# Nikon D5100 vs D90



## Lee_Maryland

After trying Canon 60D, 7D, T3i, Nikon D7000, D90, and D5100. I am coming down between Nikon D5100, or D90. 

Which camera would you guys recommend? I want to shoot baby, and wedding if it is all possible. The price for D7000 is a bit out of my reach at the moment, and D90 is just right. But Nikon has recently released D5100, and it has a newer sensor but it doesn't have the in camera focus motor. What is a focus motor? It allows you autofocus? Since all the new DX lenses have motors built in, would it matter if D5100 has it or not? Your input will be greatly valued, and I am making a purchase in the next 1-2 week.


----------



## OrionsByte

As long as you bought lenses that had AF built in, you wouldn't need the body to have an AF motor.  A camera that _does_ have one would be able to use older lenses that you can often pick up on the cheap.

I haven't read much about the D5100 but one thing you might consider is that when you buy a flash, the D90 will let you use it off-camera without any additional equipment (as long as the flash supports Nikon's CLS system) because its pop-up flash can be used as a flash commander.  The D5100 can't do that.


----------



## Lee_Maryland

So it's like a wireless flash system? Care to explain it more?


----------



## orb9220

Yep had a entry cam like the D5100 a D40 and within 6-9 months became frustrated.

1) Lack of built in motor for those great AF and AF-D lenses gives me more options with the D90. Saves me cash buying used and more lenses than just AF-S
2) Lack of dedicated controls. Have to stop and menu dig and missing shots. Now can change a crucial setting without my eye leaving the viewfinder.
3) CLS - Since the D90 has commander mode can control flash like the SB-600 wireless for off camera shots.
4) Grips - Can get a real dedicated battery grip and not the 3rd party IR kind which are not as capable.
5) Don't care for the video feature so not consideration for me.
6) Bigger & Brighter viewfinder makes for easier composition and seeing.

For me the Sensor is only a part of the equation. And use and ease in getting the shot are just as important. And the more capable D90 gives me options that the entry level cams don't. More controls so I can concentrate on getting the shot. And no cumbersome for me menu digging and missing shots like I use too.

Update on flash: Any camera that has Flash commander mode then you can use the popup flash to control the firing and adjustments of other flashes not mounted on the camera.
.


----------



## KmH

Lee_Maryland said:


> I want to shoot baby, and wedding if it is all possible..


No doubt, the D90.

There are some really nice, mid-range priced older design pro lenses that can be used for babies and weddings that don't have a focus motor in the lens that the D90 can, but the D5100 cannot, auto focus. Lens like the AF 50 mm f/1.8D (baby), AF 24-85 mm f/2.8-4 D (weddings), AF 80-200 mm f/2.8D (wedding formal shots)($650 (push-pull) to $800 (2-ring) used.)

I have an AF 24-85 mm f.2.8-4D If for sale for only $459 (see my siggy). The 24-85mm also has a 1:2 macro feature that is great for shooting closeups of wedding rings.

The current Pro wedding AF-S 24-70 mm f/2.8G is a $1900 lens: Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens 

and the Pro wedding 70-200 mm f/2.8 is $2400: Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Cameras


----------



## mrpink

The 17-55 2.8 ED is a great lens for newborn and toddler photography, I have used it for a little over a year now and have been really pleased with the results.

I just came into a 80-200 2.8 AF-D (two ring) and love that lens as well.  Both together would make a nice setup for small weddings and portrait shoots.





p!nK


----------



## Lee_Maryland

Thanks guys. Looks like I'm going with the d90. You guys think it's better just to get the kit lens, or buy the body then go with a 50mm?


----------



## orb9220

I always recommend the kit lens. As it will take some shooting through out the range to see where your needs and preferred range is.  And the 50mm can be added cheaply latter. Even tho everyone should have a prime or two in their kit at some point.
.


----------



## flatflip

I know it's been said but I have found it very important personally; D90 = More dedicated controls, Flash Commander & Focus Motor. Using the $125 50mm f/1.8 lens alone is worth the focus motor.

I agree with orb about the kit lens. That's good advice.


----------



## KmH

OP. What would you use the 50 mm for?


