Reading mode: Light Dark

Used D90 vs used D5100 vs used D3300 - which is best among these as a first DSLR in 2016?

Go to last post
David Lal said:
Nevermess said:
David Lal said:
Nevermess said:
David Lal said:
... I bought D5100 as for me IQ is the main selling point. Sure for the OP priorities could be different, but now he/she has a two real life pictures to compare and take informed decision...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Both of those muddy images are just awful because there was not enough light. They would have been improved immensely with skilful use of a flashgun or two. They are not good examples, to my eye, and represent everything that is wrong with 'available light' and the concomitant emphasis on so-called high ISO performance. That needs to be said as well in the context of informed decision.
Click to expand...
Sure there is not enough light. But there is not enough light for both cameras right? So you can see how both cameras behave in similar conditions. Often you are not allowed to use flash. So the question is not whether or not flash or other source of light will improve certain picture (in day light where you can use base ISO even point and shoot cameras performs reasonably well) , but how two sensors performs in similar conditions. and those are real life conditions. Search the discussion it was quite long, but I have kept the pictures on my PC and was able to share them right away.
Click to expand...
You make a fair point, I suppose.

However, shooting when there is not enough light and one does not have or cannot use flash then I say that is not real life photography and not what one should base a camera choice upon (except for filling up the recycle bin) unless that kind of situation is what is going to form the majority of ones shooting scenarios. We all have different style of course - but I still think for a beginner the D90 represents an excellent, economic starting point.
Click to expand...
You are not allowed to use flash in, Churches (during weddings, kids christening etc.) , hospitals, theaters, circus, zoos, museums, some indoors sports, concerts. Sure you may not shoot in those "few" situations, but it is up to the OP to decide it right? So I just gave an example where for me the sensor output could be compared and depreciating this has no value at all...

Forgot to mention that the RAW files from the D90 sensors and Sony sensor that could be found in D7000/D5100 are different. I just like the RAW files of D7000/D5100 much more and if the OP is going to experiment in post processing as well, he/she will see noticeable difference.

N.B. I am not mentioning D3300 as I have no real live experience with it..
 
Last edited:
Nevermess said:
BirgerH said:
Shunda77 said:
BirgerH said:
Shunda77 said:
Kristada673 said:
...
Click to expand...
...
Click to expand...
Hi Shunda77.
...
BirgerH.
Click to expand...
The sensors in the D5100 and D3300 are SUBSTANTIALLY better than the D90, You can shoot the D5100 at Iso 3600 with the same noise as the D90 at about ISO 1000.
Click to expand...
That is simply not correct - and will not be, even you say it again.

Look at the link, I gave you - and look at the measurements. The differences in noise is "not noticeable".
Nevermess said:
Not to mention the substantially better video performance, flip out screen etc.

The guy is a BEGINNER, the D5100 is a much better entry model because its sensor behaves more like the latest models which the OP will no doubt upgrade to at some point. Shooting clean high ISO shots is a huge advantage, a much bigger advantage than a few extra buttons.

The D90 was a great camera in it's day, well now that day is very much in the past.
Click to expand...
Not to m - I still use it - and it is doing just fine :-)
Nevermess said:
I get a little tired of the poor advice offered to first DSLR owners by those on this forum with a nostalgic view of the past.
Click to expand...
Then again - you are not the only one to decide, which advices are poor or good - but you are the one to decide, if getting tired.

BirgerH.
Click to expand...
For you there may not be difference between D90 sensor and the sensor in D7000/D5100 but for others (myself included) there are.

45ade42ff9654a31a86dc4f6dac99a31.jpg

82069d95615848f999757bb6b6ba6ec9.jpg

Those files are downloaded from an old topic (4-5 years old) when we do compared the sensor quality of D7000 and D90. Can you see the difference? I can and for me that difference do mattered enough so long time ago I bought D5100 as for me IQ is the main selling point. Sure for the OP priorities could be different, but now he/she has a two real life pictures to compare and take informed decision...
Click to expand...
+1

Good post.

The pictures are the final proof! Not a chart. You can look at charts all day, but if you can see the difference in the photos, then . . . you can see the difference in the photos.

I had both the D90 and D5100 at the same time. I was able to see the difference as clear as day versus night.

I've used my D90 right beside my D5100 when shooting my daughter at gymnastics.

A classic scenario where the lighting is less than ideal and you are not allowed to use flash.

