just wondering why they had not put in the built-in motor? so that there will still be demand for d90??
if that is the case, they would have it placed as the upgrade for D90, not an entry level price or status. and in fact, the upgrading changes is too fast. i will think 2 years is a reasonable minimal time to push for a better model.
i think it is good to have it named as D5000 becos the nomenclature is not as clear cut as canon.
xxxx = entry level
xxx = intermediate
xx = expert
x = professional
in fact, i dun even like canon separate into 1D and 5D, which should be by right x and xx, with the other categories xxx, xxxx, xxxxx.
now D90's replacement, how would it be named then??
D50, D40, D40x, D60 --> corrected = D5000 (xxxx)
D70, D70s, D80, D90 --> ??? (xxx), can't continue to D100.
D100, D200, D300 --> if uncorrected D400 (xx), can't correct to D40
D1, D2, D3, D3x --> already correct, next D4.
as can be seen, how to name the next model of D90 on the current nomenclature, and how to name the next model of D300 on a correct nomenclature is a problem either way using the wrong or the correct naming system.
in fact, 10 numbers for each series is not enough for a company with a long history. the increment should not be by 10, cos the last zero serve no purpose. i think it should be like this D11, D12, D13... big changes D10, D15... complete overhaul... D10, D20...
or maybe they should think of naming systems that designate the full frames and the half frames by C and H (complete, half) as F is already used by film SLRs.