----------



## webada

AF lense should not be an issue anymore with non motor body:    35mm AF-S 1.8 is available (and will be like ~50mm on a DX body)  and 50mm AF-S 1.8 will be available in June.  

Here is a different prespective to think about and ask yourself:

Will I be playing with manual control alot?  making immediate changes shots after shots?   D5100 can also make most of the changes except its embedded in the menu vs direct dial.

If you are just starting out in Nikon DSLR, there shouldn't be a consideration for none motor'ed lenses.   The future is SWM for all lenses.   This should not be the deciding factor if you are not already invested in Nikon AF lenses.
Besides, its not like AF lens won't work on D5100.  It just won't autofocus and again, if you are serious into manual controls, you probably will like to learn how to manual focus and may enjoy it too.

Larger sensor (someone already mentioned)  

Does weight matter?  D5100 is much lighter than D90.  

Video, video and video.   D90 is outdated.   If you want to shoot HD video on occasion, D5100 is the way to go.

Agree with Orb on kit lens, if this is your first DSLR, kit lens is a good start kit and will probably be used 90% of the time.   For babies and newborn, get a 50mm 1.8 or 35mm 1.8.

Frankly, I would not recommend any newbie to get a D90 over D5100 (assume they are the same price.)     If you are that serious and concerned about getting a better built camera, direct manual control, use of AF lenses, then you should invest the extra cash and get the D7000 instead (or find a used D90 for really low price, spend the difference on the extra lens)

D5100 is alot more user friendly and has some "point-n-shoot" effects that may keep a newbie interested.   Its truly a first step camera for the novice and may be more enjoyable as a first DSLR than the D90 as you get into this hobby and lets not forget the better video feature.

Unless D90 is significantly cheaper, I just can't see how it is a better recommendation for a newbie.  

Neither camera is no better than each other for taking baby photos or wedding, your skills and perhaps the lens you choose matters more.     50mm 1.8 is a good start for low light, none flash settings for baby portraits.   You don't want to be flashing any newborns.


good luck.


----------



## shuttermountain

@ webada

The D90 is still an extremely capable camera and until the D7000 came along, the D90 was still _the_ camera to have in it's prince range.

Considering that a new in the box D90 can be purchased here for $729.00 as compared to the D7000 at $1129.00 and the D5100 at $769.00, I know what camera I would purchase. I would rather have the D90 and put the savings over the D7000 to better lenses.


----------



## Derrel

The D90 has a significantly better viewfinder system than the D5000 or D5100, in my opinion. That alone, the viewfinder system, is my MAIN dislike of the baby Nikons.


----------



## KmH

For those that don't know, the Nikon D40/D40x/D60/D3000/D3100/D5000/D5100 all have a penta*mirror* type viewfinder, while the Nikon D70/D70s/D80/D90/D7000 have a penta*prism* type of viewfinder, like the prosumer and pro Nikon's have.


----------



## jake337

I hate my viewfinder! Can't see shyt....


----------



## jake337

KmH said:


> For those that don't know, the Nikon D40/D40x/D60/D3000/D3100/D5000/D5100 all have a penta*mirror* type viewfinder, while the Nikon D70/D70s/D80/D90/D7000 have a penta*prism* type of viewfinder, like the prosumer and pro Nikon's have.




but out of those only the D7000 has 100% coverage in the finder correct?


----------



## orb9220

The D300 & D7000 has an excellent viewfinder for its class - offering 100% coverage and a magnification of 0.94x. 
The D90 offers the same magnification but a lower coverage, of 96%.
.


----------



## nick_cool

Nevertheless I choose the D90 for me, the viewfinder in all these cameras is rather small, compared e.g. with my old Minolta Dinax 600.

I have the kit lens 18-105, which is already sent to the service after 1000 shots , and 50mm 1:1.8 prime.

I also change to a new focusing screen to improve manual focus and be sure about what autofocus is doing.

I wish I had a D7000, but it was a bit expensive for my budget at the time.


