Upgrading from Nikon D5000: D90 or D7000

[ric_hunter]

<p>hi there!</p>

<p>im from the Philippines and i currently own a Nikon D5000. i have been planning to upgrade my camera body in the Nikon line up. im in a dilemma of choosing whether i'll get the D90 or the new D7000?</p>

<p>i know that the D90 has been tested by time and that the D7000 is a new player but in demand in the market. also, the D7000 is mostly ranked as "HIGHLY RECOMMENDED" in most photography sites. so far its only www.cameralabs.com has rated it just fair with only a "RECOMMENDED" rank.</p>

<p>here in my country now, the price of D90 is dropping compared to the asking price of the D7000. although im not in a hurry to buy an upgrade but i can save for the D7000 since im only getting it on Dec 2011.</p>

<p>so is it worthy for me to get the D7000 or should i just stick with the D90 and just invest on lenses? im really having concerns with shooting in low light with my D5000 using the 18-55mm VR. i also tried the D90 using the 18-105mm VR and still get unfavorable photos in lowlight. shooting up the ISO would be my last recourse as i dont like noise in my photos. ive read that the D7000 has clean shots at higher ISO's.</p>

<p>please help...</p>

<p>thanks so much!</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>I suspect the D5000 and D90 will deliver very similar image quality in the same conditions. Low light image quality quality could be down to a whole range of factors from camera shake to lack of contrast to lens quality. If it was me, I'd keep the D5000 and buy faster lenses. As a start, why not try the 35mm f1.8 DX and see what that does for you. It's inexpensive, will work on the D5000 and allow you to shoot in lower light at sensible shutter speeds.</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>I also see yet another review commenting on D7000 overexposure in bright conditions. I'm afraid this is a deal breaker for me. If the Canon 60D can get it right in the test you refer to, I would expect the D7000 to get it right too. The fact that it doesn't (and the test scene looked pretty standard) suggests there's something wrong with the metering algorithms. That would seem to reinforce the 'better glass' route for you.</p>

[carl_becker2]

<p>I would go for faster glass, either a f2.8 zoom or faster prime in the focal length needed. One good feature about the D90 is the built in focus motor that allows full use of AF-D lenses. To keep the AF feature with the D5000 you will have to use AF-S type lenses.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>You need practice and improved technique, not a better camera. For real low-light shooting, a 35mm f1.8 would be a better investment than a new camera body.</p>

<p>The D90 can take the same photos as a D5000. Despite some of the early reviews, the D7000 looks to be a complete improvement over the 5000, 90 and even the 300 for certain people. But you don't, imho, need a new camera. A 35mm f1.8 lens on your D5000 would be a GREAT low-light camera.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I also see yet another review commenting on D7000 overexposure in bright conditions.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have been using the D7000 for a month and half and at least I have never seen that problem.</p>

<p>I wonder why people have exposure issues with DSLRs. There is a histogram you can check. If you don't like a particular exposure, just manually override the exposure on the fly. There are reasons that Nikon puts a spot meter on its most expensive cameras; we need that and then manually adjust the exposure. No meter is smart enough to know the result you want.</p>

[elliot1]

<p><em>".... D7000 has clean shots at higher ISO's."</em> The D7000 offers only a marginal (and possibly insignificant) improvement over the D90. The D90 offers only a marginal improvement of the D5000. The D7000 has about a 1/2 stop improvement over the D5000. <strong>A lot of the improvements you are seeing is in the in-camera processing of JPGs. </strong> If you shoot raw, get the exposure right and have good image processing software and technique, it would probably be hard to see any differences in high ISO shots between the 3 cameras at ISO 1600. Even at ISO 3200, the differences might not be huge, especially in typically sized prints. I use a D40 on occasion and find that in spite of its age (referring to its technology), it produces excellent ISO 1600 shots.</p>

