D90: repair or replace

[owen_farmer]

<p>I recently returned from a 2 week trip to Ireland and after 1 week my D90 died, and I did not bring my wife's point and shoot. See thread http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00dOkI<br>

I purchased the camera in 2010. The usage has been fairly light. While I love the camera, I am greatly disappointed in the short life.<br>

I am now faced with a repair or replace decision.<br>

My default lens will continue to be the Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Lens, which weighs 1.65lbs.<br>

In addition, I often use a Nikon 1.8D 50mm lens (which for auto focus requires a camera with a focus motor) for available light shooting (mainly of grandkids).<br>

These are the replacement alternatives:</p>

<ol>

<li>Nikon D90 SLR used (8+) B&H $290 $66 4 Yr. Square Trade 1.55 lbs.</li>

<li>Nikon D7000 SLR refurbished B&H $470 $129 2 Yr. Nikon 1.72 lbs.</li>

<li>Nikon D7100 new B&H $897 $124 2 year Square Trade 1.69 lbs.</li>

<li>Nikon D7200 new B&H $1197 $129 2 Yr. Nikon 1.69 lbs</li>

</ol>

<p>In addition, the following camera requires a Nikon 50mm 1.8GH lens at $217</p>

<ul>

<li>Nikon D5200 new B&H $497 $79 2 Yr. Square Trade 1.22 lbs.</li>

</ul>

<p>The Nikon web site gives a preliminary repair estimate of $225.<br>

I rule out #1, because the repair is cheaper and my camera is better than an 8+ condition.<br>

Regarding #2, I have had good luck with B&H refurbished equipment. The lower weight does not seem relevant, particularly since my lens weighs 1.65 lbs. The increased sensitivity and dynamic range is nice, but, of itself, not enough to choose this option. I rarely use video and don't care about wi-fi.<br>

I don't see that options 3 or 4 have any advantage to me.<br>

I am inclined to have my camera repaired. Am I missing something? <br>

Owen</p>

[Two23]

<p>I would skip the warranties. I always buy used gear anyway, and have saved thousands. What do you photo? The the big question. How often do you take photos? Need to have some very basic info to give you any kind of meaningful answer.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>It's always difficult to make a decision on behalf of someone else Owen, but personally I'd probably choose the D7100 option. It's still a current camera and the price is keen following the introduction of the D7200. Or if money's tight, I'd have the D90 repaired. Would that be throwing good money after bad? I'm not sure, but I'm glad it's not my dilemma to solve.</p>

[phule]

<p>$300 for a used D90 is $200 too much, IMHO. </p>

[User_276104]

<p>The D7000 is still available brand new with warranty from Amazon for $549.</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D7000-DSLR-Body-Only/dp/B0042X9LC4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1438033819&sr=8-2&keywords=d7000</p>

[Hector Javkin]

<p>There's virtue to keeping a camera going, although I would get an uneasy feeling using a camera that failed when I had nothing for backup. That's just me. If your D90 has seen a lot of use, something else could easily go wrong with it. I suggest a D7100. It has a clear advantage in autofocus over the earlier models, and a mode dial with a locking button, so it won't get switched accidentally between Program, Aperture Preferred, Shutter Preferred and Manual modes. You can buy one that is factory refurbished from Adorama for $630. (<a href="http://www.adorama.com/INKD7100R.html"><strong>link</strong></a>) I agree with Kent about avoiding the add-on warranty.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I too would advice not to purchase any additional, extended warranty. The odds are stacked strongly against you, the person who buys such warranty.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Lens, which weighs 1.65lbs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The lens weighs just a tad over 1 lbs - 485g; 1.65 lbs appears to be the weight of the lens when it's attached to the D90 ;-)</p>

<p>Refurb D7100 at Nikon Store $780, $650 at B&H, $630 at adorama. Forget extended warranties.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>7000 will probably be an incremental improvement over the D90 in most ways.<br /><br />7100 or 7200 will be much bigger improvement. I'd go with one of those. Refurb D7100 Dieter mentions would be where I'd go if you are very price-limited.</p>

[owen_farmer]

<p>What does the D7100 give me beyond the D90?<br>

Owen</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>I just bought a new D5200 on eBay for $309, added a used Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS, and took the $560 package out for its first spin yesterday.</p>

<p>I can't say I love the 5000 series, but, with the function key set to ISO, I had no problems whatsoever bringing back <a href="/photodb/folder?folder_id=1082488"><em><strong>some decent images</strong></em></a> with zero frustrations.</p>

<p>I sure loved the D90 and still cherish my D7000, but the image quality of the D5200 is better than either. (I typically shoot full frame.)</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Owen,<br /><br />The D7100 gets you: more pixels on the view-screen, noticeable increase in linear resolution (double the megapixels), better low light, ability to meter with AI (-s) lenses, better AF, more video options, and a few other things.<br /><br />D5200 Landrum mentions is nice if you don't want CLS control, don't want to use legacy non-AF lenses, and don't mind your 50mm not being AF.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Biggest advantage of a D7100 over a D7000 is the AF; but both AF-D 50mm f/1.8 and 16-85VR aren't very fast focussing lenses where the advantage is going to be vast, so I'd lean towards the D7000. The D5200 is a sweet deal too, but a D7000 for less money is a no-brainer to me - the D7xxx bodies have better viewfinders and two control dials, easily worth the extra bit of weight, in my view.<br>

Independent of the camera, I would consider trading up the 50mm f/1.8D to the f/1.8G if you use it often. It is a much improved lens, especially at the widest apertures it performs a lot better.</p>

[owen_farmer]

<p>I am still leaning towards repairing the D90. I am taking less than 1000 pics a year, many of which are family pix, using available light and sometimes fill-in flash, usually at -1 1/3 stops. In Ireland after my camera broke I borrowed my son's D60 and attached my lens. Performance with fill-in flash was poor. The D90 works fine for me. My needs are modest. It is not clear that I would notice the improvements provided by the D7000/D7100. Thanks for all the advice.<br>

Owen </p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>I am still leaning towards repairing the D90.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Owen, I am wondering what the repair costs might be. Surely getting another D90 (if that is what you want) would not be terribly expensive by comparison.</p>

<p>As for noticing any upgrade, I was quite surprised by how much better the D7000 was compared to the D90.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[owen_farmer]

<p>This has been a very helpful discussion.<br>

I've changed my mind about repairing the D90, and am now leaning towards purchasing a refurbished D7100 from B&H at $650. (I have had good experiences with refurb equipment from B&H.) Will skip extended coverage.<br>

Do I need a second battery? The battery on the D90 lasted so long that the second battery wasn't necessary.<br>

Owen</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>Do I need a second battery? The battery on the D90 lasted so long that the second battery wasn't necessary.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Battery lasts even longer in the D7100. But I would not want to be without a spare - YMMV.</p>