----------



## webada

KmH said:


> For those that don't know, the Nikon D40/D40x/D60/D3000/D3100/D5000/D5100 all have a penta*mirror* type viewfinder, while the Nikon D70/D70s/D80/D90/D7000 have a penta*prism* type of viewfinder, like the prosumer and pro Nikon's have.


 
wow, so all the mirrorless camera are screwed....


----------



## webada

To me, the fact the sensor in D5100 is the same as the D7000 along is worth picking over D90.    Google this new sensor and you will be amazed how this new sensor from Nikon is kicking Canon's hinny.

Don't get me wrong, I love my D90 andI would never upgrade to D5100 (doesn't make much sense)   However, we have to bring this into context of this post.   If a newbie comes asking all the requirements of OP's post, I would simply recommend D5100 and I'm sure he'll enjoy it much more so than D90.    Think about it, OP asked for recommendation of a leisure use and possible for work (NOT as a photographer!).....   Why would you guys recommend D90 based on all the manual controls and better viewfinder system??    Based on a simple AUTO-SETTING of a shoot on D90 and D5100, D5100 will come out more superior simply because of its new sensor.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

webada said:


> To me, the fact the* sensor in D5100 is the same as the D7000* along is worth picking over D90. Google this new sensor and you will be amazed how this new sensor from Nikon is kicking Canon's hinny.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I love my D90 andI would never upgrade to D5100 (doesn't make much sense) However, we have to bring this into context of this post. If a newbie comes asking all the requirements of OP's post, I would simply recommend D5100 and I'm sure he'll enjoy it much more so than D90. Think about it, OP asked for recommendation of a leisure use and possible for work (NOT as a photographer!)..... Why would you guys recommend D90 based on all the manual controls and better viewfinder system?? Based on a simple AUTO-SETTING of a shoot on D90 and D5100, D5100 will come out more superior simply because of its new sensor.


 
But the D5100 won't auto-focus all the Nikkor lenses, lacks the 39 point system, won't fire remote flashes, doesn't have the menu display on top, etc etc.  I just oredered the D7000 for a few extra bux


----------



## webada

2WheelPhoto said:


> But the D5100 won't auto-focus all the Nikkor lenses, lacks the 39 point system, won't fire remote flashes, doesn't have the menu display on top, etc etc.  I just oredered the D7000 for a few extra bux


 
argh, missed my point entirely....    If this is his first DSLR, you think he would miss the LCD on top, remote flashes?   talk about being objective.    I don't know your requirement since you are not the OP.

D7000 vs D5100?    no argument there and congrats on your purchase.

BTW, D90 doesn't have 39 point system....


----------



## Texas Parrothead

Well I started with a D80 and loved it. I love the LCD on top and the ability to quickly change setting with out having to use the menu system.

It gave me the ability to quickly and efficiently manage my camera/shots.

Just upgraded to the D90 and Love It even more!!!!!!


----------



## flatflip

webada said:


> Why would you guys recommend D90 based on all the manual controls and better viewfinder system??



This is the very reason, and the focus motor. All three reasons, in that order, IMHO. I had a D5000 and upgraded to the D7000 for these reasons. If I could not afford a D7000 I would have upgraded to the D90.

Edit; If I could see better, I would love the tiny screen on top, then that would be another reason.


----------



## webada

I love my D90 too.   I'm just being objective about my recommendations based on OP's requirement.   and if you read all my posts in this thread, you would understand why.

BTW, D5100 has a flip screen which is hell lot easier to read than the LCD...    D90 is over 3 years old, in my opinion, there is just no reason to purchase one if you are just starting new with zero investments in existing lense.  The baby nikons are very capable and have inherit most of the technology.

The only reason any new entry should be buying a D90 today is if they get a used at about $600+kit, put another $150 to a prime lens > D5100 with a kit.


----------



## webada

flatflip said:


> webada said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you guys recommend D90 based on all the manual controls and better viewfinder system??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the very reason, and the focus motor. All three reasons, in that order, IMHO. I had a D5000 and upgraded to the D7000 for these reasons. If I could not afford a D7000 I would have upgraded to the D90.
> 
> Edit; If I could see better, I would love the tiny screen on top, then that would be another reason.
Click to expand...

 
please don't take my words out of context.......   read before and after please and if you are going to quote, please quote the post.    I own a D90 and love my direct buttons and dial but that's not a reason for recommendations to a newbie.... especially wireless flash... 

wireless flash to a newbie, really???   

