Recommend D300 for first time DSLR user?

From the original post it sounds like you have already talked yourself into a D300. My advice would be to get something simpler like a D50 or D80 and learn the basics of digital photography before popping for a DXXX. The mysteries of white balance, ISO, etc etc are enough initially without also having to learn to operate one of the most complex pieces of electronics on the market. Get a camera that lets you focus of photography until you have mastered the basics - then you will be in a better position to assess what you want/need. I have a D200, and I want to master it before I get a D300 even though the 300 has many features that I like. I just can't (no, won't) afford to line up to buy the latest gadget. Yes, I said gadget. The only things that matter are your eye, the lens and the subject. Everything else is a gadget.
Cheers, Don
--
'It's all about light'
Don McVee
http://www.pbase.com/mcveed/gallery01

silver22 said:

Really? You have a D300, I assume?

I do, and the out of camera .jpegs are fantastic. Better than the
ones I get out of a D50.

The D200 I'd agree with you on...

Click to expand...

I have a D200, for 6-months now. IMHO, the D50 was/is the best out-of-camera .JPG DSLR made by ANYONE to date (have not tried the D300).

How long did it take you to find the right D300 settings???

I came from 30+ years of shooting slide film, beginning with manual exposure (hand held light meter), manual focus Rangefinders, then SLRs, till my last film SLR (Nikon F5) 2-years ago.

Used a D70S for 18-months to get a feel for digital vs. slide film and raw processing.

About 6-months ago traded in my D70S for a D200. Took me nearly 3-months to find the right combination of settings for the D200 and a scripted, standardized raw workflow that gave me 90% plus keepers in my direct D200 --> Raw Processing --> .JPGs workflow. Raw batch processing at approx. 2 minutes per image.
The D300 had not yet been announced . . .

Consistent results of this lengthy double learning curve exercise:

D200 ISO1000 AF-S DX 17-55mmf/2.8G 55mm f/4.5 1/40



D200 ISO1600 AF-S DX 12-24mmf/4G 17mm f/4 1/30



D200 ISO3200 AF 20mmf2.8D 20mm f/2.8 1/60



All available light, no flash, manual custom white balance.

So, now I don't need a marginally better D300, and will wait 18-24months to see what the post-D300/D3 camera bodies can do before considering trading-in my D200.

I DO NOT recomend the D200 as a first DSLR coming from a "does everything for you" P&S.

A D50, absolutely.

A D300, not qualified to comment (can only make the observation that the D300 has many, many more variables to standardize on than the D200).

--
Andy_F
[Equipment in use -- see profile]

Having had a D50 for a year, then a D80 for a year and now a D300, if I was in your position I would go with the D80 and spend the difference on top quality lenses. It is more forgiving once you get your basic setup, and no, I never once used the preprogrammed auto modes - just aperture and manual priority.

Most people who say go with a D200 or 300 instead of a D80 have never owned the D80. It does 95% of what the others can do. If you can live without mirror lock-up, ability to connect an MC-36 for timed long exposures and instant WB and iso access then it really is a no brainer. Use the D80 for a year and then upgrade with a good set of lenses behind you already. You're unlikely to notice the difference in quality between the images you'll take with any of these cameras.

Thanks!

Let me try an analogy...

In addition to photography, I teach people with Porsche lust to drive. One of the first obstacles is convincing the student that although they have been "driving" for years, they really don't have a clue! Many students never progress beyone this initial stage of total unbelief...they never learn to drive.

We start out on big parking lots and drive through pylons...slow at first. Then we "graduate" to faster speeds, but still with pylons to hit, instead of guardrails. Then we move to small race tracks, but keep the speeds down. Gradually, over years, the student progresses to "solo" status and the instructor can finally get out of the car. Whew.

I've noticed that good students are ones that DON'T start out with a fast car. One of the first things I ask a new student is what their driving history is. If their "daddy" bought them a Corvette in HS and they graduated to a BMW M3 in college and they are now driving a Twin Turbo, I know I'm in for a difficult day! In contrast, if the student tells me that he had a Chevy PU in HS, graduated to a VW bus in College, and now has a used 924, I smile, because this student will appreciate me. The only pay I get is seeing the smile on a face when the light comes on.

