D200 to D300 ?

Hertsman

Hertsman

Messages
3,413
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Sorry if this has been done to death on here.

Thinking about going form my D200 up to a good used D300, non S model.

Whats the general feeling ? Is this a worthy upgrade ?

The only thing I dont really like about my 200 is the poor high ISO images.

I love the "heft" of it, and like the fact the 300 has everything in the same place.

Your thoughts appreciated all.
 
Hertsman said:
Sorry if this has been done to death on here. Thinking about going form my D200 up to a good used D300, non S model. Whats the general feeling ? Is this a worthy upgrade ? The only thing I dont really like about my 200 is the poor high ISO images. I love the "heft" of it, and like the fact the 300 has everything in the same place. Your thoughts appreciated all.
Click to expand...

Not a massive jump tbh. The d300 is good to about 1600, after that its starts to get a bit messy. Still, the d200 was only much good up to 800, so you get a bit of extra there. Plus you get live view and a few other features.

Agreed on the heft though, you won't get that feeling without going for a d700. The d90 and d7000 don't feel close to that chunkiness.
 
;) Had a d300s, d90,d5000,d5100 d200 and d70..plus a few film cameras.
 
Last edited:
fracster said:
What? Utter nonsense, the D300 beats the D200 hands down, all day long.
Click to expand...

Have to agree..although didnt go directly from a d200 to d300s the differences were very substantiel IMO
 
Last edited:
i think its a worthy upgrade, although the d200 is still a great camera, depending on what you shoot. i love my d300 and also have access to a d200 they both feel the same and have similar layout, but the d300 is just alot cleaverer!
 
I have never used a D200 so can't compare them, but I love my D300, and have no qualms about using ISO3200 if necessary.
 
I did this upgrade a few months ago and never regreted it so far. D300 has everything that the 200 has in terms of handling/sturdiness + massively better battery life, better af system, live view, better high ISO and a weaker AA filter. All of those are of great use for me as mainly landscape photographer :)

Good luck,
Michael
 
i did it and still have the D200 too, the D300 made a huge difference to me as i shoot mostly motorsport and the AF is way better on the D300. they look and feel very much the same so felt right straight away when i switched over.

i also have a grip on mine and really like the feel weight....
 
DoubleT said:
i think its a worthy upgrade, although the d200 is still a great camera, depending on what you shoot. i love my d300 and also have access to a d200 they both feel the same and have similar layout, but the d300 is just alot cleaverer!
Click to expand...

can you define cleverer?
 
Apart for a slightly better high iso I couldn't see much difference, but don't expect a huge difference in the iso, if you really need much better high iso look at a d700 or d3.
 
fracster said:
What? Utter nonsense, the D300 beats the D200 hands down, all day long.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I went from a D200 to the D300, and then because of a break in at home, a D300S.

On this site you can compare cameras, here's the D200 v the D300. In almost every measurable way the D300 is better. And just for completeness, the D200 v D300S.

For me the AF was the biggest upgrade for me. The AF on the D300 was a quantum leap compared to the D200. (y) The extra frames per second was good, especially with the grip attached. Better high ISO performance was appreciated. :) Extra pixels are nice if it doesn't make for a worse sensor or pictures. 100% viewfinder and larger LCD. With the D300S the extra card slot gives more memory for backup or just more in camera capacity. And even though I don't do video, the Live view has come in useful many times, especially for landscapes to accurately focus once the camera is on a tripod.

If you don't shoot action, and always take pics of mainly static subjects in good light, then it may not feel as big an upgrade.

Because my D200 was an import, I kept it, and it is now used for time lapses and when I think I need an extra camera with a different lens, as when I do some sports. I don't know whether it is my D200, but the metering is not as consistent as the D300/S.
 
Tom, if you have gone from a D200 to a D300 and believe that there is not a big difference between the two, then nothing I say or can say will change your mind.

I just think that the difference was huge in pretty much every aspect,the 300 is far superior than the 200.

If you think differently, then so be it.
 
I have D300 and its OK in good broad spectrum light below about ISO 800 when you get above that images get quiet noisy. If you want better high ISO performance than your D200 you may better off looking a a used D7000 for a few quid more.

It's a shame really because the rest of the D300 experience is good, particularly the AF performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top