D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?

Started Feb 23, 2013 | Discussions
greenmanphoto
Contributing MemberPosts: 598Gear list
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to Kris in CT, Mar 3, 2013

Kris,

VERY nice shots, particularly with that lens! I HAD a D300, but it died on me due to "corrosion" inside, so says the extended warranty folks. So, I bought a D200 used to have a backup for when a replacement for the D300 comes out. When I bought the D200, there were rumors of the D300 being replaced soon, so I didn't want to buy a new D300 when a new camera was "about to come out." And I'm still waiting. The D7100 is NOT a replacement for the D300. Nor is the D800 or the D600.

Sam

-- hide signature --

Sam B.
D200, 16-85mm, 35-135mm, Sigma 10-20 f3.5 N8008s, Gitzo 2531, Induro DM-01 ballhead
Certified Texas Master Naturalist
Proud WSSA Member #260!
www.flickr.com/photos/sibeardjr
www.doormouse-editions.com

 greenmanphoto's gear list:greenmanphoto's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kris in CT
Senior MemberPosts: 1,529Gear list
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to greenmanphoto, Mar 3, 2013

Thanks Sam!  The Tamron has actually been awesome for me.  Far better than reviews you see.  But strangely it really seems to fall apart over 150 ft or so.  I've seen a few other people that have said the same.  I only posted the sparrow earlier in the thread to show ISO 1600 can be used for birding sometimes.  Also I'm surprised no one commented on the deer at 1/30th at 20 feet with no VR.  Anyways.  The red tailed hawk series is pretty cool if you want to see the death of the bunny.. http://www.flickr.com/photos/coastalconn/sets/72157632626570024/

I am super excited to try the 300 F4, If I can pick up a stop with the lens I will be shooting the D300 for quite awhile unless the D7100 is better in frame rate and buffer then spec say.  Unless Nikon does the crazy thing that they did with the D600 and offer the lens for free..  I found a video in youtube that shows the focus speed of the 300 F4 and it doesn't seem slow to me, especially with the limiter..

One more from the Tammy not re-sized just cropped to 1231x1254 which is about 100% I think.. In case you want exif or a full view...  http://www.flickr.com/photos/coastalconn/8491275148/sizes/o/in/photostream/





-- hide signature --

My sober voyage into bird photography
http://www.facebook.com/KristoferRowePhotography

 Kris in CT's gear list:Kris in CT's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron SP AF 180mm F/3.5 Di LD (IF) Macro +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JimPearce
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,343Gear list
Like?
No, Kris...
In reply to Kris in CT, Mar 3, 2013

If you had a 500 f4 and 300 f2.8 you'd be even more eager to replace the D300. Believe me on this.

-- hide signature --

Jim

 JimPearce's gear list:JimPearce's gear list
Nikon D7100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JRA1962
New MemberPosts: 3Gear list
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to soukous, Mar 13, 2013

I've battled the same as many others here.....my take was to re-invest again in gently used D300s that was available for a good deal. Having used most every DSLR Nikon has to offer, I've recently relinquished a pair of D3s' in lieu of a D4 and a D300s.....

My logic? As awesome the D3s' are, they too are now getting long in the tooth (relatively) and in an effort to maintain a majority portion of what I had invested (i did buy both used) chose to sell them while the market still maintained fairly top dollar.  Honestly, as much as i miss having (2) top notch pro DSLR's for bragging rights, I am not upset- The D4 is a different animal and it produces and responds differently from the D3s.  Is it worth an upgrade from 1 to the other? Not necessarily, but I can say- out of the box,they are in deed different devices.

I've found a crop sensor body advantageous for Sports shooting environments and while I am sure that the D7100 (and it's added 1.3 crop) will become the camera of choice for many, i do not believe it will become the choice for those use to shooting with the likes of a pro style body like the D300/D300s....and I do believe that Nikon is pulling our chains and making us wait for what they will eventually release as a D400ish body for the market in fact wants it.

The D300s is a true tool with less fluff than what many buying the D7100 will require. The 1.3 crop function of the D7100 user will be replaced by those wanting a DX version of a D800 built to run like a D300s who will also use real glass- (likely a 300/400/500/600 200/400, etc)

The D7100 will sell very well, no doubt..........as will the D400 when it finally arrives- and this will be to both those who will sell off their recently purchased D7100 as well as those who were patient enough to have waited for the release of Nikon's most sought after DSPR in 7 years....

Just my take and my two cents.....I want a D400 to join my D4 but in the mean time I saw no reason to not have a DX body in my kit if the price was right. To me, for $750 a mint condition D300s with MBD10 grip and extra batteries was worth it.....

Now, it's simply the waiting game......I can dream, can't I??