And to boot, I am shooting in JPG in order to maximize the buffer. So no ability to clean up noise from NEF files.

And in that situation, which has been probably 75% of my shooting over the last 4 years, the D5100 beat the D90 in IQ hands down.

Yes. Many may not find themselves shooting (or wanting to shoot) in that situation, but if I wanted to get shots of my daughter, that is what I had to shoot in.

And I would pick my D5100 (and then eventually my D7000) over my D90 hands down without a question.

Now I have a D750 which in this type of lighting is a clear (pun intended) step up in IQ.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)

--
My Personal Flickr Favs . . .
www.flickr.com

My Favs

Some of my personal favourites from over the years . . .
www.flickr.com www.flickr.com
.
 
David Lal said:
Nevermess said:
David Lal said:
Nevermess said:
David Lal said:
... I bought D5100 as for me IQ is the main selling point. Sure for the OP priorities could be different, but now he/she has a two real life pictures to compare and take informed decision...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Both of those muddy images are just awful because there was not enough light. They would have been improved immensely with skilful use of a flashgun or two. They are not good examples, to my eye, and represent everything that is wrong with 'available light' and the concomitant emphasis on so-called high ISO performance. That needs to be said as well in the context of informed decision.
Click to expand...
Sure there is not enough light. But there is not enough light for both cameras right? So you can see how both cameras behave in similar conditions. Often you are not allowed to use flash. So the question is not whether or not flash or other source of light will improve certain picture (in day light where you can use base ISO even point and shoot cameras performs reasonably well) , but how two sensors performs in similar conditions. and those are real life conditions. Search the discussion it was quite long, but I have kept the pictures on my PC and was able to share them right away.
Click to expand...
You make a fair point, I suppose.

However, shooting when there is not enough light and one does not have or cannot use flash then I say that is not real life photography and not what one should base a camera choice upon (except for filling up the recycle bin) unless that kind of situation is what is going to form the majority of ones shooting scenarios.
Click to expand...
I bought my Nikon D5100 to chase my daughter at her gymnastics competitions.

These competitions are held in poorly lit gyms and no flash is allowed because it is a danger to the athletes as it may temporarily blind them as they do a backward somersault on a beam trying to land on their hands . . . while the beam is only 4 inches wide.

And I have to shoot high iso (in that low light) in order to try to freeze the motion of the gymnasts as they fly through the air.

So, the better a camera can do high iso in low light, the more keepers I get.

This has ended up being what I have primarily shot over the past 4-5 years, so high iso / low light performance has been very important to me.

It may not be important to some, but it has been really important to me.
David Lal said:
We all have different style of course - but I still think for a beginner the D90 represents an excellent, economic starting point.
Click to expand...
Yes. It does IMHO.

But just because it does, doesn't mean that we should pretend that there isn't a difference in IQ (especially high iso / low light performance) between an older camera versus a newer camera.

I think it is ok for Nikon to keep improving the performance of their cameras as time goes on.

I do not expect them to stop improving their cameras just so that we can say a D90 is just as good as a D5100.

I would not expect to hold them to that.

If they want to keep improving the performance of their cameras, I am all for that.

It just means that when I finally wear out my D5100, the next Nikon camera I get, I'll simply be able to do that much more with it. :)

Although I kinda really took advantage of that and got a D750 which is very, very good at shooting in less than ideal light.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
 
Nung said:
Not true! Any form of museum, expo, church .... etc. wouldn't allow the use of flash gun. Hence, it's entirely possible to shoot in very dim light where iso3200 or even 6400 is used.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you have odd museums, expos and churches in your country. I have certainly used flash in all those situations in the UK, where I live, France, Netherlands, Germany and Sweden where I have lived and worked.

But that is besides the point - which you saliently have missed.

What I am saying is that if one has restrictions on that kind of photography in ones country and if that type of shooting represents a large proportion of the kind of photography that one does then yes, sure, acquire the kind of camera that handles those difficult scenarios well and that will probably not be a D90.

However, if one is a more general kind of photographer - children, animals, scenery, social occasions then a D90 is a very fine box for hardly any money.

Here, for instance is one from the Louvre, Paris - bit grubby, I admit, I only had a point and shoot with me - but with flash. Pas de problème, comme on dit à La France.

Venus de Milo, Louvre museum, Paris. Panasonic Lumix

Venus de Milo, Louvre museum, Paris. Panasonic Lumix

So, it is your statement that is not true.

