From a d90 to a D300s or D700

T

The Chiller

Messages
456
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
Evening All
Been a slight change of plan since I last asked this question as I have now bought a Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G :D So now should I get the D300s or go for the d700 I do mainly Motorsports photography, nature and trips to the zoo. Thanks for any help and advice.
Gary
 
The Chiller said:
Evening All
Been a slight change of plan since I last asked this question as I have now bought a Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G :D So now should I get the D300s or go for the d700 I do mainly Motorsports photography, nature and trips to the zoo. Thanks for any help and advice.
Gary
Click to expand...

Save your cash and get a D300.
 
Thanks for the reply Tommy. I must admit I have been looking for a s/h D300 or D300s. I need to save money after buying the lens, but thought after buying the lens I should put a d700 on the list.
 
DX for wildlife. Not for the extra reach as most people cant grasp the fact that its not actually extra reach at all just a cropped image at whatever the res of the camera is
 
TonyNI said:
DX for wildlife. Not for the extra reach as most people cant grasp the fact that its not actually extra reach at all just a cropped image at whatever the res of the camera is
Click to expand...

It is extra reach just the same focal length ;)

shoot a 12mp d300 at 200mm and a 12mp d3 at 200mm, print them both at say 20x16 and see which one looks closer (hence the term extra reach)
 
I am only thinking of upgrading for the far better auto focus system, better built, weatherproof, higher frame rate.
 
When I was photographer at Southend Rugby Club, I used a D300s and a 70-200 2.8 and it was a brilliant combination and the only problem was during the winter months under floodlights when at 2.8 and 6400 I just about managed 1/250 sec.

So apart from the low light problem I thoroughly loved it.

If you are to be using it in low light then get something better at handling low light situations.
 
I upgraded from a D90 to D700 mainly as I wanted something with better IQ in low light.

However for what your shooting I'd go for a D300s - the focus system alone is far superior to the D90's and will get you more consistent in focus shots.

I might also buy a 2nd hand D300s as I still need the crop which the D700 won't give me.
 
Thanks all for for the help and advice. This place is great for help in trying to make the correct decisions. :)
Thanks again
 
Don't discount the D7000. It'll feel like the D90 but will have much better IQ than the D300.
 
The Chiller said:
Thanks for the reply Tommy. I must admit I have been looking for a s/h D300 or D300s. I need to save money after buying the lens, but thought after buying the lens I should put a d700 on the list.
Click to expand...

Oh please!

I think you got a real bargain on the lens :lol:

If you are thinking between the D300 and D300s just remember they are virtually the same apart from the fact that the D300s has video. Is video worth the extra £120 plus on a D300?
 
I would wait for the 24mp d600 you can then crop to 12mp which will give you the reach if needed.
 
Last edited:
AFC said:
When I was photographer at Southend Rugby Club, I used a D300s and a 70-200 2.8 and it was a brilliant combination and the only problem was during the winter months under floodlights when at 2.8 and 6400 I just about managed 1/250 sec.

So apart from the low light problem I thoroughly loved it.

If you are to be using it in low light then get something better at handling low light situations.
Click to expand...

That seems not very good floodlights, I think the standard for National games is EV 8 or EV 9 for televised games (sky HD likes a bit more light ;) )

But the point of pushing the ISO is important. However nail the exposure and the D300 is fine.
 
andyscott said:
That seems not very good floodlights, I think the standard for National games is EV 8 or EV 9 for televised games (sky HD likes a bit more light ;) )

But the point of pushing the ISO is important. However nail the exposure and the D300 is fine.
Click to expand...

Southend are in National 2 south and their floodlights have been approved by the authorities, but I would imagine that they are at the lower end of the scale.
 
The23rdman said:
Don't discount the D7000. It'll feel like the D90 but will have much better IQ than the D300.
Click to expand...

Much better?????

I have to disagree to be honest I owned a D7000 before getting my D700 and as I said earlier in the thread I now also have a D300. The D7000 does have slightly better IQ and this is more prominent at higher ISO but I certainly wouldn't say it was much better.

The D300 also has a much better focus system, far superior build and is just a much better camera to use than the D7000.
 
