Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Nikon D90 Announced


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#21 bfdc

bfdc

    Lionfish

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 27 August 2008 - 08:00 PM

VR is indeed built in, but I see the kit lens you get at $1299 is ALSO a VR lens, so apparently you can have VR both places. Personally I'd buy the body alone for $999, though.

I'm impressed with the camera, very. VERY IMPRESSED. I wish it used CF cards though... to share with D200 etc, and because the throughput is faster. And really, I'm kinda hard pressed to say what about the D200 would warrant the extra size and weight if I had both!


Excuse me for being dense, but I am apparently not understanding or seeing what you are saying....do a search on VR or vibration in the first link in the first post above from the Nikon press release. It matches 4 and 2 times respectively. I don't read any of those as saying VR is built into the body. It talks about being the d90 able to sense when VR is turned on from the lens in liveview, etc. I am not aware of any Nikon DSLR body having VR built in - only lenses, so I would have thought that they would be bragging about it big time if they included it in the D90. Just want to be sure before I plunk down a grand....

thx

#22 johnspierce

johnspierce

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 546 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denver, CO

Posted 27 August 2008 - 08:48 PM

Excuse me for being dense, but I am apparently not understanding or seeing what you are saying....do a search on VR or vibration in the first link in the first post above from the Nikon press release. It matches 4 and 2 times respectively. I don't read any of those as saying VR is built into the body. It talks about being the d90 able to sense when VR is turned on from the lens in liveview, etc. I am not aware of any Nikon DSLR body having VR built in - only lenses, so I would have thought that they would be bragging about it big time if they included it in the D90. Just want to be sure before I plunk down a grand....

thx


Hmmm... I could swear I saw on Nikon's page something about VR being built in, but I can't find anything now, so I guess not. While I was looking around, I found this page with some demos from D-Movie mode and it looks very cool.

http://imaging.nikon...en/d-movie/#top

JP
Nikon D7000 | Aquatica Housing | Inon Z-240

#23 girelle

girelle

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:France

Posted 28 August 2008 - 12:33 AM

Hi

Will the new D90 be able to make better pictures than the D80 , and why ??? ;)

#24 markprior

markprior

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 28 August 2008 - 02:25 AM

Hi

Will the new D90 be able to make better pictures than the D80 , and why ??? ;)


The gimmicks are irrelevant.

The D90 will have better IQ because it has the D300 sensor + an additional year of development on the noise front. Much as the D300 takes better high ISO pictures than the D200 the D90 will take better high ISO than the D80.

At base ISO however there will likely be much less difference.
Sea & Sea D200 Housing - 60mm,105mm, 10.5mm, 12-24mm (All Nikon) Sigma 17-70mm and Tokina 10-17mm lenses and a bunch of Ports.
Lighting: 2 x Ikelite DS-125, 2 x Manual controller

My Pictures

#25 PapaFly

PapaFly

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 28 August 2008 - 03:10 AM

Hi

Will the new D90 be able to make better pictures than the D80 , and why ??? ;)


The answer to this depends on many other factors.

Theoretically, the slightly higher resolution can lead to sharper images, the capture of more detail.
BUT, only if your lens + port + shooting technique are sharp enough to deliver that tiny bit of extra resolution. If they're not, forget the D90.
As an avid D80 shooter i see nothing too exciting in the bag, neither did i expect it. The D80 is a great camera already.

Let's see...is there anything interesting for the underwater shooter, making a D80 to D90 upgrade worthwhile?

1) 12mp vs 10mp, possibly sharper results, IF lens, port, shooting technique are up to it.

2) higher density of the photosites means more diffraction issues at small apertures (f13 upwards maybe) - needs to be tested

3) 3 inch lcd vs 2.5 inch...do you need 3inch to check your histograms and sharpness? Of course not! You still need to zoom in for a sharpness check.

4) video mode....nice gimmick, but not needed, and you will certainly not be able to deliver high quality uw videos without proper light, and focusing/modeling lichts from our strobes are NOT enough, as pointed out in an earlier post

5) taking a video frame as a still: makes no sense to me, the video is a crappy jpeg in 1280x720 resolution, probably without the possibility of proper exposure control.

6) base iso of 200: certainly a pain in the ass for sunbursts, we need to close the aperture one stop, the flash(es) have to deliver double the light. of course you can use the iso100 mode, but the sensor is delivering best performance at iso200, so there will be some quality loss here.

7) 12bit NEF unchanged....14bit would have been a welcome addition here

8) noise: from all i've seen the d300 is no improvement over the d80/d200. just that the in-cam noise reduction is blurring the image a bit more aggressively.

9) ergonomy: nothing changed here worth mentioning, the d80 is already superb in this aspect. I know because i shoot exclusively while freediving, so size, weight, image quality and ergonomy are THE reasons i bought the d80.

