Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Hello all,
I've been considering trading in my D90 for the next step up but I'm unsure if its worth it, or what exactly the next step up would be.
Any advice? Whats your opinion on whether the body or lens matters more in image improvement? At what point is an awesome lens held back by the body?

Looking to improve image quality and versatility.

Any advice is appreciated.

What type of photography are you looking to shoot? What lenses do you shoot with now? What don't you like about your current set up?

a mixture. indoor, outdoor, low light, portraits... Currently I have a 50mm 1.8 and a 18-105mm 3.5. I just feel like the image quality is lacking what I see in others. Who knows, maybe its even post processing but I don't think so.
The difference between this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/72599083@N ... otostream/ (mine)
and this http://www.flickr.com/photos/skarpi/4656289904/

Of course I realize there are obvious differences...one is Toronto Island and one is Reynisdrangar... The lighting is different, etc but there is an obvious difference in detail and quality.

I doubt you can get that effect shooting at f4 and 1/20th @ ISO 400. If it was shot at ISO 100, f11 and 2 seconds (2 extra stops to go from ISO400 to ISO100) you'd be moving in the right direction although your exposure is off a bit....f11 being the sweet spot of your lens, ISO 100 has less grain, and 2 seconds would have achieved more water and cloud blur. He is probably shooting between 5-30 seconds...

My 2 cents is you need a 8x ND filter first...or 2 of them.

I hate to seem mean, but chances are it is not the camera. The D90 takes excellent images. Your current weak point, gear wise is your lens. The 50 1.8 is a great lens, but the 18-105 is average. But even using a pro lens will only help so much, it really comes down to the person behind the camera.

It is really hard to compare the phtos for image quality, as I am not sure how you are defining image quality. It's really hard to compare two web sized images against each other in regards to actual image quality, affected by the camera and lens used, and also the shooting technique. I am guessing you are more referring to the feel of the image.

To me your image lacks any emotion, I feel no connection to it as opposed to the other image you are comparing it too. And I will also say post processing has an affect, especially if you do not process it correctly for web viewing. I think you need to work on your actual skills as opposed to changing your camera. As stated above you may need to change how you set your camera. In this situation you would need a long exposure and use a tripod and if necessary a ND filter.

But with that said, if you truly feel your camera is defective in some way giving you bad image quality, I would ask a friend with a different camera to shoot the same scene as you at the same time so you can actually compare the image quality. This will help you see if your camera or lens is causing the issue.

Cheers,
Jordan

I'd add a flash.. I got one today and shot my easter family party. Really amazed at how the pictures turned out - no more blurs!
That's for indoor shots, btw.

I would echo @jordanfaust's advice and go back to work on your technique before considering spending any more money. I would not recommend a flash as a solution as it will do you no good given the examples you provided, and also requires quite a new skill-set to master -- get your basics down first.

However, to answer the question on what your next upgrade path is, try this:
http://www.bythom.com/upgradepath.htm

It doesn't have the D4/D800 yet, but the wisdom is still sound.

+1

i agree with jordan
and also would like to add that with what you have investing in better glass is a better option

i recently went thru the same problem as i had a D90 and upgraded to the d300
and to be honest there really wasn't much of difference
then i realized i needed a better upgrade and that upgrade was practice practice and practice
thats when i saw a huge difference
i have a couple of friends who are more advanced than me in skill level
so when i take a new set of photos i post them in flickr and my friends critique them for me
and give me pointers from
angle of shots
compostion
camera settings
choice of lenses
post processing
cropping
etc

just my 2 cents worth wait no that's my ten cents worth lol

I shot a D90 for a long time and I only upgraded once I had pushed the camera and its lenses as far as I could. My D90 images were just as sharp and looked just as good as my current full frame setup. The only difference was that I am able to get images just as sharp, at lower aperatures and at higher ISO's.

With my D90, I always had it stuck at ISO100-200 and had to shoot my 2.8 lenses at 5.6-8 and my 3.5-5.6 lenses at F8-11. As long as I stayed within those guidelines, the images were always really sharp. If you are shooting landscapes, like the ones above, then you'd be on a tripod so you could always use those settings and slow down the shutter depending on conditions. And yes, for the shot above and below, you will probably need a neutral density filter as mentioned above.

My first suggestion would be to join flickr groups for your respective camera and lenses. I looked in the "Nikon D90" Users group on Flickr and went through a few images. Here is a prime example of a great image with the D90.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54640351@N ... 67288@N20/

Based on your current set up, the only thing I could suggest is maybe getting a decent wide/mid lens. I would suggest a 17-50 2.8 Tamron or a 17-55 2.8 Nikon (if it's in your budget).

Besides better getting to know the use of your current equipment, consider it this way, If you buy a newer body you should also purchase a better lens or 2 (one wider for landscape and one for portraits) So why not buy the lenses first and see if you need a new body.

I agree with what others are saying .... upgrading your lenses would be a step in the right direction, and you could continue to shoot with the D90 for sometime to come.

I upgraded from a D90 to a D7000 as my backup body. The D7000 is an excellent upgrade from the D90. But I have to say that the D90 is no slouch by any means. The only improvements you will get over the D90 are in ISO performance and resolution, and the grip for the D7000 is a much better build than the D80/90 grip is. But saying that, I produced some awesome images with the D90, and my only reason for upgrading was to get higher resolution, there wasn't anything I couldn't do on the D90 that made the D7000 that much better.


David

D90 is a legend

I am reminded of my buddy Tyler who shot this with his D70 at the time. The D90 is fantastic camera and even better than the D70 so I don't think the limitation is there.

I still have a 6 Megapixel D70s and I think its a great camera. I only upgraded to a full frame recently because I like to make large prints - larger than 20x30. Otherwise I would stick with my D70s.

Some of my favorite photos of mine are from my D70.
Hang onto the body as long as you can and upgrade your glass with the future in mind.
Buy for what you want to do. Your lenses will outlive your body by miles, ask lxdesign!
Work on technique, work on the fundamentals, get a good tri-pod (or just me, that's my next upgrade) and shoot, shoot, shoot!

I won awards with my D70s... nothing wrong with the lower res camera's. Heck, I won awards with my D100 images. And hey.... lets talk about the D2H - only 4 megapixels, and that camera kicked butt both in the field and for post processing. I printed a D2h image at 4' wide x 2' high cropped.

I still have mt D70 has my backup body when I do lengthy photo trips (you never know what can happen!). But I would like to convert it to infrared one day.

J.

I haven't won any awards with my D90.
Maybe I should get a D800E...

I've won some awards with my D70s. But now that I have a full frame ... with some things you just can't go back.

I hear you..... When I got the D700, I remember saying.... "how did I ever shoot with those camera's before this, as this camera is simply amazing"