SO, your progression is a BIG part of learning. If you start out with a D300, you may eventually learn to be a photographer, but I doubt it. Take small steps, grasshopper...

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
Bridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/

With the D80 there are built in modes called "scene modes". So, if you want to shoot a landscape, you can set the camera to "Landscape" and the exposure, AF, and White Balance subsystems will be set for you.

On the D300 there are "shooting banks", which are basically EMPTY. You can set these shooting banks to do the same thing as the scene modes in the D80 but you have to do all the programming for yourself.

So the D80 will be easier to use when you first get it. However, in time you'll probably find that Nikon got some things totally wrong in certain Scene modes that yields less than ideal results. For example, for the Landscape mode on my D70, Nikon programmed it to use the Closest Subject focusing, which then causes the camera to focus at the grass at your feet, which is NOT ideal for a typical landscape. Hopefully they fixed that problem with the D80. However at some point you'll probably find yourself taking control of the camera and adjusting it for yourself, which you can do because the D80 is very adjustable. With the D300 you have to take control of the camera for yourself nearly as soon as you take it out of the box.

Now, out out of the box, the D300 does perform more like a digital P & S than some of Nikon's previous models, so it's not terrible and you will get some decent pictures. HOWEVER, you will initially think that your P & S took better pictures and was much easier to use. You'll also find that the D300 is much heavier than your P & S. It is, for it's size the D300 is quite heavy due to it's extremely rugged build quality.

Especially since your coming from a 3mp camera. The difference in magnification between a 3mp, 100% peep and a 12mp, 100% peep is HUGE and the higher magnification will make the images form the high resolution camera look soft. Before you start complaining about soft images, either make some prints, or re-sample the high resolution images so they match the lower resolution camera in size and apply a bit of sharpening. BTW, the above is true anytime you move up in camera resolution, the magnification in a 100% zoom increases and the images will look like they are softer because of the higher magnification.

So, do yourself a favor and have some prints made BEFORE you start to worry the camera is bad. Doing that will ease all of your concerns because the higher resolution will capture much finer detail than a lower resoluiton camera and this will show up quite clearly even in a smallish 8x10 inch print. At 16x24 inches, you'll get wowed. However, at 4x6 inches you won't see any real difference so if you don't ever plan on printing larger than 4x6 inches you may want to think about saving your money, 3mp is just fine for 4x6 inch prints. BTW, buy yourself a printer, HP has a tabloid printer that will make a very good 11x17 inch print for only about 350 dollars and you'll save a lot by making your own prints. It will also shut up your wife's complaints the first time you hand her a great looking 11x17 inch print of one of "her" babies.

Now, about hte learinging curve. IT IS HUGE. The D300 is intimidatiing to me and I have been handling cameras for over 30 years and have my own darkroom. For someone stepping up from a P & S digital, it will be overwhelming at first. Two suggestions. First, look into a continuing education course in Photography at a local college and take it. Second, plan on wearing out that 400 plus page manual and asking a lot of questions in this forum. The D300 is NOT an easy camera to learn how to use properly and it will take some effort. However, if you do commit to learnign how to use it, it's a camera that will take satisfying images for as long as you have it. Meaning, it could be a 20, or 30 year "keeper".

However, you will have to excercize some disclipine in keeping the shutter count under control in order to keep it working for 30 years. The shutter in the D300 is "rated" for a total of 150,000 exposures. Which sounds like a lot, and was when we all shot film. But, I have seen individuals who will go out and snap 1 or 2 thousand images at just one football game. Taking a picture with a digital camera feels like a zero cost act, it's only when we make a print when it costs us real money out of our pocket. So, it's very tempting to just take pictures of everything we see, including how our shoelaces are tied. However, if you take 1000 pictures per week, it will only be 150 weeks before you have to send your camera in to have the shutter replaced. That is only 3 years. So, excercize some discipline and only take pictures of things that you think are worthy of recording. In simple terms, do your editing before you snap the shutter, not at your computer. You'll spend a lot less time deleting dumb pictures and you'll make your camera last much longer.

Let me attempt a couple of analogies that may help:

With a P&S both your shooting modes (lens f-stops, shutter speed. flash or not, focusing method) are set for you automatically. Also, the "film characteristics" are setup for you.