You made your upgrade, OP is new to DSLR.    D5000 was never a capable camera, especially with that stupid hinge design.   D5100 is a different story.

maybe i should just go back to dpreview, this forum is full of thick air....


----------



## Texas Parrothead

shuttermountain said:


> Considering that a new in the box D90 can be purchased here for $729.00 as compared to the D7000 at $1129.00 and the D5100 at $769.00, I know what camera I would purchase. I would rather have the D90 and put the savings over the D7000 to better lenses.



Where can you get a brand new D90 for $729?


----------



## flatflip

webada said:


> flatflip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> webada said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you guys recommend D90 based on all the manual controls and better viewfinder system??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the very reason, and the focus motor. All three reasons, in that order, IMHO. I had a D5000 and upgraded to the D7000 for these reasons. If I could not afford a D7000 I would have upgraded to the D90.
> 
> Edit; If I could see better, I would love the tiny screen on top, then that would be another reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> please don't take my words out of context.......   read before and after please and if you are going to quote, please quote the post.    I own a D90 and love my direct buttons and dial but that's not a reason for recommendations to a newbie.... especially wireless flash...
> 
> wireless flash to a newbie, really???
> 
> You made your upgrade, OP is new to DSLR.    D5000 was never a capable camera, especially with that stupid hinge design.   D5100 is a different story.
> 
> maybe i should just go back to dpreview, this forum is full of thick air....
Click to expand...


Wireless Flash, Oh Yea, another great reason to chose the D90. High on my list. I'm sorry I offended you but don't let the thick air hit you in the...


----------



## webada

flatflip said:


> Wireless Flash, Oh Yea, another great reason to chose the D90. High on my list. I'm sorry I offended you but don't let the thick air hit you in the...


 
lol, please, none taken at all.   just can't to understand why ppl tend to hijack threads and make their own point..... The op is not asking why YOU purchased your D90, he is asking for recommendations.   Do you even know how to make a objective recommendations?    I own a D90 but I can't honestly recommend this 3 yr old technology over the D5100 for someone who have not made any investment into DSLR.  

wireless flash over better sensor?!   I think you have your priority wrong.   You can always add a wireless command but you can't change the sensor.

D90 was the best of its time, however, its over 3 years old now.   If you want all those features today, wireless flash/motored body, then you obviously know and want all these advance features then you should just save up and buy a D7000, not a D90.      

Again, the OP is asking between D90 vs D5100.   There are just way too many trolls here.

btw, I wonder what kinda of pictures you were taking with D5000 without the wireless flash?   must be horrible.

and now back to dpreview.


----------



## flatflip

"wireless flash over better sensor?", would be out of context.

Manual controls, better viewfinder, focus motor and wireless flash over a better sensor? Yes! I am trying to be objective here. Based on how the OP described his plans or intentions, he sounded like me a year ago. I very soon became aware of the lack of these features. That's why I wanted to upgrade so soon. If I had bought the D90 to begin with last year, I would not have upgraded so soon.

Now when you say, "3 yr old technology", it does take a lot of wind out of my argument. That's why I got the D7000 instead of the D90. The OP however did not include the D7000 in his OP as a viable option. He probably does appreciate our mention of it though.


----------



## Texas Parrothead

Don't want to be thought of as a troll.....thought the OP might find my opinion helpful since I was a noob to dSLRs when i bought mine and was extremely pleased with getting the D80 as my first dSLR.

Everyone's has an opinion. Please don't get upset because it may differ from yours.

hope you enjoy dpreview again but i am sure your input is equally valued here as well.


----------



## shuttermountain

Texas Parrothead said:


> shuttermountain said:
> 
> 
> 
> Considering that a new in the box D90 can be purchased here for $729.00 as compared to the D7000 at $1129.00 and the D5100 at $769.00, I know what camera I would purchase. I would rather have the D90 and put the savings over the D7000 to better lenses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where can you get a brand new D90 for $729?
Click to expand...


Here and here.  I live in Canada and these are both well known camera stores.