 JRA1962's gear list:JRA1962's gear list
Nikon D3S Nikon D4 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JSees
Regular MemberPosts: 167Gear list
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to JRA1962, Mar 13, 2013

Well, by the standards of this forum, I have neither a Real Camera nor a Real Lens. Consumer all the way, although the D7K and 70-300 combo occasionally do a decent photo, it's nothing like some of the shots posted here by those far more skilled and dedicated than I.

Spec: Well the 16Mp on the D7K is enough for what I do, usually. It has better high ISO behavior and more DR than the D300, so I'm happy with that. But I do like hawks and eagles and skiers, so I want a fast focus (D300 and D7100 have better focusing than the D7000) and a deep buffer (D7100 fail). In a few cases, those two items might have allowed me to get a photo that I have missed, or which was not focused correctly.

Handling: The D7000 is no D300, as has been stated over and over. Still, it's not bad, and configurability has allowed me to set up the camera so that the clumsy location of the ISO button is not an issue.

So, what I really want is faster, more accurate focus and deeper buffer. I want a smaller DX body because I ski and kayak with the thing, and my hands are not large. The D7100 looks pretty decent, but the small buffer prevents me from upgrading.

This time, I guess, it's about spec, but it's an item that doesn't have anything to do with Mp. It's the buffer. (Well, that and budget.)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dacrema
Contributing MemberPosts: 568
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to soukous, Mar 17, 2013

soukous wrote:

So how do I upgrade?

It seems as though, in the absence of a D400 my only route is a D600.

I just picked up a D600.  I did not give up my D300.  They are different tools.  After using it a few times I would not think of the D600 as an upgrade.  It (D600) takes wonderful pictures rendering great skin tones and I like how it works in low light.  It does not seem as fast as my D300, but if you look at the specs it should be - the problem may be the operator not having some settings correct.

If I want to go to a race or shoot ducks on a lake I will take the 300.  If I am going to a party or sitting around a camp fire I'll take the D600.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JimPearce
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,343Gear list
Like?
The D300 is quite a bit faster...
In reply to dacrema, Mar 17, 2013

It actually clocked out at 6.1 fps in IR tests with the CF cards then available, but will do 6.7 fps with a Lexar 400X or faster. The D600 actually does 5.4 fps - a 25% spread.

-- hide signature --

Jim

 JimPearce's gear list:JimPearce's gear list
Nikon D7100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Robert Cohen
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,235Gear list
Like?
It was a lot cheaper to change to the latest film
In reply to soukous, Mar 18, 2013

>> When I was using 35mm film cameras the only time I upgraded my body (camera) was when one got damaged or ceased working. All the money went into improved lenses.

With the advent of digital cameras the whole emphasis has changed. <<

With a 35mm camera the camera was intended only to meter, focus, expose the film, and put some fresh film in place.  You could choose from many different kinds of film and the film manufacturers had new versions of their products from time to time.  Today the improvements in the sensor and related electronics - the functional equivalent of film - are made in new models of the hardware, you can't just buy a few rolls of the latest and greatest film.

-- hide signature --

--Bob

 Robert Cohen's gear list:Robert Cohen's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dacrema
Contributing MemberPosts: 568
Like?
Re: The D300 is quite a bit faster...
In reply to JimPearce, Mar 19, 2013

I knew that, I was actually talking about one shot.  Lens focusing and shutter taking the shot.  I was not so worried about the FPS.  I almost never shoot more that burst of more than 3 or 4 frames and those almost never at the high speed.  Then like I said I have not lost the D300 for when I need them.

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olliess
Contributing MemberPosts: 889
Like?
Re: It was a lot cheaper to change to the latest film
In reply to Robert Cohen, Mar 19, 2013

Robert Cohen wrote:

>> When I was using 35mm film cameras the only time I upgraded my body (camera) was when one got damaged or ceased working. All the money went into improved lenses.

[...]

Today the improvements in the sensor and related electronics - the functional equivalent of film - are made in new models of the hardware, you can't just buy a few rolls of the latest and greatest film.

With film you were paying extra for quality because you knew the body would transfer to the next, better film. Lenses even more so. It has to make you wonder how worthwhile it is to buy the latest and greatest (with attendant premium) when the same sensor is going to appear in an entry level body, for less than 1/2 the price, 6 months from now.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NikonMike
Senior MemberPosts: 1,018Gear list
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to soukous, Mar 19, 2013

I also have a D300s and have no intention to "upgrade"  to anything for at least two more years.  Just my opinion, but I think too many want to change cameras way too soon, and waste a lot of money and time learning a new camera needlessly in the process. The D300s is an incredible camera in every way, and in no way shape or form outdated.  It's still head and shoulders over any other Nikon DX product in my opinon.  Even from briefly handling a D800, I feel the D300s is a built a little more solid.

 NikonMike's gear list:NikonMike's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX200V
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
krikman
Regular MemberPosts: 292
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to soukous, Mar 28, 2013

Specs or handling?

Definitely handling. After D300s responsibility D600 and D800 sucks.

On D7100 I miss AF-L button since it is only way to focus I do.