10) live view: not at all important for serious uw use. the focusing speed is slow, only by using the viewfinder will you fully exploit the abilities of the cam's AF system.

11) AF system: no real change here, 11AF points unchanged, the d80 already has a fantastic AF system; it's tracking moving objects across the frame without any problems (i've had great fun with this while shooting air shows).


Here's what i expected for the upgrade:

1)12mp CMOS, of course the d300 sensor jammed into a smaller body

2)14bit NEF... this would prolly be a more noticeable increase in image quality, specially when looking at those smoooth gradients of background water, and sunbursts.

3)more speed! something like 6-7shots/second....the 3.5 to 4.5 is a very modest increase

4)more buffer! i pack 7NEF-bursts into the buffer (using a sandisk extremeIII), no change here

5)Live view...i don't need it, but people expect it so what the hell

6) MOST important: fix the screwy matrix metering of the d80. It's overexposing, it's unpredictable, it's unable to deal with fisheyes. I use center-weighted average and spot uw, both work and are very predictable. Right now we have no idea whether the metering issue has been fixed in the D90. I have my doubts though...

7) regarding ergonomy: a faster way to set a custom wb. like assigning a button or a combination of 2 buttons to this function.

All in all, the D90 is a very attractive cam, for people who are still shooting compacts, or older dslr's in the 6-8mp range.
As a freediver I'm really glad to see that NIKON is staying commited to building highly capable cameras using state-of-the art sensors from their higher-end lineup, but in smaller, yet ergonomic bodies. The D80 is a dream to use, I love it, and it's great to see the family growing!
I don't think the D90 or even the D300 are worth the upgrade from a D80 though. The next logical step is the D700/D3/D3x. Only makes sense if you shoot a lot, and anyway the best upgrade you can ever get is better composition and shooting style, which of course cannot be bought in a shop.
So...if you have a D80, don't bother with the D90, get wet and really work your 80!

#26 PRC

PRC

    Great White

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1163 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Guernsey Channel Islands

Posted 28 August 2008 - 03:30 AM

Agree, mostly - bar a couple of minor picks.

3) 3 inch lcd vs 2.5 inch...do you need 3inch to check your histograms and sharpness? Of course not! You still need to zoom in for a sharpness check.


If you had 3" for a while there is no way back - I had to pick up a D70 the other week and the screen is dire compared to any on a 'modern' camera.

The resolution of the 'new' screen is such that when you do zoom in you can assess sharpness a lot easier. The ergonomics of zooming in are also improved.


8) noise: from all i've seen the d300 is no improvement over the d80/d200. just that the in-cam noise reduction is blurring the image a bit more aggressively.


To be honest I beg to disagree - I have found my new D300 is noticeably better than my older D200 in the noise department (finally now up to Canon standard!).

Maybe I just don't notice the blurring?

Whatever I am now taking ambient light shots that I would not have pulled off with the D200 - even with a lot of post processing work.

Having said that - this could now be a great time to pick up a D80 at reduced cost.

Paul C

Edited by PRC, 28 August 2008 - 03:32 AM.

Nikon D300, Subal, 2 * Inon 240
Water Temp (just cold & Nasty)
My Pictures

#27 Alex_Mustard

Alex_Mustard

    The Doctor

  • Super Mod
  • 8375 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peterborough

Posted 28 August 2008 - 06:02 AM

I was gonna mention the same two as Paul...

Alex

Alexander Mustard - www.amustard.com - www.magic-filters.com
Nikon D4 (Subal housing). Nikon D7100 (Subal housing). Olympus EPL-5 (Nauticam housing).


#28 Deep6

Deep6

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, CO

Posted 28 August 2008 - 07:50 AM

VR is indeed built in, but I see the kit lens you get at $1299 is ALSO a VR lens, so apparently you can have VR both places. Personally I'd buy the body alone for $999, though.

I'm impressed with the camera, very. VERY IMPRESSED. I wish it used CF cards though... to share with D200 etc, and because the throughput is faster. And really, I'm kinda hard pressed to say what about the D200 would warrant the extra size and weight if I had both!


If the D90 has VR, Nikon is keeping it a secret. Please check out an offical release at nikonusa.com. I read some of the previous links. They said something to the effect that you will have VR with the D90 coupled with a VR lens.

Carpe carp - Seize the carp


#29 tubino

tubino

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toledo, Ohio USA
  • Interests:Vacuum tube audio, vintage hi-fi, horn speakers, Tannoy dual concentric speakers.

Posted 28 August 2008 - 08:45 AM

If the D90 has VR, Nikon is keeping it a secret. Please check out an offical release at nikonusa.com. I read some of the previous links. They said something to the effect that you will have VR with the D90 coupled with a VR lens.


