Can you please help me make up my mind between D300s and D7000

BunnyPics

BunnyPics

Suspended / Banned
Messages
141
Name
Oksana
Edit My Images
Yes
Correction. D7000 is not on cards anymore. It's between D300s and D7100, and leaning towards D300s.
Thank you everybody!

-----------------

It's now turning into eeny, meeny, miny, moe situation and the more I think the more confused I now get. My ADHD is getting the better of me now, I'm going crazy and I need help.

I've outgrown my D5100. For about a year I've not used anything other than the full manual mode on it and shot in RAW only. I'm OK with the camera, but I've stumbled over more and more limitations and I need to upgrade. My dad's a pro and he despises all Nikon models with 4 numbers in them, I think, so he appears quite biased towards D300s. My argument in favour of D7000 over D300s was the supposedly better exposure metering, probably quicker focusing in low light.

The push for the upgrade came from my needing fast flash sync, in-camera focus to be able to use older lenses without ultrasound motors, in-camera autofocus adjustment.

Both are an upgrade from the dinky D5100 for me: pentaprism viewfinder, 100% viewfinder coverage, they are bigger and heavier and have the little monochrome screen at the top where you can see all the settings.
... and I like the virtual horizon on them!

Deciding factors would be:
  • autofocus because I often shoot in mediocre lighting and also moving subjects - pet animals (which seems to give D7000 an advantage, but is there a noticeable difference in speed? Or does D300 have the advantage because of more focus points including the cross ones?)
  • exposure metering (D300s' sensor has less pixels for this but again I will probably not notice the difference, or will I in low lighting?)
  • the size of the little control panel display at the top. I read somewhere that it is tiny and unusable in D7000. Is this true? Is D300s' control panel bigger in size?
  • The look and the feel of the camera! I want it to "look good" :cool:
Irrelevant factors:
  • Video capability
  • Megapixels
  • Continuous burst of 6fps is sufficient, more would be an advantage but not a deciding factor
  • Buffer size
  • I don't shoot at very high ISO. 640 is probably the ceiling for me. It's normally a reflective flash and about 200-400 in low lighting.
  • CF card slot is not critical. In fact, I don't have any of them at all
  • In-camera editing
I get a feeling D7000 would be sufficient but its fancy settings and automatic modes are not useful to me. In D300s, more focus points, but is it better than D7000 because I hear in D7000 they're all bunched up at the centre. What puts me off about D7000 is the same sensor as my D5100 has, the same automatic modes availability that I don't need or use.
 
Last edited:
I personally would have a D300s over a D7000, having used both - if only for the size and feel of the D300s, it's built like a tank.

I would recommend you finding a way to get both in your hands and seeing how you find the feel of them etc.
 
The D300s is a better comparison with the D7100 I'd imagine? I'm sure price wise they're not a million miles off each other either and pretty similar in terms of performance also with a few minor exceptions.

I have a D7100 but would have no qualms in owning a D300s either. So much so that I may well just go for whichever I can get the best deal on at the time.
 
Stu Meech said:
I personally would have a D300s over a D7000, having used both - if only for the size and feel of the D300s, it's built like a tank.

I would recommend you finding a way to get both in your hands and seeing how you find the feel of them etc.
Click to expand...

I'll phone up some camera shops tomorrow. May even go down to one and see them. At the moment, my lens (and even my flash) are heavier than the camera... and as I'm only a girl, I dread to think what will happen when I upgrade! I better get going with my push-ups if D300s is the one I like better.
 
Ian W said:
The D300s is a better comparison with the D7100 I'd imagine? I'm sure price wise they're not a million miles off each other either and pretty similar in terms of performance also with a few minor exceptions.

I have a D7100 but would have no qualms in owning a D300s either. So much so that I may well just go for whichever I can get the best deal on at the time.
Click to expand...

D7100 is the cost for me. They're a lot more money than D7000. But a good point, yes, and a better comparison.
 
I had two D300 cameras (not the 's') version and I was thoroughly delighted when I sold them and bought two D7000 cameras instead. For me the D7000 has better IQ and defo better DR, that and a newer sensor generally beats an older sensor

Oh, and twin card slots for that extra peace of mind too :)

Dave
 
I have never had a D7000 but do have an D300S which I am completely delighted with. Another benefit you may not have considered is weather sealing. My daughter knocked a large cup of coffee over mine in Legoland (deep joy..), a wipe down and a small clean inside the flash mechanism and it was good to go again. Also has 3D focus tracking which may be useful for pets, unsure if the D7000 does
 
I've had 2 D7k's (in fact I have one for sale in the classifieds as we speak) and I've always been more the happy with them. They are also weather sealed and have the 3D tracking. Great feel camera and great image quality. I had a D5000 as a spare body and liked the D7000 so much that I would never use the D5000 as it felt awkward and fiddly.

With regards to the top display being unusable, that's not true for me. I use it all the time and never had a problem reading it, even in the dark you just flick the power switch and it lights up for easier viewing.

To be honest, I think whatever you decide on I'd be very surprised if you regret your decision.
 