<p><em>" D7000 overexposure in bright conditions" </em> I doubt this is correct. Every camera can and will do this in adverse lighting conditions (back lighting, for example). Chances are the body you currently own doesn't get it right every time. There is no 'magic' camera in production yet that gets the correct exposure 100% of the time. In fact, an exposure you consider perfect may be considered over or under exposed by someone else. More importantly than getting the exposure correct in adverse conditions is the meter's consistency. I have not read of any issues with this aspect of its metering.</p>

<p><em>"i don't like noise in my photos"</em> Noise is easy to eliminate from any photo through software on your computer.</p>

<p>The bottom line is if you can afford the D7000, get it. If not, get the d90. You won't be disappointed either way. You are perhaps better of with your current body and faster glass than a D7000 and slow glass (referring to lens aperture).</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>im really having concerns with shooting in low light with my D5000 using the 18-55mm VR. i also tried the D90 using the 18-105mm VR and still get unfavorable photos in lowlight. shooting up the ISO would be my last recourse as i dont like noise in my photos. ive read that the D7000 has clean shots at higher ISO's.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>To the OP, as Simon, Carl, and Peter pointed out, if you want good low-light results, stop using those extremely slow f5.6 kit zooms. The most inexpensive fast lens is Nikon's 35mm/f1.8 AF-S DX. That should solve a lot of your low-light issues.</p>

<p>The D90 uses exactly the same sensor as the D5000 and the two share a lot of the electronics. Moving from the D5000 to the D90 should make no difference to your high-ISO capability. The D7000 can give you some advantage, but the biggest bang of the buck comes from better lenses.</p>

[nishnishant]

<p>I made the mistake of buying the D80 just when the D90 was released. I saved a bit of money but I have spent the following couple of years wishing I had bought the D90. So keep that in mind. The 300 dollar saving will affect you across a 2-3 year span of time. For an extra 10-15 bucks a month, my opinion is you should get the better and newer camera.</p>

[philip_tam]

<p>I agree with the people saying that you should get new lenses if your concern is working in low-light. If you have 1 lens only, you're not really taking advantage of what the D5000 has to offer.</p>

<p>The D90 has some functional advantages over the D5000 (autofocus motor, flash commander), but the two cameras have virtually identical image quality. If you upgrade from a D5000 to a D90, and you have only 1 kit lens, you will gain nothing.</p>

<p>I have both a D7000 and a D5000, and I do consider a D7000 in a completely different class. I can work comfortably at higher ISO's and the noise cleans up a lot better when using post production software. So if you really want a new camera, a D90 will gain you very little, and a D7000 will be a significant improvement. However, the difference between a D7000 and a D5000 is nothing compared to the difference you will see with new lenses.</p>

<p>$1200 in lenses can net you a lot: most 50 f/1.4's are available to you, Nikon's 35mm f/1.8 is only $200.</p>

<p>I have found the reviews concerning the D7000 to be kind of rubbish. 1 stop overexposure in matrix metering... this would only be a deal breaker for me if I shot JPEG only, and never used spot/center-weighted metering, and never looked at the histogram and/or applied exposure compensation. I found the D5000 tends to underexpose on it's own. *shrug* The reviews give you a perspective... you really have to look at the hard data and handle the camera yourself to judge.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p><em>The D90 offers only a marginal improvement of the D5000.</em></p>

<p>in terms of IQ, how is this possible? they have the same sensor. otherwise, i agree with Elliot on the jpeg processing accounting for some of the perceived differences in image quality.</p>

<p>to the OP: forget a d90. it doesnt make sense. you need better lenses for low-light, period. so stock up on fast primes and then upgrade the body. had you asked this question before the release of the 35/1.8, the 30/1.4 HSM, the 50/1.4 AF-S, the 50/1.4 HSM, the 60/2 BiM, the 60/2.8 AF-S,and the 85/1.4 HSM, then perhaps a d90 with its internal focus motor, would have made more sense. but nowadays there are a lot of options for fast primes with built-in motors for AF on lower-end bodies. i personally would start with the 35/1.8 if i were you and take it from there.</p>