----------



## Texas Parrothead

shuttermountain said:


> Texas Parrothead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shuttermountain said:
> 
> 
> 
> Considering that a new in the box D90 can be purchased here for $729.00 as compared to the D7000 at $1129.00 and the D5100 at $769.00, I know what camera I would purchase. I would rather have the D90 and put the savings over the D7000 to better lenses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where can you get a brand new D90 for $729?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here and here. I live in Canada and these are both well known camera stores.
Click to expand...

 
WOW!

That is a great price and the last one even comes with a USA warranty!

Wish I had seen this last week!

Thanks for sharing!!


----------



## suet

I bought my D90 from T Dimension last year when I was new to Digital SLR. So far I didnt buy any extra lens as I think thats good enough for daily life shooting. But I im worrying about its difficult setting.. Possibly change to another brand in the future, once my D90 is broken.


----------



## webada

suet said:


> I bought my D90 from T Dimension last year when I was new to Digital SLR. So far I didn&#8217;t buy any extra lens as I think that&#8217;s good enough for daily life shooting. But I im worrying about its difficult setting.. Possibly change to another brand in the future, once my D90 is broken.


 
I've heard that so many times....  D90 was hailed as the best camera for your money, its like BMW M3, poor man's porsche.    So everyone was jumping in with 2 feet 3 years ago and now you are hearing "I just upgraded my D90 to T2i/T3i"   An upgrade?   really?   what most ppl fail to realized is that Nikon/Canon/others have structured their product lines to target many many different segment of consumers and tiered pricing.   As of now, there is almost a DSLR for everyone who's remotely interested in taking pictures (point: look at Canon's point and shoot line up!   its massive!)

Somehow in this forum, when you recommend something that's they do not own or against buying something they own, its like a blasphemy.   very strange.

Suet:   good luck with D90 being broken, its almost impossible!!   unless of course you decide to throw it down from your balcony or rooftop...   just put it up for sale, seems like plenty of folks here will buy it here.


----------



## AmberNikol

I have the D90 and LOVE it. I wouldn't change it for anything. I'm still learning new things on it after having it for almost 2 years. It's a good buy, I think you'll love it too OP!


----------



## suet

AmberNikol said:


> I have the D90 and LOVE it. I wouldn't change it for anything. I'm still learning new things on it after having it for almost 2 years. It's a good buy, I think you'll love it too OP!


 
you wont change it for anything although you have been using it for 2 years. Similar to my situation


----------



## Raian-san

D90 used is the best option.


----------



## EPPhoto

orb9220 said:
			
		

> I always recommend the kit lens. As it will take some shooting through out the range to see where your needs and preferred range is.
> .



Don't listen to another word by this person!  You simply CAN'T shoot a wedding with a "kit" lens!  That's suicide!

You need fast glass for receptions and dark churches.  

I shoot weddings and I use the normal wedding lenses: 17-55 2.8 & 70-200 2.8 & 50 1.4.  I have quite a few others but those are industry standards as far as weddings go.

Sent from Erics iPhone    www.ericporado.com


----------



## orb9220

EPPhoto said:


> orb9220 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I always recommend the kit lens. As it will take some shooting through out the range to see where your needs and preferred range is.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't listen to another word by this person!  You simply CAN'T shoot a wedding with a "kit" lens!  That's suicide!
> 
> You need fast glass for receptions and dark churches.
> 
> I shoot weddings and I use the normal wedding lenses: 17-55 2.8 & 70-200 2.8 & 50 1.4.  I have quite a few others but those are industry standards as far as weddings go.
> 
> Sent from Erics iPhone    Pittsburgh Wedding Photographers - Eric Porado Photography
Click to expand...


Sorry didn't understand when they said "I want to shoot baby, and wedding if it is all possible"

And should have pointed out that if serious about shooting baby and weddings to look at the more expensive faster lenses alternatives or prime.
But starting out new and unfamiliar with photography and lack of understanding what is required is why the recommend for starting with kit lens.

 But you seem to be quick to blanket condemn everything a person says with "Don't listen to another word by this person!  ". Instead of maybe considering they were addressing her lack of knowledge and limited budget! and maybe missed the wanting to do weddings.

