D700 vs. D300s ?? what??

[mwcfarms]

Lol if they do that let me know. And you said it lol and I believe Derrel has said it as well. Incredible sensor. Sorry I'm having lust issues. I actually drove to the store yesterday and drove through the parking lot because I remembered no sense in playing with it more I still can't afford it.

 

[Dominantly]

This shouldn't even be a debate.
The D700 is the better camera all around, if you have the cash for it.

 

[Tami]

my luck with on line purchase is not good... ordered my back drop stand for a special shoot and it showed up late but still just enough time to toss in the car and go... when I got there and unloaded it... there was no cross bar yep that is going to work.... we made do with Duck tape and nobody had any idea.. then I tried to deal with the company it took them 3 try's to reship to me always the wrong parts... they just sent a new one after 2 months.

 

[djacobox372]

D700 is better IMO, but it's currently overpriced--I paid $2500 for a new d700 over a year ago. There's no question that you get more for your $$ with the d300 and d7000.

As for the d7000 vs. d300, they're pretty close. I'd probably opt for a used D300 over a new D7000 due to price.

 

[shaunly]

D700 is better IMO, but it's currently overpriced--I paid $2500 for a new d700 over a year ago. There's no question that you get more for your $$ with the d300 and d7000.

As for the d7000 vs. d300, they're pretty close. I'd probably opt for a used D300 over a new D7000 due to price.

How is the D700 overpriced? You get the exact same sensor/IQ from a $5000 D3 and very close in specs for $2500. That 50% off for a body that's almost identical to a D3. If anything, the D700 is probably the best bang for the buck of all pro bodies out there.

 

[shaunly]

After all my research, I knew what I was buying... off to ProPhoto to get the perfect camera for me (or so I thought)

D700 $2,500.00

When I got there we talked about what type of shooting I do, what sort of work I do the most:
Sports, lots of action with a few weddings and portraits tossed in.

after an hour of talking and looking at everything both cameras have to offer and what they do....
I came home with the D300S and a new lens Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 just under $2,300.00

did I make the right choice? does anybody have any input? I have 14 days to return for a full refund.... I have read all the reviews on the internet.....

Return the Tamron lens regardless of which body you decide to go with. Why would you even consider the Tamron when you can get the Nikon 80-200 AF-D for about the same price.

 

[zoogirlbc]

+1 D700

 

[Ken Rockwell Fan]

yep these were all the factors I took into consideration :er:

I was looking at the D7000 and was impressed with what I was reading until I got down to the grit... lots of outside shooting, in the rain, snow and who knows what.... this nocked it out for me, I need the extra protection as well as push buttons to make changes

Well if you are worried about rain, snow etc... then know that the Tamron lens you just bought is not weather sealed like a professional lens.

 

[gsgary]

If you had made the right choice you wouldn't be here asking, D700 would be my choice if i shot Nikon

 

[Tami]

Thank you again for all your help....

I like both camera for different reasons, Sports action shooting being my favorite of all. I have shot with the D200 for quite a few years and loved it.

because I am not in the high bucks yet.... working on gathering clients up. The money is a factor. While the D700 is a great camera, I am not sure that at this point is will make the difference on what I am doing..... The D300 will fit all of my needs and leave a little in the bank. I will return the lens... however buying used is not my friend for some reason...

that is my thoughts this morning, could change by mid day.... I like the way it feels, I like the size, I like that it is not quite as heavy....

maybe buy a D700 next year when I am bringing home the bank and need to spend before tax season

 

[djacobox372]

D700 is better IMO, but it's currently overpriced--I paid $2500 for a new d700 over a year ago. There's no question that you get more for your $$ with the d300 and d7000.

As for the d7000 vs. d300, they're pretty close. I'd probably opt for a used D300 over a new D7000 due to price.

How is the D700 overpriced? You get the exact same sensor/IQ from a $5000 D3 and very close in specs for $2500. That 50% off for a body that's almost identical to a D3. If anything, the D700 is probably the best bang for the buck of all pro bodies out there.

I only say it's overpriced because it's due for a big price drop, the d700 price hasn't moved much in the last year and a half.

 

[D300guy]

D700 is better IMO, but it's currently overpriced--I paid $2500 for a new d700 over a year ago. There's no question that you get more for your $$ with the d300 and d7000.

As for the d7000 vs. d300, they're pretty close. I'd probably opt for a used D300 over a new D7000 due to price.