<p>also, what would be the point of using a slow kit lens for low light? IMO, the main advantage of a high-ISO camera is the ability to get a faster shutter in certain situations. you still need wide apertures, which means fast lenses. it's always better to shoot at lower ISOs anyway. <strong>if you do the math, 1.4 vs. 5.6 is four stops</strong>, whereas you would gain a half-stop of ISO from a d7000 over your current camera.</p>

<p> </p>

[anura1]

<p>Just go for the D7000. I upgraded from D5000 to D7000 and loving every minute of it. Dont worry about what "Paper pundits" has to say on their expert reviews. Just grab the camera and go out and shoot. Then review the results. Thats the only way you can see how your "own copy" performs in differant situations. Its a greate camera but it may not be the "ideal" or "Perfect" camera as some expected it to be on all the situations.<br />Attacted pic is from D7000, which is taken hand held with 35mm 1.8. ISO-1600 f/1.8 @ 1/50 Sec.<br>

<a href="edit-msg?msg_id=00XrT8">http://www.photo.net/bboard/edit-msg?msg_id=00XrT8</a></p>

<p> </p>

[anura1]

<p>Sorry, wrong link to the Pic on the earlier post. here is the correct link.<br>

<a href="../photo/12012541">http://www.photo.net/photo/12012541</a></p>

[ric_hunter]

<p>thank you for the overwhelming response.<br>

one big reason i want to upgrade to between these two bodies is that i find it hard to switch controls over my D5000 rather i have to use the info button to get to my ISO, WB, shutter release, metering modes and the rest. i dont have complain with the image quality of my D5000, its superb. plus i cant enjoy primes without built in motor as the D5000 doesnt have a motor to run them that's why i was considering this 2 bodies. the coverage of the viewfinder of the d5000 is small too, lately im having eye strains already after a day of shooting.</p>

[john_anthony_powell]

<p>D5000 owner here<br>

did you know, if you can handle manual focusing ok, that ALL Nikon lens will mount on a D5000.?<br>

on a UK pension, and looking for cheaper lens for my Nikon F3, I bought a Nippon Kogaku 50mm f2 pre-AI, .... mint and very very cheap<br>

these mount on my D5000.....no AF of course [ but the green focus light operates] and no metering... [ still have my Weston Master V.]...BUT what fun to use an almost 40yo lens on a new DSLR<br>

IQ is superb too....you could look for a Nikon 50mm 1.4 AI-S........just my 2cents..!</p>

[theddy_grumo1]

<p>Kumusta? I too is from the Philippines but currently living in the U.S. Just upgraded last month to a d7000 from a d40x that i bought over three years ago. I resist the temptation of buying all the new bodies that came after it, the D90,D300,D300s,D700 and instead buying prime glasses. So now i have the 85 1.4D 501.4D&1.8 all manual focus on my d40x. I have learned a lot using those lenses manually but honestly it is such a relief to be able to autofocus. And you can do that by either upgrading to the D90 and above. Also consider a used d80 it can also autofocus because it has a focus motor inside and you can buy a 50mm for the extra cash left.<br>

MAbuhay</p>

[scott_stadler]

<p>After my D5000 was stolen last year, I saved up and replaced it with the D7000. I second the posters that said to upgrade the glass rather than get a new camera. While I love the D7000 I haven't been blown away by it, and in some cases I like the photos from my D5000 better. Note, I only shoot raw and process in Aperture. I do believe that the D7000 jpeg's look better right out of the camera. Two thinks I absolutely love about the D7000... my older ai lenses can use the meter in the D7000 where I played guess the exposure with the D5000, and I it will auto focus my AF-D lenses. If either of those things are important to you, then I would probably upgrade... if they are not then just buy a couple of new lenses like the 35mm 1.8G, 50mm1.8 G, and so on.</p>