I suppose you never misread a post and gave only partially accurate or missed the mark response there.

Pretty extreme response there not knowing the whole story behind the post. Which I'm sure you could have pointed out or clarified my misunderstanding of the OP intent with a statement of clarification of OP intent instead of blanket condemation.
.
.


----------



## Derrel

I'd put MY MONEY on orb9220 as to being a guy who could actually shoot a wedding with a kit zoom. As far as 
"Don't listen to another word by this person!" in reference to orb9220...well, I'll tell you EPPhoto, orb is a "shooter"...not just a "photographer"....Hell, the world is filled with "photographers" these days--everybody's a fricking "photographer", but orb is a "shooter"!! Do you know what that even means????

Have you seen his abilities with a camera and modest gear? He can out-shoot people with his D90 and 17-50 like it's nobody's business...


----------



## flatflip

I appreciate orb9220's advice and I see his kindness to newbies often. I also like the particular advice to learn your needed and favorite ranges with a kit lens. I also think being a nice person is better than being a photographer and / or a shooter.


----------



## webada

you can certainly shoot a wedding with a kit lense, it all depends on your skillz.   Obviously, it may not be an ideal lens and may require you to be more physical and spending time doing post editing.    Ofcourse, if you are really good, the entire theme/style of the wedding shots can be tailored around it....

I've a friend who's a cinematographer and he can do amazing stuff with a point-n-shoot Samsung...    you don't need a fancy setup to take good pictures and develop a overall theme to your shoots....

and I 100% agree with orb's recommendation (again) on kit lens for a newbie....   you will learn so much about the way or what you like to shoot for a mere $100 (new)  totally worth it.


----------



## ghache

webada said:


> you can certainly shoot a wedding with a kit lense, it all depends on your skillz. Obviously, it may not be an ideal lens and may require you to be more physical and spending time doing post editing. Ofcourse, if you are really good, the entire theme/style of the wedding shots can be tailored around it....
> 
> I've a friend who's a cinematographer and he can do amazing stuff with a point-n-shoot Samsung... you don't need a fancy setup to take good pictures and develop a overall theme to your shoots....
> 
> and I 100% agree with orb's recommendation (again) on kit lens for a newbie.... you will learn so much about the way or what you like to shoot for a mere $100 (new) totally worth it.



Shooting a wedding with a ****ty setup doesnt depends on your skillz you noob. It depend on what light you have available. I would shoot a Destination wedding in mexico with a d40 and a 18-55 anyday. try doing it in a church with no light. you can have all the skillz you want. no light no pictures.


----------



## EPPhoto

ghache said:
			
		

> Shooting a wedding with a ****ty setup doesnt depends on your skillz you noob. It depend on what light you have available. I would shoot a Destination wedding in mexico with a d40 and a 18-55 anyday. try doing it in a church with no light. you can have all the skillz you want. no light no pictures.



Exactly...I dont care who you are...you are going to run into situations doing weddings where you simply cannot use a kit lens and get decent results!  Sure you CAN do it, but all your pictures will either be way underexposed or grainy from bumping ISO.

Sent from Erics iPhone    www.ericporado.com


----------



## KmH

AmberNikol said:


> I have the D90 and LOVE it. I wouldn't change it for anything. I'm still learning new things on it after having it for almost 2 years. It's a good buy, I think you'll love it too OP!


 It only took me about 6 months to max out a D90, and so some things had to change.

First, of the 11 auto focus points the D90 has (MultiCAM 1000 auto focus module), only 1 of them (the center one) is a cross-type focus point. Second, I got tired of having to lower the camera from my eye to dive into the menus to change a setting.

To solve the first issue I got a D300 because it (and all of Nikon's prosumer and pro cameras) has the MultiCAM 3500DX auto focus module - 51 auto focus points, 15 of them being cross-type focus points. To solve the second, most settings can be changed by using a button/switch on the outside of the camera (and all of Nikon's prosumer and pro cameras have the same button/switch layout) so you can change settings by feel and looking in the viewfinder as the settings change . Plus you get a 10-pin connector, a PC port, a higher FPS rate, 3 times as many AEB brackets, blah, blah, blah, by moving up the the D300/D300s and above.


