go for a D300 or keep saving ?

suggs

suggs

Messages
2,053
Name
Harry
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all

im terrible at making my mind up so heres the scenario..

i currently have a D200 with a 50mm 1.8 and a 18-70 (kit version) and i mostly shoot motocross and downhill mountain bikes and get up close hence the 50mm...

Im recently feeling my trusty old D200 is showing its age a bit with its iso restrictions and also with the servo-AF being a bit long in the tooth, although it has and still can produced some very nice images i feel it maybe holding me back a bit and causing me to bin more shots than i might needed to...

i was thinking to buy some new (used) glass maybe a 18-55 or 24-70 2.8 etc but now im thinking the money may be better spent on a body upgrade so was thinking D300 but i guess what im asking will i see much improvement or will it be more of a sideways step then a step forward..

otherwise i could save up a bit more and go for another body or jump ship to canon..

any views on this

cheers
 
Last edited:
Harry,
normally I'd suggest going for glass - skip a generation or two in bodies.
If you are sure your glass isn't restricting you at all, I'd go for a new(er) body.
If you like the Nikon way, no reason to jump, unless the Canon can do what the Nikon can't. As for the body, I'd consider D300, D300S, D7000 or a D700, but you might need to get new glass for that, unless you can stick with the 50mm.
 
The only 2 realistic upgrades for me would be the d300 or d7000. Of course, there are other cameras, but you are going to want a high level of AF capability.

The d300 is generally regarded as having the better AF of the pair, with the D7000 having a high ISO advantage if that is needed.

I'd be tempted to go for a D300 now, and keep saving for a higher level body further down the line. Have a good search, get a good price, and you're unlikely to lose too much money when you get the upgrade you really want,

Mike
 
Agree with the 2 previous posts. BUT, also consider the new D7100 if you'll have the extra cash soon (ish) Nikon will probably have the `cash-back` offer on soon, or wait a couple of months while saving and the price drops a bit.
 
thanks for the reply's

i think my 18-70 is restricting me as it defo seems to have gone off the boil a bit, to be fair its been knocked about a fair bit on MX tracks and mountain bike trails the last few years so recently im just not using it.

the 50mm is still nice and sharp and for the most part is about right on reach on my regular haunts, although today i had an off the cuff shoot at a kart track and with only a few kids driving small karts i ended up with huge crops, so today id have swapped the wife for a 70-200 2.8. in fact id swap her for a lot less lol.

i think a fast 18-70'ish is on the cards too but need to prioritise what to buy first..

i think my main priority based on the fast sport i shoot its got to be a body with a very good AF system but what glass is an option?
 
Last edited:
Depends what budget we're talking about. It's not always advisable to change systems as the cost to replace what you have is usually significantly more than you get for your old gear.

But personally I would always upgrade the lenses before upgrading the camera body.
 
I went from the D200 to the D300, and the move was worth it for the Auto Focus alone. And the extra frames per second, especially with the grip, comes in useful for sports. :thumbs: It is better in low light, and a bit more than the specs would have you believe.

D200 compared to the D300.

D200 compared to the D300S.

Whether now is the best time to buy is hard to say. There's been talk of a D300 replacement for years, and it may never arrive, which leaves a 2nd hand D300/S. If a D400 does arrive, 2nd hand prices will go down. The alternative is D7000/D7100, which has shortcomings compared to the D300/S imho, though and improvement over the D200, and the D7100 will be a lot better at high ISOs.

And Canon have the 7D as their alternative to the D300S. Which is a fine camera, and even better since the mid life upgrade last year.

But again, there may be a 7DII in the offing, which may force the 7D prices, new and 2nd hand, down. :shrug:

The D400 and 7DII are just speculation, and if you think you'd benefit from a new camera, I'd get one now. :shrug:
 
suggs said:
thanks for the reply's

i think my 18-70 is restricting me as it defo seems to have gone off the boil a bit, to be fair its been knocked about a fair bit on MX tracks and mountain bike trails the last few years so recently im just not using it.

the 50mm is still nice and sharp and for the most part is about right on reach on my regular haunts, although today i had an off the cuff shoot at a kart track and with only a few kids driving small karts i ended up with huge crops, so today id have swapped the wife for a 70-200 2.8. in fact id swap her for a lot less lol.

i think a fast 18-70'ish is on the cards too but need to prioritise what to buy first..

i think my main priority based on the fast sport i shoot its got to be a body with a very good AF system but what glass is an option?
Click to expand...

I hope she is not reading this :wave:

I think for a start you need that 70-200mm. There are loads of cheap used Sigma's around so this could be a starting point. As you really have little good glass to take further, why not get a Canon 1D mk2 or 1D mk3 if you can afford it? Canon also has an excellent 70-200mm f/4 which is quite affordable. I can't see much point in 18-70 for motosport :shrug:
 
Just as an aside, have you ever tried the 70-300mm lens? Cracking for the money & fairly cheap pre-owned.
 
