Nikon d90 or d7000 at this moment?

<p>Hello everyone. I am new to dslr. I am shooting film photography with my old slr nikon fg20 for years. So i am new to dslr but not to photography. I'm considering buying a dslr camera and i did some research that lead me to choose between the 2 models d90 and d7000. I have for around 750$. In my country (vietnam), a used d90 (3000 - 5000 clicks) costs 475$ and a used d7000 (7000 - 10000 clicks) costs 600$. I know these shutter actuations dont really matter at all. so should i go for d90 and save money for more lenses? or should i buy the d7000 for the long run and stick with just a kit lens (18-70?), and buy more after. In my city (hanoi), a 18-70 kit lens costs for around 150$. i only own 2 old mf lenses that i still use with my old slr. i do not own any af lens. I'll use my dslr for travelling and taking landscape photos most of the time. you guys can call me Vinny instead(sorry for my english)</p>

I own a d90 and the d7100. I loved the d90, I didn't feel that the d7000 was going to offer me that much more. The

d7000 is a great camera but for your budget the d90 purchase would give you some budget left for lens options. Such as

the 35mm/1.8 dx. Awesome lens on the d90

<p>+1 Richard M. The extra $$$ isn't worth it for the D7000. Go and get some glass with the change. </p>

<p>Which MF lenses do you have with your FG20? One big advantage the D7000 has is the fact that it can meter with Ai and AiS lenses, the D90 cannot. So probably your old MF lenses should be completely fine on the D7000 (though there is the "crop factor"). Some of the old lenses are still very credible performers on DSLRs.<br>

And I wouldn't be too fast saying the D7000 isn't worth the extra money. It depends a lot on what kind of photography you do. The D7000 was, in my opinion, a serious step up from the D90 (and in ways, more than the D7100 is over the D7000) - but for specific tasks. The D7000 is one stop better at high ISO, has a faster and better AF system, much better video. For landscape, not a big difference, I admit, but as an allrounder, the D7000 trumps the D90 easily. If you're looking to do more, different, styles of photography, the D7000 has more depth.<br>

Usually I recommend spending money on lenses first and foremost, but if your old MF lenses are old gems, it may make sense to get a D7000 instead.</p>

<p>I agree with Richard 100% both with regards to the D90 and the 35mm f1.8 lens. Happy shooting! cb :-)</p>

<p>The D7000 will handle video way better, and you could use MF lenses on it without any problems.<br /><br />I have a D90 and love it. Today? I wouldn't buy it in your situation for that difference in price. I'd get the D7000 and the 18-70 (which is a great little lens) and get more lenses later when you can afford them.</p>

<p>Hi Vinny, I owned a D90 and traded up for a D7000. If you shoot mostly landscapes they are similar, but if you intend to crop (like I do for bird photography), the D7000 is hands down better because of the higher pixel count. Meaning you will get cleaner, clearer crops compared to the D90. Good luck, my friend! </p>

<p>I disagree with some here. The D90 was a fabulous camera in it's day, and still holds it's own, but the D7000 surpasses every other DX camera in it's ability to lift shadows. I now own a D7100, but in some ways preferred the D7000. If I had realized how great it was while I still had it I may never have switched to the D7100. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with the D7100, but the D7000 was just a very, very, good camera. Either way, good luck with your choice, both cameras are winners.</p>

<p>I agree with Wouter's recommendations. You need both a camera and lenses so you need to factor in the cost of both. If your lenses for your manual focus film camera can be recognized electronically by the camera and therefore eliminate the need for buying lenses, go with a Nikon DSLR that will recognize manual focus lenses you own. Another body that meets this requirement is the D200. I was at a portrait workshop Thursday night and one of the photographers was using one. While it is an old DSLR, it might meet your needs from a cost standpoint if it is available in your country. One of my favorite lenses I use for landscapes with my Nikon DSLRs is a old manual focus Nikon 55mm f2.8 macro lens. </p>

<p>Joe Smith</p>

<p>Here in the UK, D7000's are going for about £370 or $600 and D90's about £200 or $320, so making the difference more useful for lens purchase.</p>

<p>$750 - $600 is only $150 left........whereas $750 - $320 is $430.</p>

<p>For most uses, the D7000 would be better, but <strong><em>only</em> </strong>if the glass you're looking through is up to it!</p>

<p>However, if you can see a future budget as-well, buy the D7000 now and buy more glass on the next 'spend'.</p>

<p>I would go with the D7000. It is simply a better camera on virtually every point. Image quality and resolution are much better. It has a stop and a half better dynamic range. More autofocus points and a better autofocus system. Much better low-light performance. Video is much better.<br>

As a newer body, Nikon will likely support it for longer. </p>

<p>The 18-70 is a surprisingly good lens. You will enjoy using it. </p>

<p>Good luck!!<br>

</p>

<p>I have to ring in on the side of the d7000. It is simply better technology all around if you can afford it. 18-70 is a great lens for the money. I got it along with my d70 years ago and was stunned by the images that came from the combination.</p>

<p>-Cheers</p>

<p>$125 USD isnt enough to make much of a difference in lens selection. while the d90 was and still is a fantastic camera, the d7000 is a worthwhile upgrade in most, if not all, key categories. where it will make the biggest difference is in AF; the d90's 11-pt AF isnt in the same league as the d7000's 39-pt AF. that alone would be enough for me, but the d7000 also has a better-built body, better metering, more resolution, better video, better hi-ISO, and a bunch of other bells and whistles.</p>

<p>Undeniably, the D7000 is a better camera in nearly every way.</p>

<p>The question is purely financial and what's to be done with the rest of the budget. There will be change from the $750 budget. Considering the OP is AF lens free, it's a question of lens requirements for what they want to shoot. That's a personal choice only they can decide.</p>

<p>D7000 hands down :)....seriously it is a better camera than D90 even in landscaping, especially if you shoot raw, simply because it carries one of the best sensors ever made by Sony. The dynamic range of the camera is still excellent for our days and if later on you combine good glass you'll be amazed with the results. Believe it or not I still regret that I sold my D7000...Anyway, good luck with whatever you decide!</p>

<p>For normal sized prints, it would be very difficult to differentiate between an image take with the D90 and the identical image taken with the D7000 IF you are a RAW shooter and IF you have good image processing software. Ultimately it sounds like you need to stay within your budget. An auto focus lens or two would certainly be nice to have in addition to the two lenses you are currently using. And if you don't already have advanced image processing software, you should budget for that as well and that may factor into your final decision. Both bodies are excellent and you won't be disappointed with either.</p>

<p>I should have included in my post above that since you are new to digital photography, you should learn about shooting RAW. This will give you the most out of any DSLR you invest in.</p>

<p>the d7000 is within the OP's budget, Elliot. and more future-proof than the older d90. like i said, for a $125 differential, it's kind of a no-brainer to go for the better camera. </p>

<p>Prices from a respected 2nd hand retailer* (as opposed to flea bay) are...<br>

D90s are selling for ~ £250<br>

D7000s are selling for ~ £420<br>

(D7100s are selling for ~£725)<br>

Maybe the UK is skewed, but that's alot more than $125 difference....try $270!!!<br>

<br>

*mpbphotographic..........they have multiples for sale and it's interesting to see what they think will sell at what price.</p>