Last edited:
technics100 said:
I still have a D300 but had several D7k's, never liked them to be honest, not sure what it was.. so unless you are pushing ISO I would say D300s..
Click to expand...

Ian W said:
The D300s is a better comparison with the D7100 I'd imagine? I'm sure price wise they're not a million miles off each other either and pretty similar in terms of performance also with a few minor exceptions.

I have a D7100 but would have no qualms in owning a D300s either. So much so that I may well just go for whichever I can get the best deal on at the time.
Click to expand...

I am not pushing ISO. technics100, I think the problem with D7k's could be their megapixels and the complications arising from them. It looks like Nikon's marketing department jumped on the megapixel bandwagon there a bit, which is understandable as the market the camera's aimed at relishes megapixels. I'm prejudiced towards them. Ian W, D7000 caught my eye because of only 16MP. (It has the same sensor as my current D5100.) D330s has 12.1 or something. D7100 - 24MP! I don't need 24MP, and neither does the cropped sensor, I would think. And neither does my hard drive, or my poor little laptop's processor. Yeah OK, maybe there's better exposure metering and depth of colour or whatever... but those high ISO are going to be noisy on a crop sensor, and especially when megapixels go up... I don't know, I'm not a specialist or a pro, but I've been brought up by my daddy who's a pro and is a bit old-school and even his full-frame D700 has 16MP. And now they are releasing the new D5, and that has 20MP on a full frame. Why put 24MP on a crop camera? Maybe because an average consumer is not concerned with framing the shot? I have my reservations as far as megapixels are concerned.
 
Mark G said:
With regards to the top display being unusable, that's not true for me. I use it all the time and never had a problem reading it, even in the dark you just flick the power switch and it lights up for easier viewing.

To be honest, I think whatever you decide on I'd be very surprised if you regret your decision.
Click to expand...

I don't have access to the classifieds for another... 10 days or something, I think. I can't blimming wait! :-) I think sellers on eBay do take a mick with their prices sometimes, but TBH eBay's a rip-off for sellers. I have put my current bits on eBay and unless I buy something quick, I'll be without a camera for a period of time. But my dad is urging me to not rush and wait wait wait until something decent comes up. I will, I think.

Thank you for your feedback about the top display. It is helpful to know that not everyone hates it.

I know that whatever I get will be delighted and it will be a step-up from the D5100 I have at the moment. I might watch a few things and get whatever's a good deal at the time, but my heart is in D300s.
 
Is the D300s a step-up though? As you say the D5100 sensor is basically whats in the D7000, the D300s has better AF but the sensor surely is a step backwards? (12.3mp v 16mp), appreciate your spend limitation but I'd spend a little extra and get a D7000 or D7100 as I don't see from a image quality point of view that the D300S is going to be better.
 
BunnyPics said:
Why put 24MP on a crop camera? Maybe because an average consumer is not concerned with framing the shot? I have my reservations as far as megapixels are concerned.
Click to expand...

Because us wildlife togs taking pics of little birds often need to crop... A lot ;) the top crop bodies are aimed at sports or wildlife market and 24mb on my 7200 is way better than the 16mp on my previous d7000. In your case though it seems as though it would make very little difference.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Is the D300s a step-up though? As you say the D5100 sensor is basically whats in the D7000, the D300s has better AF but the sensor surely is a step backwards? (12.3mp v 16mp), appreciate your spend limitation but I'd spend a little extra and get a D7000 or D7100 as I don't see from a image quality point of view that the D300S is going to be better.
Click to expand...

Megapixels don't really matter to me because with the shots I take, I have an opportunity to frame them and I don't print larger than A4. And more pixels doesn't always means quality. Usually the other way round because they're smaller pixels on the sensor. I'm happy with the sensor on D5100, that's not the reason for upgrade at all. Perhaps I should have said it in the post, I am upgrading because of the slow flash sync on it, the lack of autofocus fine-tuning ability, and the lack of in-camera autofocus (forcing me to buy the expensive ultrasound motor lenses). They are the main reasons. But I'll enjoy more focus points, better auto-focus, and a better camera at this point.
 
When I shot with Nikon I had a extremely bad experience with two d 7100 bodies that both blew up on me ,the D300s just kept trooping on ,I can remember shooting a swan flying towards me across a lake and I took a burst of shots of it ( 300 f4 lens) and I got 21 shots in a burst all in perfect focus .the D300s is one of the best cameras Nikon ever made and it's taken them a long time to find a replacement and even that's not yet released
 