HUGE price difference between D700 & D300s! Not worth the high price unless your rich.
(Oops! :er: I was mistaking the D700 for the D3 which IS expensive and overpriced)

I would pick the D300s hands down over the D7000 too. The D7000 is just over-hyped improved D90.

 

[IgsEMT]

My 5 cents...
I've been shooting cropped sensor Nikon since went digital. When I did have a chance to work with Fx, final IQ didn't matter much when printed anything up to 20x30. Larger then that, Fx worked out better - now I'm sure someone will come out and tell me about resolution and such but I'm just saying what print showed me.
There was only 1 time when I needed Fx for its HIGHER iso capabilities and its that one time is more then I need to go Fx when I'll upgrade the body.
Until then, I've worked with D70, D200, D300, D90, D300s and if you like 300s, keep it. It is an AMAZING camera and does a great job.
Glass: Had a chance to work with both brand and 3rd-party glass. Maybe its me and psychological, but the only glass I saw being better then Nikon glass was Zeiss glass that I used with Bronica.
Good Luck

 

[Dominantly]

D700 is better IMO, but it's currently overpriced--I paid $2500 for a new d700 over a year ago. There's no question that you get more for your $$ with the d300 and d7000.

As for the d7000 vs. d300, they're pretty close. I'd probably opt for a used D300 over a new D7000 due to price.

HUGE price difference between D700 & D300s! Not worth the high price unless your rich.
(Oops! :er: I was mistaking the D700 for the D3 which IS expensive and overpriced)

I would pick the D300s hands down over the D7000 too. The D7000 is just over-hyped improved D90.

Pssh Considering the D90 has better sensor performance then the D300s, I find that comment entertaining. If your main concern was optimal ISO performance, then the D90 would be the choice over the D300s.
Now we have an upgraded version of the D90 in the D7000; should be interesting to see it's sensor performance data.

If the D700, or D3 is for the rich, then whats a Hasselblad?

 

[NateS]

Oh my...the amount of mis-information in this thread hurts my head.

I totally forgot about the new D7000.

It's a no brainer. Take that D300s back now and order a D7000 off the internet ASAP. The D7000 is much better than a D300s and it only costs $1200.

D7k is better than a D300s in some areas but where it matters for sports shooting it is NOT better. While the AF is improved over previous generations, it still falls way short of the AF system in the D300s. Buffer size of the D7k is much smaller than the D300s as well. 6fps doesn't matter much when you max out your buffer in 1-1.5 seconds.

I totally forgot about the new D7000.

It's a no brainer. Take that D300s back now and order a D7000 off the internet ASAP. The D7000 is much better than a D300s and it only costs $1200.

In what respect? The OP seems to indicate that he's going to be shooting commercial work. That is no place for a plastic-bodied camera without weather-sealing. The D7000 may have some minor performance upgrades, but compared to the D300s, it's a plastic toy.

The D7000 does NOT have a plastic body. It has a magnesium alloy body. While not as robust as the D300s, it is worlds improvement over the D90's plastic construction that you claim the D7k has. The D7k has tons of improvements over the D90 and many over the D300s even (read ISO and general IQ), but where it matters for sports shooting, it still falls short. It is far from a plastic toy though and makes a jump above the D90 like no other past jumps have (aka D70 to D80 or D80 to D90).

D700 is better IMO, but it's currently overpriced--I paid $2500 for a new d700 over a year ago. There's no question that you get more for your $$ with the d300 and d7000.

As for the d7000 vs. d300, they're pretty close. I'd probably opt for a used D300 over a new D7000 due to price.

HUGE price difference between D700 & D300s! Not worth the high price unless your rich.
(Oops! :er: I was mistaking the D700 for the D3 which IS expensive and overpriced)

I would pick the D300s hands down over the D7000 too. The D7000 is just over-hyped improved D90.

Wow....really?? Do you know anything about the D7000? It is about as close to a D90 as a D90 is to a D40. SO many areas that are improved I couldn't name them all here....a few are a better sensor... much better high iso performance, completely new (and better) AF system, completely new (and better) metering system, 2 custom user presets, magnesium alloy body, ability to focus non-cpu lenses....etc, etc, etc.... That's just to name a few of the improvements over the D90.


Back on track, D300s or D700 are both used in sports...depends on your needs. I think you'll be happy with both (though I would definitely get D700 if you could afford it.....especially if you envision much indoor sports).