Nikon D90

[Neil Rigby]

Nikon D90
The Nikon D90 is a digital single-lens reflex camera model brought out by Nikon in 2008. It is a "prosumer" model (cross between professional and consumer) and is a replacement for the Nikon D80. The D90 comes as body only or with a Nikkor AF-S DX 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR

Some of the improvements the D90 offers over the D80 include 12.3 megapixel resolution and live view capability. The D90 is also notable for being the first DSLR to offer video recording, with the ability to record HD 720p videos, with mono sound, at 24 frames per second. The Nikon D90 records up to 5 minutes of video or 20 minutes for lower resolutions.

Have you any experience with the Nikon D90?

[Maggie28]

Having just bought this camer as you know with AFS Nikkor VR 70-300mm ED 1:4.5-5.6 G

A, AF-S Nikkor VR 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 G DX

A, AF-S Nikkor VR 18-105mm, 1:3.5-6 G DX

Forgot, Tamron AF 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 (IF) Macro 62 A14 (Tamron for Nikkor AF)


Now the ED 70-300mm version was the one I got when buying the bundle, (tried to fob me off with a Tamron origionally which I allready have)

Question 1: Why is it a ED and not DX Like the other ones? Was I given the wrong version with the ED?

Question 2: Trying to buy longer lenses but can no way afford the Nikkor range but also finding that I can''t use convertors with the D90 as it needs to be an F2.8 at least.
What can I use with the D90 to get that extra mm's. I wanted a 170-500mm or 150-500mm but sadly, these are not compatible. Or up to 400mm with a convertor.
Not looking for absolute pin sharp pictures. I understand that is not acheivable with this camera unless I'm only about 10 foot from the subject.
So, without having to pay a fortune, what convertors can I use that are compatible with these lenses and/or camera?
I prefer auto focus as my eyes are pretty bad. But not that important. I could get by, just.

I was also planning on getting the D7000 but not sure if I can't get the lenses or convertors to work like I'm finding out with
the D90.

Maybe I can take the bundle back and just get A D3000 or higher. Can I return the whole bundle and get the Nikon camera which has lenses that are compatible with convertors and so on?


Appreciate any sound advice apart from buy the Nikkor range.

[PeterB]

If you are not a Ken Rockwell fan, you should be, here is his guide for the D90.

Nikon D90 User's Guide

As for the DX/ED issue, they are completely different things.

DX is the frame size or the size of the sensor. See Nikkor Lens DX Technology

ED is to do with the quality of the glass, it stands for Extra-low Dispersion. see Nikkor Lens ED Technology

What it means is that the lens is a full frame lens and on your DX camera it will perform more like a 105 - 450 mm lens. Here is Kens review - good marks.

Nikon 70-300mm VR

[Maggie28]

Thanks for that link. I had come accross him before but never saved in favourites and forgot all about it.

Allready picked up a few little tit bits

Strange to think he seems RAW images are basically a waste of time. I always shot jpg but always told to shoot RAW. ONly started doing it recently which means learning the raw format editing in PS. I never stop learning these days LOL

I got hold of my pro retired photographer friend and he explained the lens part to me. I was wanting a lens with a convertor but the convertor would not work and when I asked about actual Nikkor lenses, he explained about the F2.8 differing from F4.5 so the lens I was wanting would not work with the D90.
But he said I could use the Sigma Lenses (150-500mm +) and a TC 1x4 convertor. The convertors just don't work with my Nikon VR lenses. I have a Tamron 70-300mm but will not work with a convertor either.
Should have bought a Sigma LOL
I had one from Jesops I bought aabout 4 months ago, and he's right. Would not focus well at all.

Finally got my head round the reasons why this wont work with that and so on.
I thought the DX was different from ED's. Sorted now.

Bedtime now. I'll give that site a good browse tomorrow, if the weather is rotten that is, otherwise I'll be out and about.

Thanks again for your help Peter. Really appreciated, and for the link.

[MIKE THROWER]

ALL PRO'S shoot raw. my clients will not take anything else.

http://www.birdinglothian.co.uk/

[PeterB]

I know what you are saying and I take RAW+JPG but the thing is we are not all pros and for what we do a fine quality JPG is good enough and easier to edit quickly to post somewhere like here. After all we are displaying these things on relatively cheap, un-claibrated monitors and posting them on websites in jpg anyway.

[Maggie28]

Originally Posted by PeterB

I know what you are saying and I take RAW+JPG but the thing is we are not all pros and for what we do a fine quality JPG is good enough and easier to edit quickly to post somewhere like here. After all we are displaying these things on relatively cheap, un-claibrated monitors and posting them on websites in jpg anyway.

Agreed Peter. If you're not planning on selling them, then why bother with Raw? Besides, they take ages to load on my PC.

A 100 pics, roughly 25 minutes to transfer.

[The Actor]

I've recently started shooting in RAW full time. It does take a bit, hell a lot, longer to download the images and it does take an extra step or two in the workflow but the benefits are often worth the effort. The time spent on the learning curve isn't time wasted. I'm still learning though.

As someone that is striving to be a better photographer it makes more sense to me. I know that for web based albums a little jpeg will do, and I know that on my cheap(ish), non-calibrated monitor I'm not going to see everything but if looks OK then it will be OK. IYKWIM.

Mike Thrower has some excellent images on here. Can you imagine how they must look on his monitor or printed up as an 8x10 or larger ? What about the gannet and mink photo ? I would be surprised if that was originally a jpg all though with some of todays cameras who knows.

Anyhow, we all make our own choices. It would be boring if we didn't but remember you can't convert jpgs to RAW.

I hope I don't come over as preaching here.

[Maggie28]

I enjoyed shooting in RAW and tweeking in PS but as I'm not getting paid and never will due to the simple fact, I don't have the type of camera and lens that business people tend to want to you use as they want to know they are getting their monies worth as well.

Understandable why they want all the info and RAW profiles as a lot of photographers do charge a helluva lot of money, and some have forged pics in the past so they have to be careful now.
Even sending pics into a magazine just for a comp that only may give you a day out at a spa or some digi camera, they even want the best of the best before even looking at your picture. Then there's all the contact sheets, naming everything along with Latin names if the case may be and aload of other stuff.

Today I started out with RAW but then went back to JPG and shooting in smaller size. Just to save time loading them onto PC. But I also wanted to try and take pics without having to "tweek" them later on which saves a lot of time too.

I shoot for my time and money, no one else's, so no need to waste time on things when I don't need to.

If I was making a living out of it, then of course it would be a different ball game all together for me.

It's too late in life for me to start up courses and get a loan to buy the equipment I would need to get the pics that the likes of Mike takes. And I ain't going to crawl on my belly at my age to get certain shots. I wouldn't get back up again these days.
Once you are established and got your clients, That's fine.
I know a pro who does shoot RAW but he will shoot a lot of his pictures of wildlife in the "P" programme and is doing nicely in his retirement now.

Personally, I will just plod along with what I have and just enjoy the hobby and enjoy the pics that Mike and Clydebirder post along with others that are just awesome!

I'll always want to take the perfect picture mind you.

[alfie_s]

I bought a D90 a couple of months ago upgrading from the D80 my longest lens is a sigma 80-400 OS its tricky to keep focussed on birds in flight but with practice in the hide Im improving using manual settings & more recently a monopod