QED
 
Last edited:
I am not sure you realize that the op went with a D70 and also took a set of shots with a D5200 so not really sure this D90 critique is on topic at this point. Different strokes.
 
Brev00 said:
I am not sure you realize that the op went with a D70 and also took a set of shots with a D5200 so not really sure this D90 critique is on topic at this point. Different strokes.
Click to expand...
 
Nevermess said:
David Lal said:
Nevermess said:
Nevermess said:
... I bought D5100 as for me IQ is the main selling point. Sure for the OP priorities could be different, but now he/she has a two real life pictures to compare and take informed decision...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Both of those muddy images are just awful because there was not enough light. They would have been improved immensely with skilful use of a flashgun or two. They are not good examples, to my eye, and represent everything that is wrong with 'available light' and the concomitant emphasis on so-called high ISO performance. That needs to be said as well in the context of informed decision.
Click to expand...
Sure there is not enough light. But there is not enough light for both cameras right? So you can see how both cameras behave in similar conditions. Often you are not allowed to use flash. So the question is not whether or not flash or other source of light will improve certain picture (in day light where you can use base ISO even point and shoot cameras performs reasonably well) , but how two sensors performs in similar conditions. and those are real life conditions. Search the discussion it was quite long, but I have kept the pictures on my PC and was able to share them right away.
Click to expand...
Simply not.

A photographer does not use High ISO's to make underexposed images - he/she uses the high ISO's to get well exposed images - that could be why, you don't like the DxOMarks measurements - they are using correct exposure for their tests.

I didn't say, there wasn't differences - I said they were not that big, that they were noticeable - but of course - if you want to destroy an image, it might be a little easier to do it with the image from a D90.

Speaking about one or two stops of difference is simply nonsense.

By the way - you should give the D90 a sensor clean.

BirgerH.
 
The D90 photo hasn't had distortion correction applied which is a large part of why it looks worse
 
Kristada673 said:
Kristada673 said:
Kristada673 wrote: I am in no way claiming that I was able to test the cameras out to their full potential, the results persuaded me to buy the D70 for $45.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
We've had all this opinionated nonsense about 'nostalgia' and the merits of the sensors in cameras post D90 and you go and buy a D70! Well, good for you. You can hardly go wrong for $45.

I bought my D70 in 2004 and used it pretty much continuously until a couple of years ago when I bought a D300 but I still use it sometimes. It has one really special thing that none, not one, of the more modern bodies has - and that is proper flash x-sync all the way up to 1/8000s with a non-dedicated flashgun or 1/500s with a dedicated SB series.

This is really, really useful. The so-called 'FP mode' on newer cameras is a kludge which cannot be used to freeze motion (e.g. a flying bird's wing). None of the more modern cameras can match it. Enjoy your new acquisition - and I liked the pictures you showed.

David
 
BirgerH said:
Nevermess said:
David Lal said:
Nevermess said:
BirgerH said:
... I bought D5100 as for me IQ is the main selling point. Sure for the OP priorities could be different, but now he/she has a two real life pictures to compare and take informed decision...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Both of those muddy images are just awful because there was not enough light. They would have been improved immensely with skilful use of a flashgun or two. They are not good examples, to my eye, and represent everything that is wrong with 'available light' and the concomitant emphasis on so-called high ISO performance. That needs to be said as well in the context of informed decision.
Click to expand...
Sure there is not enough light. But there is not enough light for both cameras right? So you can see how both cameras behave in similar conditions. Often you are not allowed to use flash. So the question is not whether or not flash or other source of light will improve certain picture (in day light where you can use base ISO even point and shoot cameras performs reasonably well) , but how two sensors performs in similar conditions. and those are real life conditions. Search the discussion it was quite long, but I have kept the pictures on my PC and was able to share them right away.
Click to expand...
Simply not.

A photographer does not use High ISO's to make underexposed images - he/she uses the high ISO's to get well exposed images - that could be why, you don't like the DxOMarks measurements - they are using correct exposure for their tests.

I didn't say, there wasn't differences - I said they were not that big, that they were noticeable - but of course - if you want to destroy an image, it might be a little easier to do it with the image from a D90.

Speaking about one or two stops of difference is simply nonsense.

By the way - you should give the D90 a sensor clean.

BirgerH.
Click to expand...
Thank you, I find these enthralling discussions by such ignoble photographers to be most enlightening.
 
