Nikon D300s released

[Josh220]

Personally I think the D300 is in a section all in it's own. It's by no means comparable to the D90 and lower, but I wouldn't compare it with the D3 models either.

I view the D300 and D700 as "prosumer" in between the lower models and the D3/D3x.

The D300 is one badass camera and a serious piece of photography equipment. I think we can all agree on that.

 

[CrazyCanuck]

The D300 is just as "professional" as the D700. It's Nikon's marketing as someone mentioned. Would you as a company not try and convince someone to buy the more expensive item? I sure as heck would. Nikon now considers the professional standard to be Full frame, which is marketing once again.


Anyways, what does it matter what Jerry, Nikon or any one else thinks. The camera is just a tool...kinda like you two arguing over it.(jk)

 

[itznfb]

Personally I think the D300 is in a section all in it's own. It's by no means comparable to the D90 and lower, but I wouldn't compare it with the D3 models either.

I view the D300 and D700 as "prosumer" in between the lower models and the D3/D3x.

The D300 is one badass camera and a serious piece of photography equipment. I think we can all agree on that.

as i said in my other post. the D300s is more comparable to the D3/x in terms of performace than the D700.

 

[itznfb]

The D300 is just as "professional" as the D700. It's Nikon's marketing as someone mentioned. Would you as a company not try and convince someone to buy the more expensive item? I sure as heck would. Nikon now considers the professional standard to be Full frame, which is marketing once again.


Anyways, what does it matter what Jerry, Nikon or any one else thinks. The camera is just a tool...kinda like you two arguing over it.(jk)

the only reason i continued to respond was just to prove the point because of the way Jerry responded. i can't stand elitist asshats.

 

[Josh220]

Personally I think the D300 is in a section all in it's own. It's by no means comparable to the D90 and lower, but I wouldn't compare it with the D3 models either.

I view the D300 and D700 as "prosumer" in between the lower models and the D3/D3x.

The D300 is one badass camera and a serious piece of photography equipment. I think we can all agree on that.

as i said in my other post. the D300s is more comparable to the D3/x in terms of performace than the D700.

I'm confused...
How is the D300s closer to the D3/x than the D700 if the D300s is still a DX body?

 

[itznfb]

Personally I think the D300 is in a section all in it's own. It's by no means comparable to the D90 and lower, but I wouldn't compare it with the D3 models either.

I view the D300 and D700 as "prosumer" in between the lower models and the D3/D3x.

The D300 is one badass camera and a serious piece of photography equipment. I think we can all agree on that.

as i said in my other post. the D300s is more comparable to the D3/x in terms of performace than the D700.

I'm confused...
How is the D300s closer to the D3/x than the D700 if the D300s is still a DX body?

in terms of performance. if you take away the sensor size, the specs on the D300s are superior to the D700. take a look at the DSLR comparison i posted earlier.

plus for someone like me who loves wildlife shooting, the Full Frame sensor on the D700 is a negative feature.

 

[farmerj]

is it just me? Or are people also Missing that the D3000 is a new camera too?

Nikon unveils D3000 entry-level DSLR: Digital Photography Review

 

[Josh220]

is it just me? Or are people also Missing that the D3000 is a new camera too?

Nikon unveils D3000 entry-level DSLR: Digital Photography Review

Irrelevant.

 

[PhotoXopher]

Yep, been reading up on the D3000 because I've been looking into a D40 for a compact sidekick to my D90... the D3000 looks promising at only $50 more than a D60.

 

[itznfb]

Yep, been reading up on the D3000 because I've been looking into a D40 for a compact sidekick to my D90... the D3000 looks promising at only $50 more than a D60.

yep, and i just purchased a D5000 for my girlfriend.... D3000 would have been a better option. anyone wanna buy a D5000

 

[smyth]

I kind of have to agree with itznfb here. The D300 is as much a "pro" camera as the D700.

Why? D300s and D700 share the same AF system, the same megapixel count, the same FPS count (when both use the battery grip) and have the same magnesium alloy build.

The only thing the D700 has over the D300 is full frame sensor, higher ISO numbers...anything I'm forgetting?

In some ways the D300s is better: Higher frame rate than D700 (both without battery grip), 100% viewfinder coverage, and HD Video (see below for my thoughts on that) and not to mention, if you shoot anything telephoto it's nice having the focal length multiplier.

Now, with regards to HD video, like it or not, I am convinced soon all of the professional level cameras will have it. Why? Because Photojournalists are under pressure to not only capture still frames, but now to produce multimedia projects as well. The pros need video whether they like it or not because their media outlets are asking for it, so the pros will need it.

 

[Ejazzle]

alls i can say is PHEW!!! haha

 

[Derrel]

There's no need to pay attention to a certain eastern Canada resident who is merely trying to goad a few people here by calling the D300s a "mid-level" camera; Nikon's own release information describes it as as their "flagship DX" camera; dPreview called the original D300 of nearly two years ago "the best semi-pro camera"...the D300 has better professional specifications than the truly "professional" Nikon D1, Nikon D1h,and Nikon D2x cameras that I have owned or currently own--and the price isn't $5,000,either.

The D300 series has a better, higher-performance AF system than earlier professional DX-format bodies, and a better AF system than Canon puts in its 40D-50D-5D cameras.

Calling the D300 or D300s "mid-level" is probably just a way to get people riled up, because it deliberately ignores a number of realities those with more experience with professional Nikons are fully aware of. If you've ever shot or owned a professional D1 or D2 series Nikon, you understand that the D300 easily beats those cameras by many metrics. Ignore the provcateur...don't feed a troll...those of us who are familiar with Nikon are aware of where the 300 and D300s fit into the hierarchy.

As Nikon itself says, the D300s is their "flagship DX camera". Not their entry-level,not their second-tier, not their consumer DX camera,and not their prosumer DX camera (that would be the D90).

 

[IgsEMT]

you all know a DSLR's will soon have cell phone features to go with the video

you also forgot to mention that it'll have a 10-300mm f1.8 lens, a fax machine, web compatible AND it'll all be small enough to fit into your pocket. - A wedding photographer's must have

 

[redtippmann]

all these new cameras make my D2H feel old. but I still love it with its audio recording capability!