Soda Farl said:
Much better?????

I have to disagree to be honest I owned a D7000 before getting my D700 and as I said earlier in the thread I now also have a D300. The D7000 does have slightly better IQ and this is more prominent at higher ISO but I certainly wouldn't say it was much better.

The D300 also has a much better focus system, far superior build and is just a much better camera to use than the D7000.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree that the 300 is a better built camera, but the 7k has merits too. The IQ is better whatever you say. It has more resolution, better ISO performance and better dynamic range. I agree the af isn't as good but its better than the D90.

Oh, and to qualify I owned both cameras.
 
Hooky said:
Oh please!

I think you got a real bargain on the lens :lol:

If you are thinking between the D300 and D300s just remember they are virtually the same apart from the fact that the D300s has video. Is video worth the extra £120 plus on a D300?
Click to expand...

After all the pain, heartache, and tears you caused me I hope you put a new hankie in the box.:lol:
 
The23rdman said:
Oh, I agree that the 300 is a better built camera, but the 7k has merits too. The IQ is better whatever you say. It has more resolution, better ISO performance and better dynamic range. I agree the af isn't as good but its better than the D90.

Oh, and to qualify I owned both cameras.
Click to expand...

The general consensus everywhere was that the d7000 beats the d300 in every area with regards to IQ

Yes better built and better AF but if you're basing the choice purely on IQ then the d7000 is the winner hands down

Easier to toggle AF modes as seen by the d800 nicking the AF button first seen on the d7000

Not to mention live backup dual card slots.
 
Last edited:
Build quality is fine, one of mine lasted 6 months in Afghanistan with not one hitch.

AF on the d300 is good but not sure if it affects the 70-200 as it has a built in SWM??
 
andyscott said:
Build quality is fine, one of mine lasted 6 months in Afghanistan with not one hitch.

AF on the d300 is good but not sure if it affects the 70-200 as it has a built in SWM??
Click to expand...

Yep, the camera still has a big influence on AF speed and accuracy.
 
The23rdman said:
Oh, I agree that the 300 is a better built camera, but the 7k has merits too. The IQ is better whatever you say. It has more resolution, better ISO performance and better dynamic range. I agree the af isn't as good but its better than the D90.

Oh, and to qualify I owned both cameras.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it wasn't, just you described it as much better which is simply not the case.

I am going purely on my own experience of owning both camera's. The D7000 in my opinion does offer slightly better IQ. However the downside's to it in my opinion outweigh this.

The D7000 focus system isn't as good, the build is nothing like as good and the D7000 has had many issues, focus problems oil run off etc.

If I was to do it again I would be buying a D300/D300s over the D7000, disregarding all of the above they are just simply a much better camera to use in terms of the controls etc.
 
Last edited:
Soda Farl said:
I didn't say it wasn't, just you described it as much better which is simply not the case.

I am going purely on my own experience of owning both camera's. The D7000 in my opinion does offer slightly better IQ. However the downside's to it in my opinion outweigh this.

The D7000 focus system isn't as good, the build is nothing like as good and the D7000 has had many issues, focus problems oil run off etc.

If I was to do it again I would be buying a D300/D300s over the D7000, disregarding all of the above they are just simply a much better camera to use in terms of the controls etc.
Click to expand...

We're going in circles.
 
The Chiller said:
Evening All
Been a slight change of plan since I last asked this question as I have now bought a Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G :D So now should I get the D300s or go for the d700 I do mainly Motorsports photography, nature and trips to the zoo. Thanks for any help and advice.
Gary
Click to expand...

Gary...If i was making the decision right now i would do exactly the same as i did at the turn of last year.

Look for a low mileage D300 ( a few around circ £450/500) then save up for a D700....best of both worlds :thumbs:
 
PS .... I so nearly jumped in on the VR II...Bargain !!
 
SteveF said:
Gary...If i was making the decision right now i would do exactly the same as i did at the turn of last year.

Look for a low mileage D300 ( a few around circ £450/500) then save up for a D700....best of both worlds :thumbs:
Click to expand...

I noticed earlier that Aperture UK are advertising a D300 for £390. It might be a basket case for all I know but well worth a look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top