Kristada673 said:
For roughly the same price now (around US$ 200), which one would you advice a beginner to get in 2016? I don't do videos, and I plan to shoot RAW to learn post processing as well. I intend to shoot landscape and portrait mostly, for now, and maybe later on invest money in a good macro lens. Right now, I have procured 2 lenses, both used, a 50 mm f/1.8D (autofous not too important) and a Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 (no optical stabilization), which together cost about US$ 170. I plan on getting a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 soon, again used for about US$ 200. So, I can foresee spending $600 already for the bare essentials, and would like to experiment with only these and learn the basics for about a year, and then spend more money if required on gear, as I can't afford to spend more money right now since I'm on a tight budget.
Click to expand...
My two cents: Get the D90. It's a classic. It has a better viewfinder (pentaprism instead of pentamirror), it has two command wheels, it will autofocus with your 50mm (which you said wasn't important to you, but still), it will have fewer of the annoying "training wheel" elements that the D3300 and D5100 would bring, and there are good reasons why the D90 sold so very well. (See the graph of D70 through D7100 sales at http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/other-reasons-i-thought-a.html )

The D90 does have only ("only") 12MP, but more than that falls into the category of "nice to have" rather than "absolutely critical" - especially with a DX sensor.
 
Agree with most of that.
I've noticed a lot of what I'd call ideology in the recommendations here. It's revealed in the claims that factor X SHOULD be more important than factor Y. For example, some are claiming that a second control wheel is essential while more resolution and better ISO performance isn't. That's absolute unmitigated nonsense. Priorities are very personal. You cannot guarantee that someone will later want (much less need) a focus motor vs an articulating LCD. For one photographer, the former may be essential, for another, the latter.


If you want to use older lenses and need a focus motor, then yes, the D90 is your only choice here, but no one should be fooled into thinking they need 2 control dials or that much more time will be spent menu diving with the 5100 or 3300.


The kind of photos you get, with more resolution, and better ISO performance, + the advantage of a smaller/lighter body or possibly an articulating LCD is a lot to give up just to get an extra button and dial.

Shunda77 said:
It is the most "major" issue in this instance.

Photography is about photographs, the D5100 and D3300 take better photographs than the D90.

If only ever shooting at IS0100, then that would be correct.

I'm guessing that you aren't a beginner. If you took those images on a D5100, they would be even better.

Who said they are of little value? it's a nice feature, but simply not a necessary one to develop good photography skills.

I wear glasses and seem to manage fine, "diving through menus" consists of pushing one button and using the the up and down arrows. Hardly the taxing experience so often described here and it takes a couple of seconds.

Gear nostalgia has it's place I guess, but it has absolutely no value to an individual wanting good advice on their first DSLR.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
notpc said:
Agree with most of that.
I've noticed a lot of what I'd call ideology in the recommendations here. It's revealed in the claims that factor X SHOULD be more important than factor Y. For example, some are claiming that a second control wheel is essential while more resolution and better ISO performance isn't. That's absolute unmitigated nonsense. Priorities are very personal. You cannot guarantee that someone will later want (much less need) a focus motor vs an articulating LCD. For one photographer, the former may be essential, for another, the latter.

If you want to use older lenses and need a focus motor, then yes, the D90 is your only choice here, but no one should be fooled into thinking they need 2 control dials or that much more time will be spent menu diving with the 5100 or 3300.

The kind of photos you get, with more resolution, and better ISO performance, + the advantage of a smaller/lighter body or possibly an articulating LCD is a lot to give up just to get an extra button and dial.
Click to expand...
Seems like ideology of a different sort. Curiously enough, the op seems to value the two control dials, so much so he has acquired a D70. So, clearly not nonsense, mitigated or otherwise. I must have misread most of the posts because I felt most folks were sharing their opinions and not declaring preference as fact. Not much is essential. But, if one likes two control dials and more external buttons, there is nothing wrong with saying so. The two control dials and buttons are facts so information for the op. More resolution is also a fact as is a certain amount of high iso improvement. The D5100's iso performance is not equivalent to a D610, however. So, the balance sheet is in the op's hands.
 
David Lal said:
Nung said:
Not true! Any form of museum, expo, church .... etc. wouldn't allow the use of flash gun. Hence, it's entirely possible to shoot in very dim light where iso3200 or even 6400 is used.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you have odd museums, expos and churches in your country. I have certainly used flash in all those situations in the UK, where I live, France, Netherlands, Germany and Sweden where I have lived and worked.

