# Nikon D3100 or D90?



## paranoid73 (Aug 5, 2009)

I've been struggling with this desicion for a while, I always intended to get a D90 and now have a 7% off voucher to use at warehouse express. 
What would be the best out of the two to go for, the new D3100 with 18-55 lense 14.2 megapixal + HD @ £436 or the D90 with the 18-105 lense £691?

some experience advice would be appreciated.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

I personally would go with the D90.

It is older than the D3100 but it has a focussing motor built in which means you can use any AF lens for any Nikon.

I believe the D3100 doesn't have this so you are restricted to AF-S lenses where the motor is in the lens. These are more expensive than the AF lenses and are less readily available second-hand.

If you are looking to progress your photography, then you will want lenses very shortly. The good ones are not cheap.

Check on the focus motor first though.


----------



## Katana (Mar 31, 2007)

"it has a focusing motor" "restricted to AF-S lenses"
I see this every time someone thinks about the D90 vs something else and it's really a moot point when it comes to DX format cameras. AF-S DX (they do exist for 35mm/FX as well) lenses are just as good and probably better than the standard AF/AF-D lenses. AF-S lenses aren't inferior, they just happen to be a bit more expensive than the older lenses.
Buy a D3100 and take the money saved from buying a D90 and buy the Nikon 35mm f/1.8, Nikon 55-200mm VR lenses, a good circular polarizer, remote release and other more useful photographic stuff than a built in motor.

Also the 18-55mm lens with the D3100 is better than the 18-105 that comes with the D90, if you do get a D90 avoid the 18-105mm. Apart from the focus motor and the lackluster display on the top of the D90, the D3100 has all the same guts so it will produce just as good a picture with the same lenses.

Sorry if that was a bit rant but i see this question so often on other forums and sites it drives me nuts.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

If you read my post, i did not say that AF-S were any worse only that they *are* more expensive.

As a beginner, i had the D40 which did not have the focussing motor. I found it cheaper to upgrade to the D200 than to buy the lenses i wanted to get with AF-S designation when i wanted to progress. The AF/AF-S/AF-D point is mute. Glass is Glass. It will be good, mediocre or bad regardless of focussing method.

The D3100 is a better cam than the D40 and is closer in performance terms to the D90. However, The focussing motor is still and issue for beginner photographers without pots of money. It's a mistake that i made and one that i feel could be avoid through a little bit of advice.

The lack of a motor has nothing to do with the performance of the lens or the camera and everything to do with cost.

If the OP was bothered about performance, they would be asking "What's the best, the D3x or the D700"? Cost is obviously a factor to the OP and should be considered in the response given.

To that end, the D90 is the better option looking forward. AF-S lenses will not come down in price second hand for the foreseeable future purely because there is a whole sea of people who unlike the OP (and like me unfortunately) who are waiting for second hand AF-S lenses to come up.

That is the reason for my response and why i gave it. If the OP does not want to progress beyond the kit lens. So be it, get the D3100.

I have the AF-S 35mm, it's cracking. I also have the AF-S 55-200 VR. It's Ok.

But, now i want to step up in glass quality again. Now AF-S is really expensive, no second hand options. There are some great AF lenses available for you to step up without spending £500+. As a long term thing beyond the first set of lenses, the focussing motor gives you so many options on a much decreased budget.

Not to mention the raft of 3rd party lenses available to you.

It is a valid consideration if you don't make a living from it or have pots of money. Take it from someone who wishes they had researched a bit better.


----------



## Dan J (Jun 18, 2008)

a month or so ago i was asking the same question and ended up getting the D90 and got a very good condition second hand 24-120 vr lens off my mate(lucky for me) and i havent regretted it at all, i am completely new to photography but the D90 was definatly the right choice the moment i first held one in my hand it felt right compared to the d3000,d3100 and the d5000 which are lighter and very slightly smaller than the D90.
its got a bit of weight depending on what lens you put on it but ive just recently got a 50mm lens and it weighs nothing and makes it very comfatable to use.

after several weeks of playing about with the settings etc its starting to feel really familier and getting alot easier to go through all the settings etc(there are quite a few on the d90)

if you havent already!! go down your local camera shop and get them in your hand and see how they feel first then spend a bit of time swatting up on there specs etc and see which one would suit you best.

sorry if thats a load of waffle but just giving you my opinions due to just buying one myself.

hope this helps


----------

