Anyone upgrading to a D7000?
- Thread starter gabepari
- Start date
loren85022
Explorer
I'm sitting on my d300, waiting for the d700's predecessor. My 18-200mm is the lens that lives on the camera. Its usually the only lens I travel with. I own better glass but they're too heavy, too large for casual, comfortable travel, walking, etc. I do enjoy having an 12-24 mm on trips as often I'm search for perspective when I am doing my travel thing. And when I know a trip will include some urban time for spouse to shop, I take a 50mm 1.4 for my rendition of street photography. I do wish at times I also had a d90 for travel. Nice size and weight.
RusherRacing
Adventurer
I had an accident with my D90 that ended in me being dripping wet from head to toe and was pouring water out of my D90 and my Tamron 18-200 lens.. (glad I had insurance!!) But I ended up spending a little more and upgrading to the D7000 with an 18-200 Nikon VR II..
As for the camera well its nice but the lens is so much better than the Tamron.
Personally I wouldn't feel the need to spend the $600 or so to upgrade the body. But I do love my 18-200... My nifty 50 which used to be on my D90 90% of the time is now in bag duty as the 18-200 takes sharp enough pictures for me. (the tamron just didn't cut it photo quality wise)
As for the camera well its nice but the lens is so much better than the Tamron.
Personally I wouldn't feel the need to spend the $600 or so to upgrade the body. But I do love my 18-200... My nifty 50 which used to be on my D90 90% of the time is now in bag duty as the 18-200 takes sharp enough pictures for me. (the tamron just didn't cut it photo quality wise)
Last edited:
jnelson4x4taco
Adventurer
I agree with others as far as the versatility of the 18-200. I recently bought the VRII model and love it. As others have said, it lives on the camera 90% of the time and I rarely even bring out the 70-300 for the extra 100mm.
The back LCD on my D40 is on the fritz and often gets stuck just displaying the negative colors so im contemplating possibly getting a D90 or D7000. Im curious as what others will say about their comparison.
As far as glass goes, you cant go wrong with the Nikon 18-200, its a great lens and very versatile, I love it for traveling. Whether you need to be on the wide end to take in the landscape or on the tele end to shoot wildlife, this lens will do it. VR and AF are great as well, i strongly urge you to go for the Nikon model and not the Sigma, Tamron, etc. The 50mm is fun too. The 1.4 takes some beautiful shots but the 1.8 is a lot of fun too and very affordable.
The back LCD on my D40 is on the fritz and often gets stuck just displaying the negative colors so im contemplating possibly getting a D90 or D7000. Im curious as what others will say about their comparison.
As far as glass goes, you cant go wrong with the Nikon 18-200, its a great lens and very versatile, I love it for traveling. Whether you need to be on the wide end to take in the landscape or on the tele end to shoot wildlife, this lens will do it. VR and AF are great as well, i strongly urge you to go for the Nikon model and not the Sigma, Tamron, etc. The 50mm is fun too. The 1.4 takes some beautiful shots but the 1.8 is a lot of fun too and very affordable.
GTABurnout
Explorer
I also run a D7000, mos the time I use the 18-200 but I do like the sharpness of my 50 1.8.
RusherRacing
Adventurer
Well if I was getting a new camera I wouldn't get the D90. I would upgrade to the D7000. The sealed body is enough of advantage for me to want it.
I was out in down pour at a race a couple weeks ago. Captured some awesome photos I would have probably shyed away from with the D90. I still used an OpTech Rainsleeve but when its coming down that hard things were still getting wet.
But besides that the rest of the features "bells and whistles" I don't seem to use. That said if I had a D90 I wouldn't upgrade to the D7000 I would probably wait for the D300 replacement or the next generation of the D7000 line.
I should state i am not a pixel counter, nor am I worried about having the utmost perfect quality photo, good quality, with proper focus is normally good enough for me. I care more about capturing moment in my life, or some crazy artistic look at nature.
I was out in down pour at a race a couple weeks ago. Captured some awesome photos I would have probably shyed away from with the D90. I still used an OpTech Rainsleeve but when its coming down that hard things were still getting wet.
But besides that the rest of the features "bells and whistles" I don't seem to use. That said if I had a D90 I wouldn't upgrade to the D7000 I would probably wait for the D300 replacement or the next generation of the D7000 line.
I should state i am not a pixel counter, nor am I worried about having the utmost perfect quality photo, good quality, with proper focus is normally good enough for me. I care more about capturing moment in my life, or some crazy artistic look at nature.
redthies
Renaissance Redneck
Some a$$hats in Portland broke into our Rubicon 6 weeks ago and stole all my digi gear. (It was well hidden, and THREE dogs in Jeep...) Thankfully all my good (heavy) 2.8 ED glass was at home with the vintage F4S. I need something for our trip to Socal and Yosemite etc in 10 days so I just bought a mint D200 with MBD200 for $500. I know it is "old" technology, but money is better spent on lenses than fancy bodies. The guy I bought it from DID upgrade to a D7000 however...
Similar threads