If this site/comparison is correct there is far less that the D300s does that the D7100 doesn't - the previous (vs D7000) advantages the 300 had primarily relating to AF appears to have gone:

https://photographylife.com/nikon-d7100-vs-d300s

My take on the differences apart from the aesthetic and/or ergonomic (the latter of which is really important btw!) would be:
  • AF works on the D7100 at a smaller aperture. I think you're using kit lenses so if you ever play with teleconverters you may exceed the D300s ability to focus (limited to f/5.6 or faster)
  • Base ISO could be relevant if you're shooting outdoors and want to use fill flash - being able to keep that shutter speed down is helpful. Quality improvement at 100 vs 200 might be worthwhile but probably not massive TBH
  • Buffer speed you've mentioned isn't relevant but it might me - the D7100 will basically allow you 1s of continuous shooting before it "locks up" vs a good few seconds for the 300 - if you're wanting to get longer distance shots where camera shake may well be an issue, high speed continuous could be something you start to use more of, although whether you'd be taking more than 1s of continuous, I don't know
  • Exposure metering looks like it might be more advanced / better on the D7100
  • MP count is double on the newer D7100 - you say this isn't important as you don't currently crop, but you may find yourself wanting to crop aggressively (especially if you cannot get as close as you'd like) and halving a 12MP image is noticeably worse than halving a 24MP image. If you ever do faster action stuff (including animals) you might not have the luxury of composition time and cropping is an image-saver
Having not used either body, I can't give you advice on which would be more suited for your needs but on paper (not the most relevant comparison) the features of the D7100 look to have the edge.
 
the black fox said:
When I shot with Nikon I had a extremely bad experience with two d 7100 bodies that both blew up on me ,the D300s just kept trooping on ,I can remember shooting a swan flying towards me across a lake and I took a burst of shots of it ( 300 f4 lens) and I got 21 shots in a burst all in perfect focus .the D300s is one of the best cameras Nikon ever made and it's taken them a long time to find a replacement and even that's not yet released
Click to expand...

I just bought one of the D300s's. And I'm glad I did!
 
Good buy ,I loved mine and don't worry about the mp take a look at what I produce with a 10 mp canon 1D3 ,
 
the black fox said:
Good buy ,I loved mine and don't worry about the mp take a look at what I produce with a 10 mp canon 1D3 ,
Click to expand...

I never worry about MP. The megapixel wars never really caught up with me. My laptop screen is only 1 MP and an A4 print's only about 11 at 300dpi. There are more drawbacks to the MP count than advantages for me. Plus, cropping photos has never given me the quality I get from framing them right in the first place. With bigger pixels, I won't worry so much about using older unstabilised lenses like Nikon 18-70mm (which is just the one I need on a crop sensor). And though D7100 attracted me with its functionality and tech... I didn't fancy in the slightest moving those 24MP files. I only have a laptop for image processing and my external terabytes are getting fuller... and I have enough bother with the 16MP I currently have in D5100. Sometimes it takes quite a few minutes to import / export and hours to do my obligatory 2 backups a month (because I do full sync inc. updates and deltions, twice). I don't fancy upping those times, and I don't fancy having to upgrade my hardware either. I can see nothing but trouble from megapixels for me at this point.
 
If my memory is correct the d300s takes most old Nikon lenses with no problem as well .and it's a.f is lightning fast
 
Have compared my own D300 to a D7000 and much preferred the D300 for design, handling and build quality. I'd choose the D300s personally, in fact I'm looking out for one to go along with my D300. Haven't used a D7100 but can't imagine it's much different from the D7000.
 
Techy Guy said:
Have compared my own D300 to a D7000 and much preferred the D300 for design, handling and build quality. I'd choose the D300s personally, in fact I'm looking out for one to go along with my D300. Haven't used a D7100 but can't imagine it's much different from the D7000.
Click to expand...

They've updated D7100 substantially. New sensor, faster burst, focus points all over the frame rather than bunched-up in the middle... it's really quite a good camera. Apart from the megapixels. I don't fancy shifting those around when I don't need them. :-)
 
Well... I got my D300s, and am I glad I got it!.. It triggers my flash remotely, it syncs with it above 1/200s, and it's good for self-defence. I only use Nikon 18-70mm with it, but the improvement from that 18-250mm Sigma lens on Nikon D5100 is staggering. Here's a photo of Thimble bunny I just took, and it's no masterpiece, but that's the kind of shots I have to make for the bunny rescue I run, and I have never had this ease in taking a shot and this sharpness with Sigma!

25978674324_9c1c97edbd_o.jpg


He's a bunny who's ill and could not walk, and the sight of him finally getting better and stumbling around my room makes my heart as glad. Even better that I can finally show that little sparkle in his eye and the soft hair of his with a short shutter shot AND using a flash.

It's taken me a little bit to get to grips with, but not nearly a learning curve as steep as I expected. I quickly added my personal shooting settings - one for high quality 14 bit raw photos, one for 12 bit ones for high-speed bursts, went through the menu and did my own resets of everything (the previous guy had it set up for Jpegs and I only shoot in RAW), fiddled with semi-automatic modes, figured out the controls, connected the flash, connected the battery grip. It is perfection.

There is a huge advantage to a professional camera in having all of the buttons to hand: I can change ISO without going into menus, format cards with two presses of two buttons, change the focus mode, white balance, shooting mode... all very quickly, and with buttons that are to hand. Two command dials make things so easy. The fantastic focus, viewfinder, the viewfinder grid, menus... I love it love it love it love it!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top