With a D40/D50/D70/D80 class DSLR, you have the option of either letting the camera choose your shooting modes or doing it yourself. The "film," with perhaps some limited choices available to you has been provided.

With a D200/D300/D3 class DSLR, the shooting modes are more "user defined" than "user selected". Plus, you have to make variable selections to "invent the film" you wish to use. There are "out-of-the-box" defaults set, but you may or may not like these (my personal experience with the D200 is that you won't).
--
Andy_F
[Equipment in use -- see profile]

digitalj said:

Brian,

... I talk to a photographer who took my wedding photos up in
Washington state a lot. He honestly feels that if I am going to buy a
slr, he would personally go with a D200 (which he has) or a D300. He
.... I was also wondering myself if the D80 and D300 are really
that much in size difference. Going from a D40 to a D80 is a big size
increase, but is going from a D80 to a D300 that much bigger? I too
am just a little confused as to what I would actually be happy with.
If I bought a D40, I personally would wonder if I should have gone
with the d80 due to its lens compatibility and is easier for me to
hold onto since it is a little bigger. Decisions....Decisions....

Click to expand...

The Buying Guide / Side-by-Side comparison of DPReview would be useful.
If you have not noticed, the BUYING GUIDE is the is the 5th item on the menu.

Position the mouse cursor over the BUYING GUIDE and select Side-by-Side. You can select as many camera to compare, but 4 is the practical limit if you decide to print the result.

Almost 18 months ago, I was leaning towards the D80 because of size / weight but finally decided on the D200. I concluded that the difference in body weight is not very significant when tele lens are mounted, specially since I will most likely use tripod or monopod.

If finance is not an issue to you, I'd recommend the D300.
--
ecube

I see your position and it reminds me a bit of mine when I got a dSLR a few years ago. I started with an old Pentax Spotmatic II and a 50mm f1.4 from my dad to learn some basics (shutter speed, aperture, metering, composition). About 10 months after using that, I upgraded to a little Fuji superzoom. About a year after THAT, I upgraded to my current camera, a Konica Minolta 7D (the body has a button or dial for pretty much every shooting function imaginable). I bought it for a HUGE discount because it was about a month after Sony took over KM. It's been a wonderful camera and I still use it every day. But that's beyond the point. What I'm getting at is that when I made the jump to a dSLR, I didn't question it at all because I felt I was ready. You seem a little questioning at your readiness to get a dSLR, so perhaps you're not ready for one yet? In my mind, you don't really seem ready to buy a D300, maybe a nice P&S with an external flash would be good? A nice setup for you might be a Canon S5IS and one of Canon's Speedlites. You'd have a long zoom range plus a powerful, fast flash. You could also try a Panasonic FZ50 and an external flash for that. Just my two cents, I'm sure you'll make a good decision.

-Kevin

I haven’t owned an SLR since my Canon T90 from 1986(ish).

After having gone through four P&S cameras, I decided to get a DSLR.

My logic on camera size was that once you go along the DLSR path, you except that it's not going to fit in your pocket so you will need to carry some form of camera bag. Therefore the size issue becomes virtually irrelevant.

After 6 month’s of indecision on which one to buy, my D300 turned up last Friday.

And, it’s amazing. It feels the absolute business in your hands, I’ve already got a few shots that I would have missed with a compact and the pics are far better (sharper, better colours) than I expected. Add to that the LCD screen and HDMI output and I am one happy chap.

Yes, it is a complicated piece of kit, but that only adds to the interest and as it’s digital you can fire of as many shots (good or bad) as you like and they are all free.

I am a first time DSLR user. My previous camera was a SonyF828. I wanted to graduate to a DSLR and be able to learn better photography with a camera that would take excellent photos but also increase my skill level as I learned more about it.

After reading many reviews, I decided on the D300. I've had it about a week and a half and I love it. I am just an amatuer photographer who enjoys taking pictures but also want to learn how to take better pictures.

I have attached a link to my first days with the D300 of pictures of some of my wife's pets. You are more than welcome to view them if it would help you decide.