----------



## cnutco

D90 hands down!!!!


----------



## webada

ghache said:


> Shooting a wedding with a ****ty setup doesnt depends on your skillz you noob. It depend on what light you have available. I would shoot a Destination wedding in mexico with a d40 and a 18-55 anyday. try doing it in a church with no light. you can have all the skillz you want. no light no pictures.


 
oh you are absolutely right and I forgot that if you have an underwater wedding, a kit lense will not do either.   noobs be warned.   :lmao:


----------



## suet

I do think so, D90 is the best option, it doesnt cost much at the range of middle level DSLRs.


----------



## Nykon

D90 is my vote! Own it, love it! Next is a D3S within the month, which I will still keep my D90 cause it still just turns me on!


----------



## Michaelfoy

Havnt heard from the OP for awhile but To get back to the whole point of the thread, perhaps it is too easy to suggest a D90. I think Webada has a fair point, it sounds like Recreational use is going to be his main objective and if so, the Auto mode is gonna be regularly used, in which case a d5100 is a good choice. Its his first DSLR so he hasnt invested in non auto focus lens' and if youre considering a d90 for your first DSLR youve probably got abit money to spend so likelihood is, he'll be able to buy a lens' specifically suited to wedding photography if he wishes. Im in the same situation as the OP, upgrading from the bridge camera iv owned for 2 years i'm also stuck between the two cameras. Chances are after this thread he's gonna choose the D90 and thats no bad thing, Its a great camera, iv been trying it out. I still dont know which camera to buy, Weighing up the newer sensor and marginally better image quality and in particular low light capabilities against the D90's pro body for easy shooting in the field is very tough. Hopefully il be able to work out whats best for me soon. Bye.


----------



## ulrichsd

Hi Michael,

For me it comes down to better controls, top lcd, better viewfinder, and internal motor for the D90 compared to better video (I don't use) and better high-ISO (I wish I had) for the D5100.  If you plan on using shooting mostly on auto AND taking a lot of video AND a lot of indoor photos with no flash, then the D5100 might be a better choice.  However, most of the people who post on photography forums for advice are the types who will eventually want to get out of auto mode and into manual modes.  It'd be hard for me to lose the the top LCD after growing accustomed to it.

good luck,
Scott


----------



## Nikon_Josh

I agree with many of the comments here about the D90 being the better choice, mainly as I have one and love it.

The D90 just gives me what I need in a camera, it has great manual control. I would prefer a D700 or D3S but the D90 is adequate for me and fulfils my needs. The D5100 has better sensor performance, but takes away alot of the features I need.

When I was looking at cams it was between the D90 and D5000. I think the D90 was worth the extra cash for what it offers over the D5000. If I had got a D5000 I would've regretted it, I may of saved some money but what is the point of saving money if every time you pick up your camera you wish you had bought a higher model.


----------



## Michaelfoy

You see i dont take a lot of video, and im rarely using the auto mode unless at a friends house for a party of something very casual. For photography i shoot on full manual of A/S priority. This is why im leaning towards the older D90 with the Pro body and dual controls. With my current camera i hate having to go into the menu everytime i need to change a setting. Its probably the better choice for me. I just worry that after i purchase, il be regretting that extra image quality, perhaps its so marginal in good light that i wont even notice? :/


----------



## Nikon_Josh

Michaelfoy said:


> You see i dont take a lot of video, and im rarely using the auto mode unless at a friends house for a party of something very casual. For photography i shoot on full manual of A/S priority. This is why im leaning towards the older D90 with the Pro body and dual controls. With my current camera i hate having to go into the menu everytime i need to change a setting. Its probably the better choice for me. I just worry that after i purchase, il be regretting that extra image quality, perhaps its so marginal in good light that i wont even notice? :/



I wouldn't worry, that extra image quality is marginal it really is. The D90/ D300 perfomance was so high, that there was no way really they could make a camera that was much better in the IQ department. You have to remember the D300 was classed as the best APS/DX sensor camera when it was released and the D90 is like a plastic body version.


----------