But that is besides the point - which you saliently have missed.

What I am saying is that if one has restrictions on that kind of photography in ones country and if that type of shooting represents a large proportion of the kind of photography that one does then yes, sure, acquire the kind of camera that handles those difficult scenarios well and that will probably not be a D90.

However, if one is a more general kind of photographer - children, animals, scenery, social occasions then a D90 is a very fine box for hardly any money.

Here, for instance is one from the Louvre, Paris - bit grubby, I admit, I only had a point and shoot with me - but with flash. Pas de problème, comme on dit à La France.

Venus de Milo, Louvre museum, Paris. Panasonic Lumix

Venus de Milo, Louvre museum, Paris. Panasonic Lumix

So, it is your statement that is not true.

QED
Click to expand...
OK, so maybe it's some strange museum or art gallery that I've been in that flash isn't allow. Or maybe I don't want to be rude and blinding everyone around me. The fact still remains, high iso is very useful in many situations and shooting above iso1600 or iso3200 is not as rare as you made out.

The D90 was and still is a brilliant camera, which I recommond the op to choose out of the 3, right from the start. But one thing has nothing to do with the other, the fact still remains, D3300 has better high iso performance then the D90, and the D90 is an all around better camera. So who's missing the point?
 
David Lal said:
Kristada673 said:
David Lal said:
Kristada673 wrote: I am in no way claiming that I was able to test the cameras out to their full potential, the results persuaded me to buy the D70 for $45.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
We've had all this opinionated nonsense about 'nostalgia' and the merits of the sensors in cameras post D90 and you go and buy a D70! Well, good for you. You can hardly go wrong for $45.
Click to expand...
Haha! Well, I only bought it as it was $45. So I figured, "what the hell, I might as well try it out." And also because without zooming in, I couldn't tell the difference between the shots of the 2 cameras.

But I assure you, I have enjoyed reading all the posts in this thread. The academic discussions and the collective experiences shared here are invaluable to me. As they say, you don't have enough time in your life to make all the mistakes, so you might as well learn from those of others. :-)
 
Last edited:
There is a flag at the top of the page for notifications. You can choose to get email notifications when you first start a thread. I know of no way to tag or follow people but I have been able to stay in touch with what certain folks are doing pretty easily. The PM function helps. If you want to ask someone a specific question that does not feel right in a post, send them a pm. Also, lots of folks use flickr so you can make them a contact on that website or, also, on Facebook.
 
I never said all were doing that, but I did read the whole thread and there was quite a bit of it. And yes, declaring that a second control wheel is essential while claiming that more resolution and better ISO performance isn't, is indeed absolute nonsense. It's like saying a quiet shutter is important but a telephoto zoom isn't. You can't determine that for others. It depends on what the person holding the camera needs and values.

And around here there's a very prevalent perspective where newcomers are typically advised to skimp on the sensor while investing in the buttons. That's a simplification of course, but it does represent an ideology - one that states X is more important than Y. I think it generally comes from those who see photography more in theoretical terms where every little thing they've learned to do must be valuable to others. In practical terms, it almost never is. Most people don't buy cameras to maximize all the variables of what they MIGHT do. They're simply trying to get the photographs they want - and that can almost always be accomplished very well without a "pro" feature set.


Want to change the shutter OR aperture with the control dial? Press the exposure comp button while you're turning it. To do so, you use the SAME finger you'd have on the front dial. If you get used to that, it would feel awkward switching to a front dial - and vice versa. So much of that is overblown, while valuable assets like articulating LCD, resolution, clean ISO and dynamic range are minimized. Around here that HAS become an ideology. It is NOT right for everyone and does a disservice for those with different priorities.

Brev00 said:
Seems like ideology of a different sort. Curiously enough, the op seems to value the two control dials, so much so he has acquired a D70. So, clearly not nonsense, mitigated or otherwise. I must have misread most of the posts because I felt most folks were sharing their opinions and not declaring preference as fact. Not much is essential. But, if one likes two control dials and more external buttons, there is nothing wrong with saying so. The two control dials and buttons are facts so information for the op. More resolution is also a fact as is a certain amount of high iso improvement. The D5100's iso performance is not equivalent to a D610, however. So, the balance sheet is in the op's hands.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top