Upgradeing, do I keep old body or trade/sell it off?

[craigpjenkinsphotography]

<p>Howdy!</p>

<p>I am ready to upgrade from my D90 to a D7000. If I trade in the D90 along with its:</p>

<ul>

<li>Nikon battery grip</li>

<li>two non-Nikon batteries</li>

<li>Nikon battery charger</li>

<li>Nikon protective LCD cover and</li>

<li>all original Nikon packaging & paperwork, </li>

</ul>

<p>(these accessories are not compatible with the D7000) then I might get a $400 - $500 USD credit toward the purchase of the D7000. </p>

<p>Is it worth taking a hit like this to clear out the D90 or should I keep it for a spare?</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>Craig</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I think you can probably get more than $500 for the above if your D90 is in good condition. A new D90 is still around $800 or so, and that Nikon grip has got to be worth something.</p>

<p>The real question is why you need to upgrade, and whether you need a second body. If you intend to sell the D90, I would sell it as soon as you get the D7000. The longer you wait, the more the D90 will depreciate, especially since the D5100 is out, the D90 will definitely be discontinued soon since they both occupy essentially the same price range.</p>

[drjoder]

<p>If you were to need a back-up body, what could you get if you could only spend $400-$500? I don't think you could get a D90. So, I'd keep it. Hmmm...but, on the other hand, since I went from the D70 to the D90, I haven't touched my D70. So, it may depend on what/how you shoot. If you shoot anything that requires quick access to two different focal length lenses or in conditions that would be bad for swapping lenses--weddings or social events, dusty conditions, safari, whatever--I'd keep it as a second body. Just my 2 cents.</p>

[rossb]

<p> Digital camera's do not have a lasting value and the depreciation is huge on the things. If you buy one you should just wear it out before thinking about a new camera. It's wasteful of your income to flush it. I guess if the D90 is out then sell it. What else would you do with it.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>You should be able to get about $650 or more for your D90 with a genuine Nikon grip. Is it worth the upgrade? If you are talking money, only you can decide based on your financial situation. Is it worth it for the upgraded features? A friend of mine did it and is thrilled with his decision. Others who have done it seem to be very happy as well. I say go for it if you can afford it.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>The key is not to trade it in but to sell it yourself. You can likely sell it for over $600 USD with the grip. You have to accept that DSLRs experience huge depreciation. I take advantage of this by buying used bodies, and lenses for that matter. These days people are very quick to buy something that does not fit their needs and so they end up having to sell it not long after buying. Be patient and there will be plenty of slightly used D7000s out there within a few months. Absolutely sell the D90 to also help offset the continuous losses, unless you have a regular requirement for a second body. </p>

[photo5]

<p>Sell it. After getting the D7000 you won't want to use the D90...</p>

[craigpjenkinsphotography]

<p>Thanks for the sincere response guys.</p>

<p>My line of thought here is when I upgraded from the D70 to the D90 I got 102% more image size. With a jump that big I'll never think of falling back on the D70 as a backup. When I upgraded to the D90 my D70 was out of production and so the trade in value was a joke. I sold it private party to a acquaintance familiar with my camera equipment and thus knew what good condition it is in. I am still surprised how much $ I got for it in private sale, but the price was a fair one considering. </p>

<p>Moving from the D90 to the D7k is only a 32% increase in image size. This makes the D90 reasonably close to use as a backup. Nobody who knows my camera bag is interested in buying a D90 and so if I do not trade it in then I'll have to sell it to an unknown buyer who may not be as easy to please. This is the part that makes trading-in attractive if I do not keep the D90.</p>

<p>And I've been trying to get the wife to move up from her happy-snappy Nikon to a DSLR. She knows if she makes any affirmative sounds to this notion then I'll pull the trigger on the D7k and hand her the D90. That sword cuts two ways because if I follow this plan then I'll have to share all the lenses also - YIKES!</p>