Bruce
http://horsepoor.smugmug.com/gallery/4073567

digitalj said:

Hello all,

I have been reading this forum everyday for several months now and
have really enjoyed what people have to say. I want to tell you about
what kind of photography I do and see if you would recommend a D300
as my first slr.

... I have 2 kids now, a 2 1/2 year old and a 4 month old. I would like to do a
lot of indoor photography, macro shots, and outdoor photography. . . .
... a camera that is quick and does well in not-so-great shooting environments.

Click to expand...

Any of the camera mentioned (Nikon D40, D40X, D80, D200, D300) can take photos of your kids, indoor and outdoor. Naturally, the D200 better than the others and D300 better than D200. I assume you are aware of the need for external flash for general indoor shots.

digitalj said:

I bought the Canon G9... returned it ...couldn't seem to hold it without shaking

Click to expand...

I don't know anything about Canon G9. Maybe just too small for your hands.

digitalj said:

I was able to get decent macro shots but ... [not] with ... non-macro shots.

Click to expand...

It is possible that you did not know how to use the Canon G9 given the limited time you had with the camera. Be aware that you would encounter problems with using ANY new camera specially high end models. Whatever camera make and model you buy, you NEED to learn how to use the camera. As several posters warn, the learning curve for D200 is steep and is steeper for the D300.

digitalj said:

... [I am] wondering if I would actually use a slr as I would with a p&s because of
the size.

Click to expand...

You are the only one who can answer that question.

digitalj said:

The reason I am thinking of the D300 is because:

1. I want to buy a slr and feel that I will be happy with it for very long time.

Click to expand...

You need to define your ALL YOUR short and long term NEEDS and EXPECTATIONS and understand that there is no single camera that will meet all those needs. Naturally, your needs will change in time as surely as there will be new and significantly improved DSLR in the future.

digitalj said:

2. ... a D40 or D40x ... too small for my hands. I like the grip on ... the D80 or
the D200-D300. I can hold onto them better.

Click to expand...

Tha t is your personal preference. I am biased for NIKON ergonomics.

digitalj said:

3. I like all the improvements on the D300 like the 51pt af system,
CMOS sensor, Live View, nice LCD, etc.

Click to expand...

I like the 3" LCD. The others are just bonus (to me).

digitalj said:

If I buy something like the D200, I will wish I bought the D300.

Click to expand...

Don't we all have second thoughts.

digitalj said:

4. If I buy something like the D80, I will wonder [should have] the D200/ D300.

Click to expand...

ditto.

digitalj said:

5. At the current moment, I don't need to shoot fast paced images
like sports or what not, but in the not too distant future, I can see
myself needing a camera for these types of settings.

Click to expand...

If "not too distant future"? is over a year, I'll get D40X with the bundled lenses. I think you could get a package D40X with two zoom lenses. If I were you, I'll get three good lenses which I will keep for upgrade two or three years later . . . D400 (?) perhaps.

digitalj said:

Do you use your slr for the "everyday" occasions, or ... just for "the special
occasions" like weddings, etc.?

Click to expand...

Ahhhhhh, looks like you are ambivalent . . . D40X is looking good for you.

digitalj said:

The slr would be my one [unti] I get a nice p&s to go along with it.

Click to expand...

That DOES IT! Get the D40X plus three lenses.

digitalj said:

I am a college student ... interested in photography and a camera that
does well in most shooting environments.

Click to expand...

This is both a negative and a positive indicator.

Positive: You are (I assume) young and energetic and in the prime of learning and ambition.
Negative: With a young family, would you have time and financial resource?

As for shooting environment, I think any serious photographer demands that and any pro-sumer camera can provide that.

digitalj said:

[is] the D300 a good camera ... for the type of shooting that I want to do and

Click to expand...

For your CURRENT usage, D300 is an overkill.

digitalj said:

... I don't ... want to purchase an "outdated" camera if could AFFORD
something newer and nicer.

Click to expand...

I think AFFORDability is the KEY! Forget about the "outdated", it is only a "wish" for you. Can you afford the D300 body and a descent start-up lens. Speakiing of lens, I recommend the 18~70mm or the 18~135mm for YOUR stated current usage.

I have said enough. Now, consider the suggestions from ALL the posters. Make a list and do a trade-off analysis.

