D300 vs. D700

[robdavis305]

As far as a full format camera goes which I know the 300 isnt, whats the big difference in image quality and can you tell a difference in the formats when taking pics.

 

[KmH]

As you can see in this side-by-side comparison, the big differences are in the SNR (Signal-To-Noise Ratio) performance and usable ISO range. Dynamic range and color depth are pretty close. (click on the tabs and look at each of the graphs.)

 

[joemc]

I own and love both...... Honestly they are both fantastic cameras... The big difference is the D700 is FF and is a huge benefit if you are shooting it tight quarters or if you are going for wide angles without the fisheye effect. But the real difference between the two is the low light performance! The d700 can shoot at ISO 1600 all day (3200 pretty damn good) with no noticeable noise....The D300 is more like 400-800 iso.

Plus the D700 renders whites and highlights better IMO... I still shoot with both...but I do prefer the D700 over the D300.. I use the D300 when I want to take advantage of the crop sensor...Like Florida birds.

Cheers, joe

 

[itznfb]

I think comparing the D300 and D700 I'd probably pick the D700. I owned the D300s and the D700 and I got rid of the D700. I found the Active D-Lighting on the D300s to be much more powerful than the higher ISO performance on the D700. As well as a few other features the D700 doesn't have. If the D700 had Active D-Lighting then it would be a tough decision.

 

[Dominantly]

this is interesting

 

[IgsEMT]

I have both D300 and D90 and love their performance. This past week, had a pleasure of shooting with a Tank D3 and was amazed by its performance under various conditions. Since D700 is a little brother of D3, comparing it to D300 and D90, it really is a leaderin IQ.
After that day, I changed my mind about getting D300s and will be working slowly toward D700 or w/e will be by the time I'll have $ for it.
As for glass, somehow, I prefer older lenses

 

[chip]

switching to the D700 is a big jump because you have to buy FF lenses as well. So it is not just buying a new camera, but also a whole new set of lenses. Have to count the cost before making such a move. Nikon lenses are very expensive at the moment probably due to the weak dollar.

 

[Dominantly]

What about the D90 vs the D300....... It doesnt appear to do anything better.

 

[IgsEMT]

What about the D90 vs the D300....... It doesnt appear to do anything better.

According to various comparisons, IQ of D90 is better then d300. I've only seen that difference in RAW files at 100-200% crop on computer screen. On 16x20 portrait under same conditions and equivalent camera settings YET too see the difference.

 

[Derrel]

Nikon Camera Lenses

10.5 DX, DX 35/1.8, 10-24 DX, 12-24 DX, 16-85 DX, 18-55 DX (2 versions), 18-70 DX, 18-105 DX,18-200 DX, 55-200 DX, 55-200 DX-VR, 85 DX Micro-Nikkor,announced but not delivered yet.--13 total DX lenses, 12 models which are on the market currently.

So there are 11 manual focus lenses and 37 other FF lenses. So, one out of four CURRENT Nikon lenses are DX lenses. There must be at least 85 or more different AF, AF-D, AF-i, AF-S, and Ai and Ai-S Nikkor lens models made since 1977, all available used in addition to the current 11 MF lenses--3 of which are the fancy tilt/shift/electronic lens 24-45-85 models.

About half of the DX Nikkors are relatively cheap consumer zooms. If a person is going to buy a high-performance, full-frame camera that costs $2,799, he's not going to want to put beginner-level kit zoom lenses like the 18-55 or 55-200 on the camera--even though those lenses WILL mount,and will shoot on Full-frame Nikon cameras, unlike Canon's EF-S lenses which will damage a full frame camera and cannot be mounted. The DX-format Nikkor lenses are not totally useless on the full-frame Nikons.

The D90 body's improved sensor performance over the 2007-model D300 is why the D300 was discontinued this year, and has been replaced by the 300s in late 2009. I think it's pretty obvious that the D300s will have the improved sensor performance equal to or better than the D90. Similar to the D300 to D300s upgrade, the 2007-era D3 has been discontinued and replaced by the D3s, with its improved High ISO performance that the lucky few testers are claiming is two stops better at the extreme ISO settings compared with the original D3 of 2007

 

[Dominantly]

The D90 body's improved sensor performance over the 2007-model D300 is why the D300 was discontinued this year, and has been replaced by the 300s in late 2009. I think it's pretty obvious that the D300s will have the improved sensor performance equal to or better than the D90. Similar to the D300 to D300s upgrade, the 2007-era D3 has been discontinued and replaced by the D3s, with its improved High ISO performance that the lucky few testers are claiming is two stops better at the extreme ISO settings compared with the original D3 of 2007

Technology...

How quickly models become yesterdays news is amazing, but I guess not new. I figured the reason for the D90's better results was due to the fact it was a newer model with the newer technology.

I have been trying to find really detailed comparisons between the new D300s and the D90, but haven't found any yet. I have looked over the specs on Nikons site and see that they have changed a few things but still use the same sensor and quite a few other things. I know they also both used Expeed sensors, but I cant find anything that discusses the possible differences in them between the two bodies... Do you have any insight?

 

[DScience]

The D90 body's improved sensor performance over the 2007-model D300 is why the D300 was discontinued this year, and has been replaced by the 300s in late 2009. I think it's pretty obvious that the D300s will have the improved sensor performance equal to or better than the D90. Similar to the D300 to D300s upgrade, the 2007-era D3 has been discontinued and replaced by the D3s, with its improved High ISO performance that the lucky few testers are claiming is two stops better at the extreme ISO settings compared with the original D3 of 2007

Technology...

How quickly models become yesterdays news is amazing, but I guess not new. I figured the reason for the D90's better results was due to the fact it was a newer model with the newer technology.

I have been trying to find really detailed comparisons between the new D300s and the D90, but haven't found any yet. I have looked over the specs on Nikons site and see that they have changed a few things but still use the same sensor and quite a few other things. I know they also both used Expeed sensors, but I cant find anything that discusses the possible differences in them between the two bodies... Do you have any insight?

It's not that hard:

D300s has faster shutter speeds, better high iso performance, 51 AF points, CF and SD card slots, way more sturdy with weather sealing build, better and more functional/usable controls.

Those are the main differences.

 

[Dominantly]

The D90 body's improved sensor performance over the 2007-model D300 is why the D300 was discontinued this year, and has been replaced by the 300s in late 2009. I think it's pretty obvious that the D300s will have the improved sensor performance equal to or better than the D90. Similar to the D300 to D300s upgrade, the 2007-era D3 has been discontinued and replaced by the D3s, with its improved High ISO performance that the lucky few testers are claiming is two stops better at the extreme ISO settings compared with the original D3 of 2007

Technology...

How quickly models become yesterdays news is amazing, but I guess not new. I figured the reason for the D90's better results was due to the fact it was a newer model with the newer technology.

I have been trying to find really detailed comparisons between the new D300s and the D90, but haven't found any yet. I have looked over the specs on Nikons site and see that they have changed a few things but still use the same sensor and quite a few other things. I know they also both used Expeed sensors, but I cant find anything that discusses the possible differences in them between the two bodies... Do you have any insight?

It's not that hard:

D300s has faster shutter speeds, better high iso performance, 51 AF points, CF and SD card slots, way more sturdy with weather sealing build, better and more functional/usable controls.

Those are the main differences.

If it's not that hard, then why didn't you answer the question? Please re-read the bold part.

 

[DScience]

Technology...

How quickly models become yesterdays news is amazing, but I guess not new. I figured the reason for the D90's better results was due to the fact it was a newer model with the newer technology.

I have been trying to find really detailed comparisons between the new D300s and the D90, but haven't found any yet. I have looked over the specs on Nikons site and see that they have changed a few things but still use the same sensor and quite a few other things. I know they also both used Expeed sensors, but I cant find anything that discusses the possible differences in them between the two bodies... Do you have any insight?

It's not that hard:

D300s has faster shutter speeds, better high iso performance, 51 AF points, CF and SD card slots, way more sturdy with weather sealing build, better and more functional/usable controls.

Those are the main differences.

If it's not that hard, then why didn't you answer the question? Please re-read the bold part.

The difference in sensor? There isn't a difference.

 

[KmH]

Burst mode performance, shutter life, same DX auto focus module the D3's have, # of cross-type focus points.....