sell Nikon d300s and buy Nikon d7000 ?

S

scott236

Suspended / Banned
Messages
16
Name
scott
Edit My Images
Yes
If you had a nikon d300s (as i do) would you sell it to buy a Nikon d7000, i cannot afford a d700 but from what i read the d7000 is way better at high iso than the d300s and the image quality is better too.
I mainly shoot portraits inside and out using natural light and 2nd shoot at the odd wedding so the better iso would be helpfull.

Is the d7000 really that good ?

scott
 
From everything I've heard/read, whilst the D7000 is awesome the D300s is still the one to keep.
 
I haven't really researched it image quality wise, but I did handle a D7000 and for me it was a big step back in handling/controls from the D300s.

So for me - no, but you may very well prefer the handling of it so if that suits you better, maybe yes!
 
justinitus said:
I haven't really researched it image quality wise, but I did handle a D7000 and for me it was a big step back in handling/controls from the D300s.

So for me - no, but you may very well prefer the handling of it so if that suits you better, maybe yes!
Click to expand...

I know the D300s has a bigger pro style body but what do you think the D7000 is missing in terms of controls? I think the easily accessible two user defined modes are a great feature on the D7000.
 
if you want slightly better hih iso go for it, but go try and get the feel of one first, it does not feel like the d300,
if you want high iso save for a d700, iso 12800 is slightly cleaner then the d300 at iso 6400.
heres some high iso samples taken 11 at night and one 11watt energy saver bulb.
d300 iso 6400 no nr
d300iso6400.jpg

same p&pd
d300iso6400done.jpg


d700 straight from camera no nr.
iso12800.jpg

p&p
iso12800done.jpg
 
Just bought the D7000 fantastic camera superb IQ dual sd slots with backup a real plus camera is quiet and fast cannot fault it programable user settings a real extra
 
From what I've read, the D7000 is better than the D300S in a few ways (ISO, number of pixels, but overall the D300S is the better camera.

The D7000 is aimed below the D300S in the Nikon range, and a slight reposition/replacement of the D90 in the market.

For the minimal advantages that the D7000 has in a few areas, I wouldn't, and indeed haven't, been tempted at all to replace my D300S. it hasn't even entered my head. :shrug: :lol:
 
One of these two is likely to be my next body. Out of interest, I have read about where the d7000 is better than the d300s. What does the 300s give you that the d7000 doesn't?
 
scottthehat said:
the d300s has more af points, faster fps and with battery grip 8fps, also better build.
Click to expand...

The D300S is also slightly bigger (makes a difference to some people), more ergonomic (some functions have their own buttons which they don't have on the D7000), more informative viewfinder (the ISO value in particular is not always in the viewfinder) and able to take Compact Flash cards.
 
I have a D7000.

Great camera, but I would'nt sell a D300s for one.

I'ts not the camera it's who's behind it.

D in W
 
Dave in Wales said:
I have a D7000.

Great camera, but I would'nt sell a D300s for one.

I'ts not the camera it's who's behind it.

D in W
Click to expand...

This thread 1st time with a D40 may confirm that as these were taken with a D40 - yep a D40!! A camera no way near the likes of a D300s nor a D7000.....

Just shows what you can get if you put your mind to it...
 
Last edited:
redhed17 said:
The D300S is also slightly bigger (makes a difference to some people), more ergonomic (some functions have their own buttons which they don't have on the D7000), more informative viewfinder (the ISO value in particular is not always in the viewfinder) and able to take Compact Flash cards.
Click to expand...

Cheers. I think personally the high iso performance of the d7000 would probably sway me but whatever replaces 300s is going to be some camera!
 
the 300 is a better quality camera all round .. i love mine!
 
Trig's said:
This thread 1st time with a D40 may confirm that as these were taken with a D40 - yep a D40!! A camera no way near the likes of a D300s nor a D7000.....

Just shows what you can get if you put your mind to it...
Click to expand...

With kit lens too... Kinda puts the whole expensive lens expensive camera thing into perspective :)
 
arent d40 supposed to be really good for night shots as the pixel density is way down?
 
Sell the D300s to finance a D7000 - in short no.

I acquired a D7000 a couple of weeks ago. I haven't really had the time to put it through it's paces yet, but one of the things I've noticed is that the ISO performance is not as good as it's hyped to be, especially if you shoot raw. Compared to my D90 I have about one more stop of usable ISO, which to be honest It's pretty much what I expected. The d300s and the D90 have a very similar, if not the same sensor, so I think the comparison will probably also stand for the D300s. If you you shoot JPEG, or use Capture NX to process the RAW files, then it's a whole different ball game. Nikon seems to have worked some serious voodoo with the noise reduction algorithms.

Would I buy a D7000 in preference to a D300s, well I did because the D7000 suited my needs more than the D300s did. Depending on another persons needs the d300s may be a more suitable camera.

That said, I was having a chat with one of the guys at my local photography shop at the weekend, and basically since the arrival of the d7000 they've gone from selling 30-40 d300s a week to selling perhaps one, and it also has appeared to have had an impact on the D700 sales as they're down as well. Now this may be partly down to customer perception of megapixels, but according to the guy serious pro Nikon users have also been buying up the D7000 for the resolution, and to use as a backup.
 
I took a step up from the D90 to the D7000. I t was originally going to be the D300. I was a bit dubious as I may have been taking a side step, but was told by someone who knows and has plenty experience that the D7000 is better image quality than the D300. I would consider the technological advantages of the D7000 compared to the D300?
 
I'm watching this thread with interest, I'm undecided between the 2 as well!
 
I use a d300s as a backup and d3 as my main body, I considered getting the d7000 as a backup because of the video, I do weddings. That's the reason a lot of pros are picking it up I think, the video. The video on the d300s isn't worth using imo. But I'm going to wait for the d800 or d4 as I expect they will do video.

If you don't need video or the slightly higher res I would say stick to the d300 for now. The extra res isn't enough for *** who need to go higher than 11mp like micro stock or fashion, so you better off keeping the higher frame rate and build quality. The d300 has long been considered a pro body by news and wedding photogs.
 
gad-westy said:
Cheers. I think personally the high iso performance of the d7000 would probably sway me but whatever replaces 300s is going to be some camera!
Click to expand...

It should be, with the technological advances it could share with a D4, as it did last time with the AF and the LCD amongst other things with the D300/D3, but there is no definite date for D400/D4 and I expect Nikon's plans to have been affected by the Japanese Earthquake/Tsunami to some degree. :(

I'm happy enough with the D300S though, and can't see any reason to upgrade at the moment.


That said, I haven't seen the D400 specs. ;) :lol:
 
Seems a bit daft - I'd stick with the D300s until its replacement is announced and then compare that against the D7000.

There's currently little to differentiate the D300s from the D7000 - each model has its pros and cons. Prefer the D300s's controls but the D7000 has, at least for me, an edge on IQ (particularly at higher ISOs).

The D300s is showing its age - which is why I chose to go with the D7000. Had previously used a D80, so was accustomed to the sometimes clumsy control layout.

Loving the D7000 btw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top