Sooo... burning question - D700 or D300?

Ok...

So, I've been getting increasingly annoyed with the wildlife shots I take, and really do want to upgrade. We'd been thinking (we being Mr Z and myself) about getting the D700 first - then saving up to buy the D300 - for him mainly - but for me to do wildlife stuff too. Soooo... we've been thinking again (dangerous this thought stuff), and we're leaning now to the idea of buying a D300 when the prices (surely) lower with the release of the D300s (video is not a feature we're after ), and then going for the D700 upgrade when that comes out. So next year probably.

I do want to do more portrait stuff, but I'm pretty sure I can do perfectly well with a D300 where that's concerned - certainly for the time being. My wildlife stuff though is suffering with the D80, and of course, it's better to have the crop sensor for wildlife stuff...

Decisions decisions... any input? The long term idea is to have a full frame DSLR for me (actually the long term is Mamiya RZ67 Pro IID with a digiback... but we can all dream of winning the lottery eh?! ), a D300 for Karl and then pass the D80 with kit lens to my mum.

Gonna be a while doing all that methinks - but the main question here is which first, D300 or D700?

xx

That sounds like a good plan Z.

The D300 is a superb camera and will serve you well for years, and it will be an ideal time to buy it when the D300s comes out! Whereas the D700 will stay at it's current price until the D700x or D800 comes out, which probably won't happen until next year.

Either way they are both great cameras - but you'll prob get a better 'discount' on the D300..

That was my reasoning! I think I just wanted some other people to talk me into it!

I'm about halfway there with regards to money I think (we've had a lot of expenditure lately, or I'd have bought a new camera body months ago!)... so watch this space!

xx

Well wait for the D300s to come out first - as that's when you'll start to see the D300 drop in price, esp 2nd hand

Yes I will do - but probably not to buy second hand - I'm a bit funny about it with electrical and other sensitive equipment - been bitten too many times- would rather pay slightly extra!

Should come down a bit in price though, which will be good!

xx

What would you achieve with a D300 you can't with a D80? It's only 2MP more and if you are talking about just macro work then it's not going to be leaps and bounds greater advantage picture quality. Part of the greater advantage of a D300 for me was the more ruggedness and faster access to functions through buttons rather than menus. It also has a complex AF system, but not really any advantage in macro work which I would suggest you would probably do a significant part in manual. We still have D100's at work for some critical close up work. The D80 is very capable at fast moving stuff, airshows, wildlife, I used a 70, 80 and 200. Only the former was a little slow and unsure on autofocus. I'm left wondering why your wildlife is suffering?

Regarding the portrait work, well for many portraits the D700 would have an advantage (ask DC) and produce a nice, creamy quality. The lenses on the sensor are bigger and more widely spaced. However, actually I like some of the denser picture quality effect the DX format gives for harder male portraits. There is no doubt the FX format is the way to go and brings with it a bigger viewfinder. It's hardly the Imax that reviews seem to suggest though. I would think carefully about what you are aiming for. I have sweated over a D700 for weeks I rattled off some test shots on the street a few days ago against my D300 and could hardly tell the difference, it's subtle rather than obvious. Granted low light would blow my D300 out of the water, but there was a head to head recently of a D200 with noise reduction software in PP against a D700, almost non-noticeable difference. So, obvious advantages at high ISO but not if you don't use it.

If you are confused which way I am going so am I! If I was buying I'd be going full frame but from a D300 I'm not sure it's a significant leap except in price for my kind of photography. However, overall, you know the 700 will perform at least as well as the all the time and it's the way things are going. However, you also have to feed it bigger, more expensive lenses that are more critical. You also have to have bigger to get back to the DX focal length at the expense of wider wide angles which is great, but not for wildlife, macro or portraits.

The last point is that the D700 is 12MP. Sounds fine, but if you read a magazine review this month it came 3rd of 3 against the Canon EOS 5D Mk2 and Sony A900 on resolution. It's already bettered and you can guess 24MP will be the way to go for full frame with a year or two. You may have seen me comment already SteveL's EOS 5D Mk2 seems to have a noticeable quality over many pictures here even at the size we show in Yop.

Hope that confuses you more...I have had the money in my hand for a D700, made an offer on one and played with one but still couldn't quite convince myself to do it.

The D300 is a considerable step from the D80 - it's not just about the megapixels.

The ergonomics are much better, the ISO handling is also much better, not to mention the general IQ, more focus points etc.

Yes - well this is kind of my thinking. The difference between the D80 and the D300 is very marked in my (admittedly limited) experience of the two - and the difference in photography is great. D80 is good for some things, but not for others. One example is when Nic and I went to WWT in March, and took photos of the Spoonbill there - same lens (Sigma 50-500mm) me with the D80 and Nic with the D300 - the images were worlds apart.

I do definitely want full frame, which is why I've been doing my darndest to buy full frame lenses so to speak. I do think it's the way to go - and that's why when I do come round to buying it I would like the upgrade on the D700 - as I don't think it wuite matches the competition at the moment - we'll just have to see where Nikon go next. I do think though, that a D300 would suit me fine, and see no need to look at the D300S because I know I won't use video.

I think it's interesting that so much store is put in Megapixels - I don't actually think it's that important - really speaking - I find the megapixels I have already fine really... the main thing is performance at higher ISOs - the D80 seems to be pretty poor above about ISO 400... Also, the autofocus points are better for wildlife. Admittedly, it'll make little difference to macro work - I do 99% of it in manual anyway these days, and almost always in manual focus.

In short, I don't know why there's a large gap between the D80 and the D300 (there must be for them to be so separate in price and league ) - but I know I noticed the difference when Nic and I were shooting in the same conditions with the same lenses.

I'm stumped now! You had to go and throw a spanner in the works! lol - seriously though, thanks for the thoughtful post - it helps to make me think more!

I still think the best way would be to get the D300, since I know I don't want the upgrade on that, and there won't be another one for a fairly long time I should think - and wait to see what the future brings with the upgrades on the D700...


xx

You obviously didn't read my post Azz , I mention most of those things...I have used both.

I don't think there would be a massive difference in IQ between a D80 and a D300. The 300 is obviously a better sensor, but the development of sensors tends to be more subtle. There are scores of high quality images in Flickr etc. on D80's and less, although I will say I prefer the D70 to the D80. One factor that could make a big difference between the two is metering and consequently exposure. The matrix metering of the 80 and 200 is known to be a bit random at times.

To clarify the 300 is a better camera than a d80, much more professional and competent, but I wouldn't say it was a very noticeable difference just based on IQ.

Predictably, I'd recommend the D300

I think it's a big enough jump up from the D80, the sensor is far superior, especially performance at high ISO levels, my treecreeper shot was taken at ISO 1600, for example, and the noise is only slightly noticeable, and the 51 point dynamic area autofocus is superb for flight shots, and was my main justification for ditching the D60 in favour of the D300.

For me, I 've got no burning desire to go full frame at all...I love the crop factor for wildlife stuff, and the saving I made going for the D300 instead of a D700 helped buy my 17-55mm lens, which is a fab bit of kit.

Don't really see the point in getting a D300s over a D300 either, unless you want to shoot video. I just use the boyfs video camera if I want to do that!!