Looking at my D300s I found that it is still potent camera. I tried D4, D800, D600, D7000. Only D4 takes my soul... but nobody wants to buy my little soul for $6000.

The only feature I lust for it is new AutoISO mode, because it pushes possible quality at maximum. I found useful rule as 1/2*f for crop.

(So lock AutoISO at 1/600 reasonable for 300mm but waste 2 stop quality for 70mm etc.)

Believe me. My work is large interior prints so 1*2m is common for me and my photos too, pixel quantity doesn't matter at all. 8,10,12,16,24 or 36MP just don't mean quality photo printing. It is all about local contrast, geometric layout, features and color planes of photographs. The only thing that sucks at large quality photos is bad color noise in darkest shadows. Nikon handles it well. (Canon shines at beatiful skin colors but sucks in darker areas)

So what specs mean after all? Nothing except good handling.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bailey151
Contributing MemberPosts: 990
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to NikonMike, Mar 28, 2013

NikonMike wrote:

.................The D300s is an incredible camera in every way, and in no way shape or form outdated.  It's still head and shoulders over any other Nikon DX product in my opinon.

Not hardly, it can still shoot the longest string & one can argue "build"..............aside from that? It's reign elsewhere is over.

And this from someone who's hoping for a D9xxx (doubt they confuse the FX & DX line numbering) w/ a 16-85 F4 in June.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nikkorwatcher
Contributing MemberPosts: 684
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to NikonMike, Mar 28, 2013

NikonMike wrote:

The D300s is an incredible camera in every way, and in no way shape or form outdated.  It's still head and shoulders over any other Nikon DX product in my opinon.

If you get the right shots side-by-side you will see different. Still, the focus of the D7xxx is not as good so it's hard to make the jump. I'm think a D400 can't be more than a few months away.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gr8fan
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to soukous, 10 months ago

If money is no matter, your wish would be granted with the new Df... But is it worth $2,700?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
calson
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,315
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to soukous, 10 months ago

The only difference between a D400 and the D7100 is the CompactFlash slot and the 10-pin port. With the D600 you have a full frame D7100 for all intents and purposes.

With "inexpensive" full frame high ISO capable cameras like the D600 there is much less demand for a D400 type of camera. The D7100 fits the bill for 99% of users who wish to stay with a DX camera. Many of these people do want video and not having video sooner in its cameras cost Nikon with people moving over to Canon that was two years ahead of Nikon and still has a slight lead.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Timberwolf530
Junior MemberPosts: 25Gear list
Like?
Re: Upgrading for the sake of upgrading is a waste
In reply to Mike H, 9 months ago

I'm with you Soukous.  I have had my D100 for 10 years.  Before that I had an N6006 for about 10 years.  I just "upgraded" to a used D300 with only 4K clicks on it this month.   Mostly I upgraded because my daughter is now wanting to get into photography, and I wanted her to learn on the D100 because it doesn't have any of the fancy programs that impede the learning process.  Also, she will be learning with a fixed lens until she gets the basics, just like I did 30 years ago.  Anyway, the D300 does what I need it to do.   I do a lot of sports shooting, so I am very excited about the higher fps on the 300.  I don't need video.  I have a 1080p video camera. I did alot of research D300 vs D7000, and even kicked around the idea of getting a D7100, but finally decided that the 300 fits my needs better.  I'll probably have it for at least 10 years too.

 Timberwolf530's gear list:Timberwolf530's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7000 Nikon D100 Nikon D300 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WalterSanders
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: D300s vs D7100 - is it about spec or is it about handling?
In reply to soukous, 6 months ago

soukous wrote:

I agree Gary.

When I was using 35mm film cameras the only time I upgraded my body (camera) was when one got damaged or ceased working. All the money went into improved lenses.

With the advent of digital cameras the whole emphasis has changed.

Every year sees better sensors and more megapixels, which gives better ISO range and the ability to pull up more detail. (I shoot birds and animals so I like detail.)

In terms of why I would like to upgrade, I feel that my D300s does not handle awkward lighting particularly well and i get too many blown highlights when shooting against the light. My D80 is a bit long in the tooth and batteries run down very quickly when using big AF lenses. I don't know why that is as the D300s uses the same battery and lasts much much longer.

I like to carry 2 bodies with me. It's a habit I got into years ago and even though I can get memory cards that will hold more pictures than I can shoot in a day It is convenient to have 2 bodies with different lenses mounted.

So my thinking was to phase out the D80, move the D300s to bench warmer and start using an upgraded model.

- or maybe it's just me looking for an excuse to buy a new toy.

I remember those days, I just took out and dusted off my first SLR a Nikon FT2.

While we wore the bodies out, we did change film all the time and film is the equivalent of the sensor.

New films came out, old films where replaced or used when their characteristics suited the shoot.

Its just film was/is a consumable. If you view a "sensor" the same way, it just doesn't come out of the body.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads