D400.. keep dreaming.

[JacaRanda]

I keep reading (rightfully so and comparitively speaking) how crappy the 7D iso performance is. Then, I go out shooting amongst what I call the serious birding and wildlife photographers and the overwhelming majority of them are using 7D's. I only call them serious because of all the 300, 400, 500, and 600 mm primes I see many lugging around.

Then I check out Flickr and see the results. How much better can things get really? That being said, I myself and waiting/hoping for a 7D mkII. Why? Because I am a nutbar first of all. Secondly, I hope it has enough specs that satisfy me for the next 10 years - that along with the 300mm 2.8 mkII. My dream team.

 

[MGRPhoto]

I hope it has enough specs that satisfy me for the next 10 years - that along with the 300mm 2.8 mkII. My dream team.

What specs are missing from the D300s that cause it not to satisfy you for the next 10 years? When I asked myself a similar question I stopped caring when it's replacement was coming.

 

[bribrius]

few more years they may not be a market for any dslr. Once the computer chip went in a camera that was all she wrote. From that point on, sizes shrink, image clarity gets better without needing a large body. The chip takes over. Before long, you wont need lots of lenses either. Cameras are pretty much half computers at this point anyway. This laptop has a camera, the phones have cameras, we have tablets with cameras. The camera, at least to the extent of a large body dslr. is going extinct.
The manufacturers would be better off putting the research and development money in the future than the past. Which I believe dslrs are the past. Mirrors, past. Ten years cellphones might be putting out as good pics as top level dslrs do now. The younger kids, more tech savvy, the tech generation. Arent out dreaming after dslrs I don't think. They probably consider them archaic. Whiich in actuality, old technology, they are archaic.
Early in this thread someone gave a example, first digital camera was like 13000 dollars now you can buy a disposable one for 9 dollars.
something to think about too.

 

[xj0hnx]

few more years they may not be a market for any dslr. Once the computer chip went in a camera that was all she wrote. From that point on, sizes shrink, image clarity gets better without needing a large body. The chip takes over. Before long, you wont need lots of lenses either. Cameras are pretty much half computers at this point anyway. This laptop has a camera, the phones have cameras, we have tablets with cameras. The camera, at least to the extent of a large body dslr. is going extinct.
The manufacturers would be better off putting the research and development money in the future than the past. Which I believe dslrs are the past. Mirrors, past. Ten years cellphones might be putting out as good pics as top level dslrs do now. The younger kids, more tech savvy, the tech generation. Arent out dreaming after dslrs I don't think. They probably consider them archaic. Whiich in actuality, old technology, they are archaic.
Early in this thread someone gave a example, first digital camera was like 13000 dollars now you can buy a disposable one for 9 dollars.
something to think about too.

I seriously doubt DSLRs are going anywhere, and they will NEVER be replaced by phone cameras unless they start making phones with the level of controls that cameras have now, or mini 200-600mm zooms. There are just too many things you can do with cameras from different lenses to controls that there's just no way a phone will ever replace them, and who the heck wants to lug around a computer, or tablet to take pictures with? No one I know. All adding computer chips is doing is making cameras better every year, not making them obsolete.

 

[coastalconn]

At the time the D7000 came out I picked one up to replace my D300s. It didn't even come close to be able to replace my D300s. I haven't really kept up to speed on the D7100 as I have just become content with my D300s as it does do everything I want it to and does it well. What are the differences between the D7100 and D300s that make the D7100 still not a replacement? The two glaring things I see are FSP and still no 10-pin...

My shutter started making some weird noises and it seems to be a bit sluggish so I wanted to send it in for repair but I don't currently have a backup. I though about picking up a D7100 but just wondering if there is something major I'm missing. If there is I'd be happy to just find a refurb D300s to pick up instead. I do agree that we are unlikely to see a direct D300s replacement.

If you look back through this thread you will see I was holding out for the D400. I caved 2 months ago and got a D7100. The sensor is really quite a bit better, especially when cropping for birds. I'm shooting at ISO 1600 and go to ISO 3200 if needed. With the D300 I shoot at ISO 400 and really hated going above that if I knew I would be cropping at all.. After that the D300/s smokes the D7100 in every aspect. I know the D7100 is supposed to have an upgraded AF system but in real life shooting I don't feel it. The speed and buffer is so much better on the D300. I actually have only shot with the D7100 since I got it and I am getting by for now with shorter bursts and the camera still chugs away at 3 FPS when the dinky buffer is full.. The D300 is always ready to go if needed. Once the Ospreys return and I start shooting dive sequences I will be torn as to which camera to shoot.

I keep reading (rightfully so and comparitively speaking) how crappy the 7D iso performance is. Then, I go out shooting amongst what I call the serious birding and wildlife photographers and the overwhelming majority of them are using 7D's. I only call them serious because of all the 300, 400, 500, and 600 mm primes I see many lugging around.

Then I check out Flickr and see the results. How much better can things get really? That being said, I myself and waiting/hoping for a 7D mkII. Why? Because I am a nutbar first of all. Secondly, I hope it has enough specs that satisfy me for the next 10 years - that along with the 300mm 2.8 mkII. My dream team.

The 7D is still the best crop camera in Canon's lineup, imho. I played with a 7d and a 70d on the same day and besides the cool touch screen and the cool video AF system, If I shot Canon I would be shooting the 7D myself.

It is a shame that Canonikon has seemingly abandoned us wildlife shooters. It seems to me one of the biggest markets in the future for DSLRs. No tablet or phone will be able to slap a 600mm lens on it and fire away like our cameras can. At least not in my lifetime...

 

[MGRPhoto]

At the time the D7000 came out I picked one up to replace my D300s. It didn't even come close to be able to replace my D300s. I haven't really kept up to speed on the D7100 as I have just become content with my D300s as it does do everything I want it to and does it well. What are the differences between the D7100 and D300s that make the D7100 still not a replacement? The two glaring things I see are FSP and still no 10-pin...

My shutter started making some weird noises and it seems to be a bit sluggish so I wanted to send it in for repair but I don't currently have a backup. I though about picking up a D7100 but just wondering if there is something major I'm missing. If there is I'd be happy to just find a refurb D300s to pick up instead. I do agree that we are unlikely to see a direct D300s replacement.

If you look back through this thread you will see I was holding out for the D400. I caved 2 months ago and got a D7100. The sensor is really quite a bit better, especially when cropping for birds. I'm shooting at ISO 1600 and go to ISO 3200 if needed. With the D300 I shoot at ISO 400 and really hated going above that if I knew I would be cropping at all.. After that the D300/s smokes the D7100 in every aspect. I know the D7100 is supposed to have an upgraded AF system but in real life shooting I don't feel it. The speed and buffer is so much better on the D300. I actually have only shot with the D7100 since I got it and I am getting by for now with shorter bursts and the camera still chugs away at 3 FPS when the dinky buffer is full.. The D300 is always ready to go if needed. Once the Ospreys return and I start shooting dive sequences I will be torn as to which camera to shoot.

That's pretty much what I expected to hear. Have you considered selling the D7100 and picking up a D300s or is it not that bad?

 

[Derrel]

I keep reading (rightfully so and comparitively speaking) how crappy the 7D iso performance is. Then, I go out shooting amongst what I call the serious birding and wildlife photographers and the overwhelming majority of them are using 7D's. I only call them serious because of all the 300, 400, 500, and 600 mm primes I see many lugging around.

Then I check out Flickr and see the results. How much better can things get really? That being said, I myself and waiting/hoping for a 7D mkII. Why? Because I am a nutbar first of all. Secondly, I hope it has enough specs that satisfy me for the next 10 years - that along with the 300mm 2.8 mkII. My dream team.

Significantly better. For less money. The 7D is five years old,and based on even-older sensor and signal processing technology. Compared to better sensors, the 7D noises up FAST; by ISO 800, its color to me, looks grainy, and weak.Nikon D7100 versus Canon EOS 7D - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

Basically, two full stops more dynamic range, and two to three steps richer color from the D7100, which is a cheaper, $1,200 body than the 7D. Canon has let the lower and mid-range camera sensors stagnate since 2009, having released five new models around the same, tired, old sensor. SINCE the introduction of the 7D is September ofd 2009, Sony and Toshiba have re-invested and moved their sensor manufacturing technology to NEW levels of quality. Canon has refused to make that investment, and the Sony sensor fabrication success story has released things like the D800 and D800 e, and all the 24-megapixel consumer cameras. Canon is still in the Pentium 4 mind-set. "It's good enough for our customers".

I juuuuuuuust can NOT figure out why both Canon and Nikon have not stepped up here and made new models to replace the 7D and D300s. It boggles the mind.

 

[jaomul]

I think an upgrade to both the d300/d300s and 7d would likely sell well for both companies. The internet chatter about these upgrades is significant. Bird/wildlife and sports shooters would be the likely big market but lots of shooters who just want the most current best dslr available in their chosen format size would likely buy also. I know a few 7d and Nikon d300 users who don't need 8fps or the very best af. That didn't stop them buying them.

 

[Gavjenks]

Screw 8 FPS, I want like 20 FPS. I will not be satisfied until I can open up my memory card on my computer, hold down the right arrow key, and see a fluid realtime movie as it previews the still images I took.

