What would you choose? Nikon D2X or D90?

[andylynn]

<p>Think of the D90 and D300 as having identical image quality. If one of them has an edge, it's not enough to make a difference. The real questions are, which feature set do you want (the D90's high-amateur features of the D300's semi-pro features) and how much do you want to spend for those features?</p>

[chauncey_huffman]

<p>I had the same consideration about 5 or 6 months ago and I went with the D90. Mostly because I knew that I would shoot some weddings and the D90 handles higher ISO more easily. In fact, I'm pretty sure that the D2x only has ISO capabilities up to 800, that won't cut it for many wedding situations, even on a f/1.4 lens.</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>The D80 has the cam1000 AF module the D90 also has this cam1000 module all though it has probably been tweeked a bit. The D300 has the newer AF module that is also used in the D3 and D700. The D300 should focus better than the D90 and for me the D300 would be the real upgrade from the D80 as it offers improved handling over the D80 as well as better hi ISO ability and superiour build quality. I also find that my D1h handles and focuses better than my D80 but the D80 is abit smaller ,has better battery life and the popup flash is useful sometimes. I found that the AF sensors on my D80 are larger than the AF points in the view finder and the are not centred. The middle cross sensor that I use the most seems to be a bit lower than where it is marked in the view finder. At first I thought it suffers from front focusing but it does not when I remember where the AF point really is it focuses quite well but not as fast as the D1h and the AF is not as repeatable.</p>

[jalywol]

<p>D90. I had a D200, and was never entirely happy with how it rendered certain shades of blue (I do floral work), or its dynamic range. I got the D90 last summer and, for my uses, it is a significant improvement over the D200. I am very happy with it.</p>

<p>I also vastly prefer the weight of the D90. No, it will not withstand a hurricane, but I don't usually do the kind of shooting that requires that level of ruggedness. I find I actually take the D90 with me more often, and my neck and hands don't get tired after holding it for a while, whereas the D200 felt like a boat anchor. </p>

<p>If you prefer a heftier camera though, or are rough on your equipment, the D2x might be a more logical choice....but to be honest, the sensor and software technology in the D90 is just more current than that in the D2x, and I suspect might give you better results in some circumstances. If ruggedness is a concern, I would look for a used D300 rather than the D2x, to take advantage of the more current technology.</p>

 

[bill_brock1]

<p>Thanks Janet W for that input!!!</p>

[mizore]

<p>I bought a used D300 and have been quite happy with it, but one of my concerns was being able to use metering with manual focus lenses, which I don't believe the D90 does. If you don't have manual focus lenses, I think you'd be happy either either. Used D300 prices are within roughly $200 of new D90 prices in my area (DC suburbs).</p>