You are correct, I was wrong, and I updated my post to show that. Oh well.
Nikon D300s, Ikelite housing + 2 Ike DS-160. Tokina 10-17 fisheye, 11-16mm, Sigma 50 macro, Nikon 105 VR, SubSee Magnifier.

#30 PapaFly

PapaFly

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 28 August 2008 - 10:26 AM

I have found my new D300 is noticeably better than my older D200 in the noise department (finally now up to Canon standard!).

Maybe I just don't notice the blurring?

Paul C


This is certainly open for discussion. To really convince me, we'd have to compare D300/200/80 NEF files. Dpreview's data, based on jpeg taken with noise reduction ON, clearly shows that these cams are all but identical up to ISO800. This is luminance noise, which is more prominent compared to chroma in the nikons. I can confirm that a properly exposed d80 iso800 shot is absolutely acceptable. Can the D90/D300 raise the bar to ISO1600? Does this justify an upgrade from the D80? I'm a little touchy on this subject, because there are too many people that are all about gear, wanting to upgrade a d80 to d90, a d200 to d300, when in fact it is always the better composition that really makes the difference. Heck, unless the new cam is a huge leap foward, i couldn't care less. If one really wants considerably low noise, the d80/d200 to d90/d300 upgrade is not the way IMO. If one owns any current nikon/canon 10-12mp cropped sensor cam and wants less noise, the fx cameras are the way to go.

Phil

#31 loftus

loftus

    Blue Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4571 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Winter Park, Fl

Posted 28 August 2008 - 10:50 AM

This is certainly open for discussion. To really convince me, we'd have to compare D300/200/80 NEF files. Dpreview's data, based on jpeg taken with noise reduction ON, clearly shows that these cams are all but identical up to ISO800. This is luminance noise, which is more prominent compared to chroma in the nikons. I can confirm that a properly exposed d80 iso800 shot is absolutely acceptable. Can the D90/D300 raise the bar to ISO1600? Does this justify an upgrade from the D80? I'm a little touchy on this subject, because there are too many people that are all about gear, wanting to upgrade a d80 to d90, a d200 to d300, when in fact it is always the better composition that really makes the difference. Heck, unless the new cam is a huge leap foward, i couldn't care less. If one really wants considerably low noise, the d80/d200 to d90/d300 upgrade is not the way IMO. If one owns any current nikon/canon 10-12mp cropped sensor cam and wants less noise, the fx cameras are the way to go.

Phil

Discussions about composition, photographer ability etc are obvious, but I think in this thread this is completely beside the point. I own a D200 and would love it if I could not see significant differences between the D200 and D300, but that's simply not true. Probably the most important difference I have noticed for underwater photography is the improved ability of the D300 to handle sunballs. Noise, resolution etc are probably not significantly different at low ISO and average magnification, particularly on a monitor. On the other hand dynamic range and the improved highlight handling are visible at any ISO and any magnification and alone are worth the upgrade. Assuming the differences between the D90 and D80 are similar in this regard, I think the same would apply.

Edited by loftus, 28 August 2008 - 10:59 AM.

Nikon D800, Nikon D7000, Nauticam, Inons, Subtronic Novas. Lens collection - 10-17, 15, 16, 16-35, 14-24, 24-70, 85, 18-200, 28-300, 70-200, 60 and 105, TC's. Macs with Aperture and Photoshop.

#32 craig

craig

    Full Moon Rising

  • Super Mod
  • 2826 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX

Posted 28 August 2008 - 11:13 AM

2) higher density of the photosites means more diffraction issues at small apertures (f13 upwards maybe) - needs to be tested

Higher photosite density NEVER means more diffraction issues. Diffraction is a function of f-stop only. Diffraction limits the full benefit of higher photosite density but more resolution is never a disadvantage, it is only sometimes less of an advantage than it seems.

6) base iso of 200: certainly a pain in the ass for sunbursts, we need to close the aperture one stop, the flash(es) have to deliver double the light. of course you can use the iso100 mode, but the sensor is delivering best performance at iso200, so there will be some quality loss here.

Flash output must balance ambient light, not camera ISO. For ISO 200, flash doesn't have to deliver double the light, it has to deliver it twice as fast (assuming you are bumping up against strobe sync limits). Yes, ISO 200 base is a step backward here, but the D90 will still do ISO 100. I've seen some pretty positive comments on the D300 with sunbursts so I suspect the D90 will do fine.

8) noise: from all i've seen the d300 is no improvement over the d80/d200. just that the in-cam noise reduction is blurring the image a bit more aggressively.

You are making this judgement without looking at RAW? Nikon isn't applying in-camera noise reduction on raw files.