<p>Thanks again for sharing your thoughts, its been very helpful.</p>

<p>Craig</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I wouldn't. At least I'd keep it for a spare and sell it after I'm sure.</p>

<p>Why do you need to upgrade?</p>

[rossb]

<p>If your wife would want the D90 or the D7000 for her own use then that would make since. Sharing lenses also makes since to me. My previous comment was a bit over the top. Sorry about that. Since I have a large family I have always weighed every dollar before spending it. Anyway enjoy the D7000. I hope it works out well for you.</p>

[photo5]

<p>You didn't mention the wife in the original post, so yes, give it to your wife, she may like it very much.</p>

[michaelwalter]

<p>If you decide to sell the D90, I might be interested. I have an old D80 that is reaching to end of its life, I think. My budget is not huge, but my interest is.<br>

You could email me at pasvorto at gmail dot com</p>

[Two23]

<p>The main thing the D7000 will give you is another stop of usuable ISO. Do you photo at night a lot, or fast sports in dim light? If not, what is it that the D7000 will do that your d90 won't? What lenses do you have? What kind of tripod & head? Do you have a flash--exactly what do you photo? One thing I've learned is that you can quickly go through a lot of cash by trying to keep up with the latest camera. If it has something you really need, such as you're a sports photographer and really need faster AF, then camera changes might be worth it. Generally though, I've learned that a camera switch does the least to improve my image quality compared to other parts of the photo system. You really have to think and analyze what it is you photo and how, and what gear you need to take the kinds of photos you want to take. That's the whole thing--match the gear to the images. My own camera strategy is to skip one generation and not buy each one. The difference between generations is only incremental, but it can eat up lots of cash that could be better spent elsewhere.</p>

<p>I'll mention one last thing. When I bought my D300 I kept my d80 as a backup camera. I take a lot of "exotic" trips and sometimes also shoot for hire. Imagine this, when I went to Iceland last summer I was clambering around huge waterfalls. What if I had dropped my camera into the abyss of Dettifoss? I would be done with photography, that's what. Most of the places I go have few or no camera stores! I've come to see a backup as essential. For you the question remains, what would the money be best spent on?</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[craigpjenkinsphotography]

<p>Its a done deal! My D90 will soon be off to a new home and a D7k should arrive very soon to fill the void.</p>

<p>Kent, I was an early adopter of digital photography and half my interest in the hardware honestly is in the gadgetry. I've been in the "Hobby" since my first Polaroid and have almost always owned an SLR since 1984. In college I minored in photography and played with unbelievably expensive Canon digital cameras that by today's standards barely have enough resolution for display on the Web. When I purchased a Nikon Coolpix 995 I knew there was no turning back from digital photography. When I upgraded to the D70 the coolness went off the scale. The D90 offers over double the image size of the D70 and so this is the model I moved to next. Since then I have been watching the DX sensor size reach its full potential then come down in price. About 16.5 megapixels is all I expect from the DX format. To get more megapixels from the DX sensor will require individual sensors so small they will not 'see' light colors in the longer frequencies of the visible spectrum. Someday a clever engineer will find a work-around but that camera is too expensive for me. In the meantime, however, I was planning to upgrade to the D7k later this year. Then Japan & Nikon got the rug yanked out from under them. So I figure I'd better buy now while the pickin's are good. I expect the D7k to be in my hands longer than any prior camera of mine. The next time I upgrade I'll be going to the FX sensor which means I may also replace all my lenses as well. I'll have to pay for that with the wife's life insurance money so I'm not expecting an FX for a very long time.</p>

<p>Now to answer your direct questions. I do have a lot of photo opportunities in poor light and I do have a 200mm lens that is not used nearly enough. Also I am developing my HDR skills as well and want to attempt subject that presently are not well suited - the D7k has a leg up over the D90 in this application. My flash is the SB-800 which I am please with and do not intend to replace. As I progress my hobby into an honest income I will be much more keen to balance the value of business tools vs business toys.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for the opinions. All were read by the wife & I and we value each one.</p>

<p>Craig</p>