Art and Photography

Upgrading from a Nikon D90

  • Last Updated:
  • Jul 24th, 2017 10:35 am
Tags:
[OP]
Member
Jan 6, 2013
472 posts
29 upvotes
WATERLOO

Upgrading from a Nikon D90

So I'm looking to update cameras. Coming from a Nikon D90 and want to stick with Nikon. At the time the D90 was one of the better starter cameras. I'm hoping to re-use my lenses with the new camera. I would still consider myself a beginner/medium user. Any suggestions on what is currently a good camera to get? Not looking to break the bank since this would just be for a light hobby. Are my lenses still compatible with th newer cameras?
16 replies
Sr. Member
User avatar
May 5, 2010
814 posts
214 upvotes
Maybe get a D3400 or D5600 since both are APS-C like your D90, won't break your bank (how about a precise amount of budget?) and will work with your lenses, unless you have D lenses. In that case, it's manual focus only if you go with D3400 or D5600, but it still give all informations of the lens. D7200 will allow autofocus with D lenses.
[OP]
Member
Jan 6, 2013
472 posts
29 upvotes
WATERLOO
Out of curiosity, how much better are the newer cameras compared to my D90 (ie. what more do they offer especially if I am using the same lenses)
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 6, 2003
10593 posts
1679 upvotes
Ottawa
ballashotcaller wrote:
Jul 17th, 2017 5:26 pm
Out of curiosity, how much better are the newer cameras compared to my D90 (ie. what more do they offer especially if I am using the same lenses)
Biggest change is sensor.

More resolution....enough such that some of the old Nikon lenses won't seem that sharp on the new bodies. Especially true if you have the old standbys like the 18-200. It takes a good lens to give all the detail that a 24MP sensor can provide

More dynamic range: you can pull more detail from light and dark areas.

Better low light. Probably around 1/3 stop. You can see about the same amount of noise at ISO2500 on the new body vs ISO1600 on the D90.

Of course, you'll get better video features and things like swivel LCD screens

It's not going to a earth shattering change in that your photos won't magically be amazing, but you should be able to notice the difference due to the sensor. If you crop or shoot in available light a lot, you'll be pleased.
Honey, I can't go to bed yet. Somebody is wrong on the Internet!
Deal Fanatic
Jan 27, 2006
6454 posts
1665 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
Since you are coming from a D90, I would seriously look at something like a D7x00 - either a used D7100/D7200 - which is a few generations newer than the D90 but includes many of the features that are the upper range of a DX style camera at a seriously reduced price these days. And of course, the image quality isn't that far off from the latest generation stuff either.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 9, 2011
1032 posts
201 upvotes
Toronto
upgraded my D90 to a D610, Low light performance is absolutely a big improvement. i had a 18-200, 24-70F2.8 and 35 F1.8 when i had the D90. I kept the 24-70 w/ the D610, and sold my other DX lens. like i said, it's a big improvement, i am not so happy using ISO 800 on D90, But on D610, i can go up to ISO2500 and I'm still happy w/ the image quality.

Still looking forward for a 70-200F2.8 and 35 F1.4 to add to my collection.
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
11013 posts
1711 upvotes
Toronto
D3200 / D3300 or D7100 are all good cheap upgrade options. D3200 is smaller and lighter and D7100 has the focus motor for old lenses like your old D90.

Upgrading to fullframe will mean most of your DX lenses will no longer work and the upgrade costs will be high.
Deal Fanatic
Jan 27, 2006
6454 posts
1665 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
yellowmp5 wrote:
Jul 18th, 2017 10:04 am
upgraded my D90 to a D610, Low light performance is absolutely a big improvement. i had a 18-200, 24-70F2.8 and 35 F1.8 when i had the D90. I kept the 24-70 w/ the D610, and sold my other DX lens. like i said, it's a big improvement, i am not so happy using ISO 800 on D90, But on D610, i can go up to ISO2500 and I'm still happy w/ the image quality.

Still looking forward for a 70-200F2.8 and 35 F1.4 to add to my collection.
I have a D600 and have been very happy with the performance but realistically, Full Frame is a different animal than what the OP is at right now and we don't know what their selection of lenses include (might be entirely DX).
Deal Guru
User avatar
Dec 23, 2003
11827 posts
825 upvotes
Toronto
Having been a D90 user, I would suggest you make a list of features you would like on your next camera and go from there. It is easy to suggest one model or the other but in the end, it comes down to what you would like.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 6, 2003
10593 posts
1679 upvotes
Ottawa
basically upgrading to ANY of the 24MP bodies will net the OP a noticeable step up. If you are comfortable with DX and already invested in DX lenses, you have to think carefully about why you actually NEED full frame. For some, a DX body like the D500 might be a better investment if you want to shoot action seriously.
Honey, I can't go to bed yet. Somebody is wrong on the Internet!
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
11013 posts
1711 upvotes
Toronto
ballashotcaller wrote:
Jul 17th, 2017 5:26 pm
Out of curiosity, how much better are the newer cameras compared to my D90 (ie. what more do they offer especially if I am using the same lenses)
In good light, you won't see much difference.

Once your lighting gets poor and you have to boost the ISO over 1600, you will see BIG differences in the new bodies. The newer cameras all have much better image sensors vs D90. 24 Megapixel will also give you much more room to crop vs. 12 MP on the D90. This matters if you're like me and you often don't compose properly from the get go.

I have a D3200 and D7100 and I have no problem pushing the ISO to 6400 if absolutely needed, although i try to keep it at 3200. These numbers are just not doable on a D90.
Deal Fanatic
Jan 27, 2006
6454 posts
1665 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
Kurtz7834 wrote:
Jul 19th, 2017 10:28 pm
In good light, you won't see much difference.

Once your lighting gets poor and you have to boost the ISO over 1600, you will see BIG differences in the new bodies. The newer cameras all have much better image sensors vs D90. 24 Megapixel will also give you much more room to crop vs. 12 MP on the D90. This matters if you're like me and you often don't compose properly from the get go.

I have a D3200 and D7100 and I have no problem pushing the ISO to 6400 if absolutely needed, although i try to keep it at 3200. These numbers are just not doable on a D90.
It's not just noise... Dynamic range has also improved over the years so that you can actually pull out better details in overblown/underexposed areas with a bit of post processing from a RAW image.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 6, 2003
10593 posts
1679 upvotes
Ottawa
You would gain at least one more stop of dynamic range in the sensor, a big improvement
Honey, I can't go to bed yet. Somebody is wrong on the Internet!
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
11013 posts
1711 upvotes
Toronto
craftsman wrote:
Jul 20th, 2017 12:13 am
It's not just noise... Dynamic range has also improved over the years so that you can actually pull out better details in overblown/underexposed areas with a bit of post processing from a RAW image.
True enough. I love the Nikon 24 MP sensor and the only caveat is that the RAW files are huge to store and you need a lot of processing power on your computer to work with them.
Sr. Member
User avatar
May 5, 2010
814 posts
214 upvotes
Kurtz7834 wrote:
Jul 22nd, 2017 8:50 pm
True enough. I love the Nikon 24 MP sensor and the only caveat is that the RAW files are huge to store and you need a lot of processing power on your computer to work with them.
You won't like Fuji's Raw files! My Nikon 24 MP Raw files are about 25-30 mb and my Fuji 16 MP Raw files are 30-35 mb...

Top