 Mark R. Eliason |
D300s or D7000 Which one and why? I appreciate the input
|
|
|
|
||
- Usman M. Bajwa Contact Usman M. Bajwa Usman M. Bajwa's Gallery |
Check these links and decide for yourself, Mark. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d7000.htm http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d300s.htm UB.
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
7000 is about 23x bigger than 300. Go with the 7000.
|
|
|
|
||
|
David & Renee Russell |
I can't speak for the 300s. We shoot with a D3 and a D7000. The 7000 is usuall paired up with the 18-200 vr. the D3 is usually paired with 70-200 VR I or 28-105. The D3 is used for low ligh and speed. Noting Nikon has is better for low light except the D3s. Under the saqme conditions the D3s is one 1.5 stops better than the D3. Image quality under normal conditions is exceptional. The D7000 in my opinion is the best value on the market. Image quality is great. I have never seen better skin tones. It is just not quite as good in low light conditions as the full frame cameras. But I am talking ISDO 6400 shutter speeds of 1/640 with a 2.8 lens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Thom Schoeller |
I don't know if Mark has made a choice or not at this point. Feedback from a working professional: One thing you need to know is the D300s is a professional camera body. It is essentially identical to the D700 sans the full frame sensor. The D300 and D300s use the smaller "cropped" sensor. This is neither "good or bad" since you can get terrific high quality, high resolution poster size images from the D300. The D7000 is an exceptional ameteur camera, Nikon is confident enough to have just dropped the D90 from it's production lineup. I personally like the D7000 better than the D90. The D7000 performs well in low light at high ISO but one needs to consider what they are photographing and then use the best tool. Resolution? Despite the specs Nikon gives of a 12.3 MP vs. 16 MP, the D300s will most likely still provide far better resolution. The ONLY step(s) up in the Nikon line from the D300 are the D700 which is marginal and the flagship Nikon D3x. The D3x cost as much as some cars. Ken Rockwell and Thom Hogan both provide excellent reviews.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Nicholas Semo |
Wait to save a little extra money and then get the D700. I own both the D300 and the D700. The D700 is leaps ahead of the D300. When photograping birds I was afraid to go above ISO 400 with the D300. It would lose a lot of detail. With the D700 ISO 3200 is no problem at all. The D700 has the same sensor as the D3, ISO capabilities are the same. The D3 auto focus is faster and it processes the images faster. I wouldn't even think about the D300s.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||