Dpreview makes special mention that the D300 improves noise performance over the D200 in the conclusions of it's D300 review. Nikon made three major improvements to IQ with the D300: (1) improved sensitivity through microlens design resulting in a higher base ISO, (2) increased resolution, and (3) substantially improved noise performance. I find it interesting that these improvements are all discounted here.
I love it when a plan comes together.
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith

------
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
My Galleries

#33 PapaFly

PapaFly

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 28 August 2008 - 12:05 PM

To really convince me, we'd have to compare D300/200/80 NEF files.


I'm waiting to see some D80 vs D90 raw files, underwater, same scene, same lens, same ports. Until we see those, all is speculation.

#34 loftus

loftus

    Blue Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4571 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Winter Park, Fl

Posted 28 August 2008 - 12:42 PM

Well you will probably have to wait forever then before your next upgrade, because I've not seen too many underwater camera comparisons (except test charts) done this way. (Actually can't think of one)
Folks like myself look at images we see on this website and others and draw our own, somewhat unscientific, but I think well considered opinions.
Nikon D800, Nikon D7000, Nauticam, Inons, Subtronic Novas. Lens collection - 10-17, 15, 16, 16-35, 14-24, 24-70, 85, 18-200, 28-300, 70-200, 60 and 105, TC's. Macs with Aperture and Photoshop.

#35 tubino

tubino

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toledo, Ohio USA
  • Interests:Vacuum tube audio, vintage hi-fi, horn speakers, Tannoy dual concentric speakers.

Posted 28 August 2008 - 01:08 PM

Dpreview makes special mention that the D300 improves noise performance over the D200 in the conclusions of it's D300 review. Nikon made three major improvements to IQ with the D300: (1) improved sensitivity through microlens design resulting in a higher base ISO, (2) increased resolution, and (3) substantially improved noise performance. I find it interesting that these improvements are all discounted here.

Craig, is it accurate to say that all 3 of these improvements are incorporated in the D90? Or is it more complicated than yes/no?
Nikon D300s, Ikelite housing + 2 Ike DS-160. Tokina 10-17 fisheye, 11-16mm, Sigma 50 macro, Nikon 105 VR, SubSee Magnifier.

#36 craig

craig

    Full Moon Rising

  • Super Mod
  • 2826 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX

Posted 28 August 2008 - 02:10 PM

Craig, is it accurate to say that all 3 of these improvements are incorporated in the D90? Or is it more complicated than yes/no?

I'd say it's safe to say so. If it's not so, we'd have to wonder what happened. ;)

I'm waiting to see some D80 vs D90 raw files, underwater, same scene, same lens, same ports. Until we see those, all is speculation.

But it's informed speculation. We know a lot about the D90 because we already have the D300.

When do we ever see testing that rigorous?
I love it when a plan comes together.
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith

------
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
My Galleries

#37 tubino

tubino

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toledo, Ohio USA
  • Interests:Vacuum tube audio, vintage hi-fi, horn speakers, Tannoy dual concentric speakers.

Posted 28 August 2008 - 03:01 PM

I'd say it's safe to say so. If it's not so, we'd have to wonder what happened. ;)


Well, then I'd say it's safe to say that for $1000 retail for the body, the D90 is a very good deal for a lot of people. About 2 years ago my decision was between the D200 and the D80, and I went D200, no regrets. If I were looking at D90 vs. D300, starting from nothing, I would probably opt for the D90, spend the difference on lenses, and probably not regret it.
Nikon D300s, Ikelite housing + 2 Ike DS-160. Tokina 10-17 fisheye, 11-16mm, Sigma 50 macro, Nikon 105 VR, SubSee Magnifier.

#38 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 29 August 2008 - 02:01 AM

I believe the D90 still uses 12bit processing, not 14 bit.

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#39 Deep6

Deep6

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, CO

Posted 29 August 2008 - 08:11 AM

Has anyone seen one yet? Have it in their hands?

Truly wondering if it will fit into the D80 housing? Perhaps with a different housing back?


SS18,

The tech. specs. dimensions from the nikonusa site are the same for the D90 & D80:

D90 D80
in. mm in. mm
Width 5.2 132 5.2 132
Height 4.1 103 4.1 103
Depth 3 77 3 77
LCD dia. 3 2.5

It seems reasonable to assume that Nikon would use the same camera body. Let's hope that manufacturers will let us buy the D90 backs at a reasonable cost. One housing front, two backs, a D90, and a D80 for backup may not be too expensive of an up-grade.

Carpe carp - Seize the carp


#40 DuikKees

DuikKees

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 267 posts

Posted 29 August 2008 - 12:17 PM

I did a quick overlay of the D80 and the D90 in PS.

Most of the buttons and dials are in exactely the same position. The only mayor difference is the selector and that is a real tricky one to mod.

Attached Images

  • D90_D80_back.jpg
  • D90_D80_front.jpg

Edited by DuikKees, 29 August 2008 - 12:19 PM.