I want to buy a D300, not a D7000, why?

[shadowlands]

The newest is not he best sometimes, the suitable is the best I think.

Agreed!!!! Thanks...

 

[mjhoward]

uhhh... the D700 has an auto DX mode, so every lens that he owns would work just fine.

I think you misunderstood my post. I said that his current lenses would be very useful, not completely unusable. I know the D700 has a DX mode, but at that point you've basically got a 5.5MP D300 sensor. You have NONE of the reasons for even buying a FF body in the first place other than some slight low light improvement which, unless you shoot ISO3200 or higher, you're likely not to even notice.

 

[shadowlands]

uhhh... the D700 has an auto DX mode, so every lens that he owns would work just fine.

I think you misunderstood my post. I said that his current lenses would be very useful, not completely unusable. I know the D700 has a DX mode, but at that point you've basically got a 5.5MP D300 sensor. You have NONE of the reasons for even buying a FF body in the first place other than some slight low light improvement which, unless you shoot ISO3200 or higher, you're likely not to even notice.

I agree. I don't need FX, nor do I need to pay for it.
Look at my main lens... the 18-300 VR DX. It says it all. I am fine with DX.
I have not outgrown my D90. I still love it. But I want a second body, so I'm going with the D300, soon.
I seldom shoot above ISO 1600, and the D90 is great at ISO 1600, to me.
Bam!!!

 

[Derrel]

I guess the OP has a preference for a higher class of camera than the D7000...the D300 body has a more-refined fit,finish, and "feel" to it than the D90 or the D7000 have. it's simply a higher "class" of camera body than the D7000.

Yeah well.. me and my two cent ho of a D90 been doin real good work and aint had no complaints.

No slam was meant in the making of this post. No D90's were harmed in the making of this post. All similarities between this post and actual D90's were entirely unintentional. No actual resemblance to any two cent ho's was intended. TPF is an equal opportunity slam fest.

 

[pixmedic]

We use a D90 as well and love it. Putting money away now for a new camera and we are strongly considering a D300s instead of a D7000. We want to stay with a DX body since we dont really have a need for FX.

 

[coastalconn]

That's not exactly a shot that calls for anything extraordinary. However, I challenge one to take the same shot with a 50mm, from the same distance.

Umm, what's your point? Why would I shoot with a 50mm? My point is good shots are obtainable without having the newest and best of everything. That particular shot goes against the grain of what birders think. There is very fine feather detail that I should not be "able" to attain with a 3rd party 500mm especially handheld. Perhaps I should shoot Ospreys with a macro lens?

Osprey with fish 8/22 by krisinct, on Flickr

 

[Ballistics]

That's not exactly a shot that calls for anything extraordinary. However, I challenge one to take the same shot with a 50mm, from the same distance.

Umm, what's your point? Why would I shoot with a 50mm? My point is good shots are obtainable without having the newest and best of everything. That particular shot goes against the grain of what birders think. There is very fine feather detail that I should not be "able" to attain with a 3rd party 500mm especially handheld. Perhaps I should shoot Ospreys with a macro lens?

Osprey with fish 8/22 by krisinct, on Flickr

My point is, the equipment matters. Can you get great shots with off brand gear? Yup. You don't have have the best to get great shots, but you still need specific equipment to pull of a shot. Can't get a shot like that
with a 50mm, because it can't reach. Therefore, the equipment makes a difference.

As for you saying that you shouldn't be able to obtain the image with a 3rd party lens, what does that mean exactly? Are you doing something that's allowing you to go past the limits of your gear?

Also, you can shoot anything hand held at a fast enough shutter speed. You're at 508mm @ 1/1250; what's so special about this being hand held?

 

[Ballistics]

Also, let it be known that I don't think that your shots are not good.

 

[coastalconn]

Ok, can we agree on this? Often in photo forums many people give advice to buy the newest, and most expensive gear out there. Quite often top of the line gear is great if you can afford it, but a camera is just a tool and with proper knowledge, technique and lighting great results are possible with "dated" technology.

 

[Ballistics]

Ok, can we agree on this? Often in photo forums many people give advice to buy the newest, and most expensive gear out there. Quite often top of the line gear is great if you can afford it, but a camera is just a tool and with proper knowledge, technique and lighting great results are possible with "dated" technology.

There's much more to it than that though. You're not using dated technology. You're using an older camera, but it's not obsolete to the point where it makes these shots "hard".
In otherwords, lower tier equipment is capable of good things.

 

[Bukitimah]

I own a d5000 and trade that for a d300 slightly more than a year ago. I can't say it is the camera but I can see improvements. It could be my lenses and technique but I certainly prefer the d300 feel.

I don't have experience with many models but the ability to switch Modes such as ISO without going through the menu helps. The camera is just 1 part of your hardware. I feel the lenses are equally, if not more important.

 

[shadowlands]

I own a d5000 and trade that for a d300 slightly more than a year ago. I can't say it is the camera but I can see improvements. It could be my lenses and technique but I certainly prefer the d300 feel.

I don't have experience with many models but the ability to switch Modes such as ISO without going through the menu helps. The camera is just 1 part of your hardware. I feel the lenses are equally, if not more important.

Good to hear.... I owned a D5000 once and when I held it and then used my D90 the next day, I would love my D90 and dislike the D5000, simply because of the build quality. I know I'm in for a real treat with the D300.

 

[Bukitimah]

Just to share here. The only 'problem' I have with my D300 is the eyecup. I find it too flush to the body and I am wearing glasses. I have been asking around and received various answers. Most say I need to modify before the parts can be fitted into the camera.

Well, I did the simpliest thing which I didn't do initially. That is to consult Nikon Service Centre. The person that answers my call told me it is not possible. I am not giving up and I wrote them an email. A guy from NSC call and invited me to their show room. Hey, no modification required. This is what you get and all parts are original from Nikon.

 

[coastalconn]

Well at the risk of getting attacked again, I had a D5000 then D90 and now the D300. For me once I got the D90, I never used the D5000 again, I sold it. I'm at the same point now. I have the D300 and have only kept the D90 so far as a back up. I never use it, I like the D300 that much more. FWIW

 

[BRN1]

Umm, what's your point? Why would I shoot with a 50mm? My point is good shots are obtainable without having the newest and best of everything. That particular shot goes against the grain of what birders think. There is very fine feather detail that I should not be "able" to attain with a 3rd party 500mm especially handheld. Perhaps I should shoot Ospreys with a macro lens?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/coastalconn/7838640672/
Osprey with fish 8/22 by krisinct, on Flickr

If you get close enough for that, please post the results! (in macro mode of course)