To cut to the chase, I love the D90. It may not be the most technically capable camera out there but it’s certainly one of the most enjoyable to use. I had originally planned to only use it for times when I needed a lighter alternative to my 5D, but I found myself using it all the time. One of the things that really surprised me was the quality of the kit lens. Normally those lenses are not particularly good but the 18-105 that comes with the D90 is excellent. It has some minor chromatic aberration issues but the stabiliser is superb and images from it are amazingly sharp. In fact I was amazed that I was often able to get better results from this combination than from my canon 5D and its L-Series 24-105 lens. Of course when I wrote about this at the time I was set upon by Canon fans who insisted I was doing something wrong and obviously a terrible photographer (despite the numerous other professionals who also had focus issues with the 5d) Actually, the autofocus on the D90 is excellent, especially compared to what I was used to. And the D90 doesn’t even use the more elaborate of Nikon’s focus systems.

I had planned not to buy any more lenses over the year until I came to my decision on whether to stick with Canon or switch wholesale to Nikon, but in the end I couldn’t resist (although I tried to stick within a budget and only buy the more inexpensive products.) I first bought the excellent 18-200VR lens from Nikon. This is truly a superb lens. It may not be the sharpest, but considering the focal range it’s pretty damn good. Having that range in a single lens is incredibly useful. It’s my main walking around lens now and any time I head out for a walk with my camera it’s usually attached to it. I also bought the 50mm f/1.8 which isn’t very good in my opinion. My other lens purchases were a second hand sigma 10-20mm and more recently the Nikon 35mm f/1.8. The sigma is a great lens and the 35mm is very sharp although it has some severe chromatic aberration and fringing problems. You can work around these if you’re careful, but it’s a bit of a let down considering how sharp the lens is.

The idea of the experiment though, was to see if I liked the Nikon way of doing things, the layout of controls, the ergonomics and the handling. The answer is a resounding yes. I had always found the 5D like using a sledge hammer to hammer in a nail. It was clunky and cumbersome, and while you can get fantastic shots from it, I never felt a sense of synergy with the camera. With the D90 it’s the complete opposite. The camera becomes an extension of your arm. It’s so well designed from an ergonomic point of view that I don’t know how I ever used anything else. I particularly like the fact that you can operate most of the controls one handed. I find the main control dial’s position under the thumb much better than the placement of Canon’s rear control dial, which is very easy to turn by accident. I also like the fact that you can zoom in to check sharpness during image review without having to hit play first (which annoys me no end on my 5D). Another really useful feature is to be able to turn the front control dial during image review to switch between full screen, full screen with clipping warning and histogram. Again, the whole one handed operation is very user friendly. Another thing I love is the two button combination to format the card. It’s such a simple thing yet it saves you so much time.

Over the course of the year though I did find a few annoyances with it. The colour balance can occasionally be a little off and colours can sometimes look over saturated or false looking. I find it particularly noticeable in the blues. I think it’s because the camera is very sensitive to what white balance setting you have set. Much more so than any Canon I have used. When you set it for daylight and it becomes slightly cloudy or overcast you can see the difference, whereas on the Canons I have used it is usually fine. On the other hand the vibrance can be stunning on subjects that accentuate it such as flowers. I really like the way it renders greens in particular. I’ve found too that the exposure can be a little biased towards under exposure and you have to compensate for that. Then again, you can set a permanent offset in the menus, which is really cool (although I don’t use that feature). I have found too that it really struggles with areas of high contrast. When you have sky in the picture and a darker foreground such as a building, and you’re using matrix metering it will often blow out the sky. My 5D usually do a much better job and get both reasonably in range. Overall though, the metering is pretty good, but not perfect.

The other big disappointment is the video. Now, I know some will argue that you buy a camera for the stills and video is just a bonus, but it’s pretty bad, especially in comparison to the 5D MarkII (but more on that in a minute)

There is a line skipping issue and severe aliasing that renders anything with fine detail almost completely useless.
The much reported “jelly-cam” effect is pretty severe too and makes hand held video without the use of a stabiliser useless. It’s a shame because it really is useful having video on a DSLR.