Reason i say the fast 18-70 is i shoot most weekends at a MX track and sell the pictures, im allowed anywhere on the track and i do get in very close so dont need much more reach than 50mm, although a long lens would mean getting further a way from the target and i guess more dof

i did nearly buy the new Tamron 70-300 VC last week to see what a longer reach would be like but didnt in the end as had the body change in the back of my mind..

if the panel think i should go better glass then maybe i should..
 
Is there anyone near you that could lend you either a body, or lens, to try out? (any `toggers on here that fancy a day out with you?)
 
everyone i know has canon's mostly 5d mk2 :\


im kinda thinking maybe i should get a 70-200 2.8 first after all and try that, as worse ways it will be a great lens to take forward to a D300..

i have £4-500 to play with at the moment may be able to warrant a bit more..

might be a silly question but should i expect better IQ from the 70-200 2.8 compared to a nifty fifty ?
 
suggs said:
everyone i know has canon's mostly 5d mk2 :\

im kinda thinking maybe i should get a 70-200 2.8 first after all and try that, as worse ways it will be a great lens to take forward to a D300..

i have £4-500 to play with at the moment may be able to warrant a bit more..

might be a silly question but should i expect better IQ from the 70-200 2.8 compared to a nifty fifty ?
Click to expand...

Tricky.

For a second body I'd go for a used D7000. The D300 is also a good upgrade in terms of AF but I'd go newer sensor over AF (since the D7000 AF is good enough for most situations).

The thing where I feel you will also notice a big difference is ISO and DR.

this is where the D300 is not really anything in terms of an upgrade whereas the D7000 is quite a big difference.

The 70-200 could be an option but I would personally upgrade the body just to be with the times lol.
 
The 70-200 could be an option but I would personally upgrade the body just to be with the times lol
Click to expand...
Have to disagree unless your shooting a lot of low light...the d300/s would be a great upgrade.Just because its not the latest doesnt make it bad;)
 
ISO isnt my first priority really as i mostly shoot in open bright areas, id rather go after the upgrade that will give me better IQ..

what ever happens lens or body upgrade, id like to get it underway next week..
 
I moved from the D200 to the D300 and never looked back. With the battery pack and the battery pack using the EN-EL4a addition is really great. if using a heavy lens the grip helps with the overall balance of lens and camera, such an important consideration so often overlooked.
Realspeed
 
Last edited:
For shooting fast sports id choose the d300 over a d7000 anyday....I take it you shoot mostly outdoors so getting the 1/500 of a second to freeze action isnt going to be a problem, plus the af is very good on the d300 and a blistering motor drive with the grip.....no brainer really.:thumbs:
 
Last edited:
Suggs my brother is in rainham and owns a D300, he loves it and found it a vast improvement over his D90, he also has some fast glass and I'm sure if I put you in touch with him he'd let you pop round and see what its like.

Personally from what you've said I would say its the body holding you back more than glass, yes you need to replace the 18-70 at some point but shiny new glass isn't going to help if the D200 is letting you down with autofocus & ISO performance and as your selling images iQ is obviously important to you.
As said you've got a lens thats doing the job for you, on a better body how much better will it be?
 
what i find odd and it could just be me i guess but as an example of what i find with the AF

today for instance 2 karts same size same track same sort of speed and line, one a piecing aqua blue the other a dark red, way more of the aqua kart images where sharper compared to the red one im talking 3 or more to 1, ive found this several times before when shooting MX certain colours seem to focus much better than others to the point i think im loosing the plot "/


ps might take you up on the brother thing, im only 10 mins from rainham
 
Last edited:
suggs said:
what i find odd and it could just be me i guess but as an example of what i find with the AF

today for instance 2 karts same size same track same sort of speed and line, one a piecing aqua blue the other a dark red, way more of the aqua kart images where sharper compared to the red one im talking 3 or more to 1, ive found this several times before when shooting MX certain colours seem to focus much better than others to the point i think im loosing the plot "/
Click to expand...

The AF in the D200 doesn't (afaik) see colour, so if certain colours are low in contrast compared to the surroundings, then the AF (and any AF) will struggle. The D300/S can track by colour (though will struggle as any AF will with low contrast) but there are more focus points, grouped closer together, to hopefully lock on to the subject. You can choose 1, 9, 21 51 points and 51 point 3D. The 3D option is the one that can track by colour, if the subject colour is different to the background. ;)

The D300/S AF is very good. :)
 
yes defo seen some D300's going for around £300, if i see one with sensible millage for that sort of price ill have it :)

i need to get it sorted soon as got a few things coming up next few months including being one of 3 official togs covering a mountain bike race series and an increasing fan base of MX riders wanting pictures...
 
been offered a D300 today for £325 with all bits and bobs plus 4 CF cards with 12000 shots on the clock and unmarked (so they say) also selling a 18-200 VR1 for £150, not a lens i want but might be worth buying and selling on as making over £200 on ebay...


could work out well ?
 
Last edited:
yes true, id be happy with just the body for 325 if its a good as described and its only 19 miles away.

ive put a wanted up in the classifieds so will wait and see the next day or so..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top