That would definitely make me a better photographer.

 

[coastalconn]

That's pretty much what I expected to hear. Have you considered selling the D7100 and picking up a D300s or is it not that bad?

I still have my D300, which is pretty much the same as the the D300s. I just choose to shoot with the D7100 because even with the limitations of the body, the final image is that much better. So far there has only been a few times I have missed the speed. I would have loved to have a few more frames to choose from when this snowy owl got released. Like wings up on the fingertips of the rehabber. But I just keep making do for now... The light wasn't very good this particular day and I think at ISO 1000 the D300 would not have had nearly the same results...


Amazing release of a Snowy Owl! by krisinct, on Flickr

 

[coastalconn]

Screw 8 FPS, I want like 20 FPS. I will not be satisfied until I can open up my memory card on my computer, hold down the right arrow key, and see a fluid realtime movie as it previews the still images I took.

That would definitely make me a better photographer.

I hope some day they make a camera like that for you, if that's what it takes to make you a better photographer!

 

[MGRPhoto]

Screw 8 FPS, I want like 20 FPS. I will not be satisfied until I can open up my memory card on my computer, hold down the right arrow key, and see a fluid realtime movie as it previews the still images I took.

That would definitely make me a better photographer.

I hope some day they make a camera like that for you, if that's what it takes to make you a better photographer!

They do! It's called the Nikon 1

 

[Tailgunner]

Screw 8 FPS, I want like 20 FPS. I will not be satisfied until I can open up my memory card on my computer, hold down the right arrow key, and see a fluid realtime movie as it previews the still images I took.

That would definitely make me a better photographer.

I hope some day they make a camera like that for you, if that's what it takes to make you a better photographer!

Thanks, I was drinking some tea when I read this, now I have to clear my screen lol

 

[JacaRanda]

I hope it has enough specs that satisfy me for the next 10 years - that along with the 300mm 2.8 mkII. My dream team.

What specs are missing from the D300s that cause it not to satisfy you for the next 10 years? When I asked myself a similar question I stopped caring when it's replacement was coming.

I keep reading (rightfully so and comparitively speaking) how crappy the 7D iso performance is. Then, I go out shooting amongst what I call the serious birding and wildlife photographers and the overwhelming majority of them are using 7D's. I only call them serious because of all the 300, 400, 500, and 600 mm primes I see many lugging around.

Then I check out Flickr and see the results. How much better can things get really? That being said, I myself and waiting/hoping for a 7D mkII. Why? Because I am a nutbar first of all. Secondly, I hope it has enough specs that satisfy me for the next 10 years - that along with the 300mm 2.8 mkII. My dream team.

Significantly better. For less money. The 7D is five years old,and based on even-older sensor and signal processing technology. Compared to better sensors, the 7D noises up FAST; by ISO 800, its color to me, looks grainy, and weak.Nikon D7100 versus Canon EOS 7D - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

Basically, two full stops more dynamic range, and two to three steps richer color from the D7100, which is a cheaper, $1,200 body than the 7D. Canon has let the lower and mid-range camera sensors stagnate since 2009, having released five new models around the same, tired, old sensor. SINCE the introduction of the 7D is September ofd 2009, Sony and Toshiba have re-invested and moved their sensor manufacturing technology to NEW levels of quality. Canon has refused to make that investment, and the Sony sensor fabrication success story has released things like the D800 and D800 e, and all the 24-megapixel consumer cameras. Canon is still in the Pentium 4 mind-set. "It's good enough for our customers".

I juuuuuuuust can NOT figure out why both Canon and Nikon have not stepped up here and made new models to replace the 7D and D300s. It boggles the mind.

Ah yes, definitely yes. You are correct Mr. D. I was thinking in terms of the gorgeous shots I see. However, I ignored the crappy ISO performance (my bad). In fact, my 60D is crappy in that respect and may still be slightly better than the 7D.

Dang! I say crappy and feel a little weird about it. These are all amazing little gadgets. But heck, if we are going to be spending $K's for this HOBBY...........

Otherwise back to golf.

 

[JacaRanda]

I hope it has enough specs that satisfy me for the next 10 years - that along with the 300mm 2.8 mkII. My dream team.

What specs are missing from the D300s that cause it not to satisfy you for the next 10 years? When I asked myself a similar question I stopped caring when it's replacement was coming.

I actually shoot with a Canon 60D and have become addicted to wildlife/birding. It certainly has been sufficient, but now I see it's limitations for what I enjoy shooting most.

My choice of Canon was somewhat random, so I could easily be in the Nikon boat with the same concerns with D7100's vs D300 etc.