Over the course of the year I’ve taken some really nice shots with the D90. I brought it to New York as my sole camera, coupled with my 18-200 and 10-20. I got some great shots with it. On a trip to Glendalough, a national park in Wicklow, I brought my 5D and the D90 but ended up using the D90 for most of the shots. As you can tell, I really like the D90. So does this mean I’ve made the decision to switch full time to Nikon? Well, unfortunately not just yet. I had some jobs in August and September that required me to shoot video so I ended up buying a 5D Mark II. My reasoning at the time seemed sound. The one thing I was missing from the D90 was the look you get from full frame. I could have bought a D700 but I really needed video and I was wooed by the promise of 21 megapixels. On top of that I really couldn’t afford to buy a D700 and the new lenses I would need to take advantage of it.

I haven’t given up on Nikon altogether though. Despite the 5DII being technically superior to the D90 I still find myself reaching for the D90 more often. The D90 is a nice and light camera and perfect when you just want to have something with you to take pictures and not be weighed down. Together with the 18-200 it provides a great walking around system.

At the end of the day I need a professional level camera to replace my original 5D on which the screen is failing. Unfortunately the D90 is not a pro level camera, although you can get pro level results from it. Don’t get me wrong, I was never under any impressions that it was. Do I regret my purchase of the D90? Not at all. It’s one of the best cameras I’ve ever owned. Do I regret getting the 5D Mark II ? Well, on the one hand it was for specific jobs so I have made my money back on it, but on the other hand I don’t think it’s as great a camera as many people make it out to be. I wish Canon had waited a year and put the 5D sensor, perhaps with a few less megapixels in the 7D’s body. I don’t want to spend too much time going on about the 5DII’s failings because that’s not what this is about (I’ll write about it more when I work up the courage to deal with the onslaught of 5D fans) Still, I have it now and I’m making the best of it. You can get spectacular Images out of it if you know how to work around its limitations and the video is far superior to what Nikon currently offer (with the possible exception of the D3s).

At the end of the day it all comes down to this. I know someone is going to make the argument that cameras are just tools and any good photographer should be able to use any camera but that is not the point. Sure you can use any camera, but that doesn’t mean you would want to. A painter who paints in oils might just as well be able to paint a masterpiece with pastels, but that doesn’t mean he or she would enjoy the experience. Yes, absolutely the camera is just a tool and I can use either camera to take great pictures. This isn’t about lusting after the next best thing rather than focussing on the art, but rather finding the brush I’m most comfortable using and the one I enjoy the most. After all, art should be about enjoyment of the process, not just the results.

For the moment then I will remain a two system shooter. I use my 5D II for serious work or studio shoots and my D90 for anything where I need a lightweight alternative. I would love to try the more professional Nikon body such as the D300 or D700, but for now I’m happy with the D90 for what I use it for. For anyone considering a new camera I couldn’t recommend the D90 more. It’s a fantastic camera. The images it produces are superb and it’s a complete joy to use.

Related posts:

1. Thoughts on the D300s and other Nikon Announcements
2. In a World of Digital Cameras, Technology Does Matter.
3. DpReview Tests The Powershot G11

Related posts:

1. Sigma 10-20mm Lens Tests
2. Sigma Lens Tests – Take 2
3. Glendalough Panoramas

Even though I shot RAW + JPEG for lot of shots, having Active-D on full lowers the exposure significantly, and in already poor light this ratchets up the noise, and dramatically reduces the quality of the shots. So much for that Idea. I could have labelled this post as “How Not to review a lens”. Still though, I did get some good photographs out of the mornings shootings.

My set-up mistakes aside, what about the lens?

Like I said earlier, having such a wide lens really changes how you look at things. DP Review gave this lens a good review, but I’m not sure I agree with them. It seems soft to me, but it’s inconsistent. It’s possibly a back focus issue, as some shots were fairly sharp, but others were not, and I was stopped down. Sharp areas of the frame were not where I had the focus point, so like I said, it could possibly be a back focus issue. Still, I got the lens for a very good price and it’s more than useable. I will have to do more tests, and on a proper shoot before I make the final judgement on it. I’m going to be using it in a proper shoot in about a weeks time so I’ll see then. For now though, if you are considering this lens, I suggest that unless you’re getting it for a good price, I would look at the Nikon (or canon) alternatives first, even though they may cost a little more.

Related posts:

1. Sigma Lens Tests – Take 2
2. Some Quick Nikon 35mm f1.8 Lens Tests
3. Are the Canon 5D Focus Problems Real?