoot one of the most beautiful places I've ever seen.... the Lake District.

Wish you well in your decision.

Very true.... and your right the Lakes is one of the the most amazing natural places i have seen, i will have to post some more pics of the actual mountains after this next trip.

I have in fact just purchased a D90, so once again thanks for the input.
I will also be taking a MF TLR camera to see if i can get something a bit different from my usual style, gonna be fun!

Chris of Arabia · Apr 23, 2010

I love photographing in The Lakes and fortunately for me it's an area that's on my doorstep, or at least it is when I'm in the UK (read, not often enough).

I'm not sure I can offer you much in the way of suggestions on the Nikon question, but I can perhaps off a bit of a comparison from my move away from my 350D last year. I always knew that I wanted to go the full frame route, so when the opportunity came, I got myself the 5DII and the lenses I needed to upgrade from my EFS stock. Which was a great move, though I perhaps hadn't banked on expecting to struggle so much with the consequent weight gain.

So time passes by and I'm finding I lost something in the move, that being the IS capability and familiarity of working with my 17-55mm f/2.8 EFS. In a moment of weakness, my willpower cracked and I found myself buying a 7D body to use with the 17-55. So now I have a top notch full frame and an equally top notch crop sensor body, and I switch between using them as the situation suits.

So basically what I'm suggesting is that there is no real need, other than purely financial, why you should think that the D90 should be a compromise. If you get that now, there's no reason to think that it will languish in a cupboard should you subsequently decide to get a D700 or it's next incarnation.