Good luck!
--
ecube

The photos on your webpage said it all for D300!
--
ecube

Hi diditalj,

I thought I would add my opinion to this very interesting thread. My thoughts are predicated on the cost of the D300 + decent lens not being too much for you. If you can afford it AND if you are willing & interested in learning the D300, why not buy it and enjoy!

There is a definite learning curve to the D300, you will not learn the camera in a day, as one can learn a new P&S in one day (or one hour!). For a person coming from a D200, there is a learning curve with the D300, but if someone is coming from a P&S, there is a mountainous learning curve. Not that you can't handle it, if you are INTERESTED in learning the camera. I've spent the most amazing nights lately, with family doing their own thing all around me, and me curled up with my D300 manual and camera.

The customization that this camera gives you is simply amazing and I've enjoyed! every page of the manual and every customization the menu allows for. How fantastic is it that via the "Custom Settings" Menu you can even reverse the defaults of the main command & subcommand dials (Custom Settings f7 manual page 308) ...and reverse the default setting of the "Exposure Indicators" (Custom Settings f10 manual page 311). If learning and applying this type of customization AND learning how to shoot with the camera excites you, then absolutely! get a D300.

If this sort of stuff is a bit dry for you, and you want to just have great pictures from a camera that does not require you to put this sort of effort into it, then get one of the other great cameras mentioned in this thread. One thing on the side of getting a D300 is that you will grow into it. I loved my D200...the D300 is even better!

Best wishes,
Londongal

Oh what the heck, let me add to this list since I've also been thinking about buying a new camera.

First, although I think the D300, or the D200 for that matter, are more sophisticated and complicated cameras from a hardware, and technical standpoint, the gear itself is not what will be harder to figure out. It is the photography with such a sophisticated mechanism, that assumes you are up to speed in matters photographic, that will prove challenging coming from a P & S. That challenge is not bad, and it is much of what I enjoy, and no doubt if you are into photography you will learn to enjoy it (or already do). It takes patience, and it takes enjoying your every mistake also (and learning from them). That's all good.

Would I buy a D300 as my first dSLR after only using P&S's? Probably not. The price for me is prohibitive, and I'd start with something that would allow me the opportunity to truly focus (no pun intended) on the essentials, the foundationals of photography with a dSLR and with a few lenses. This first dSLR would be used plenty, taking lots of shots (learning shutter discipline as you go along, but also trying out new things by taking lots of shots). While your needs and aims now are pointing in one direction, once you have the camera and start playing with it, you will be inclined perhaps to try your hand at other things. This first camera, and lenses, ought to be flexible enough for that experimentation without breaking your bank. This first dSLR might also help you see yourself as an emerging photographer (and not just someone taking pictures), with deep interests in specific types of photography or subjects. So, tons of learning happens with these first dSLRs.

That does not mean you should not get a feature-rich camera. Just that a D300 might be jumping into more than you need for your stated goals and aspirations at this point, and with a steeper learning curve because goals, aspirations, and knowledge level might not match the equipment as well at this point in time.

I would recommend purchasing based on what you need and what you think is critical for the work you do rather than on features. People who make products want to sell you on features, but features don't always, nor necessarily, translate into benefits. For the features of the D300 to translate into benefits requires much more than having them, and there's the rub. I've seen some rather impressive shots with the D40, and I was lucky enough when I owned one, to take what I consider some good shots with it. I've also seen great shots with a D50, D70, and with a D80. I've taken some shots with a P&S that have been well received and that I think ended up being good for their intended purpose. I've also seen some rather bad shots with a D300, and D200 (and some impressive ones also). So, having the feature-rich camera is not the deciding factor.

I'm considering a used D200. It is less expensive, still a good camera, and will allow me to continue learning for a while more as I continue to emerge as a better photographer. I'm sure I could do the same with a D300 (and if my friends and family help me financially I might go that way later), but it is not something I need to do what I want, and the financial constrains are significant. We'll see how it pans out.

Oh, I have an 8 year old and a 4 year old and have been trying to take pictures of them for a few years now (also a 21 year old that tried me photographically also when he was a toddler)! What I wish I had more than anything was a good small camera that I could deploy quickly, with a wide to medium range zoom and fast lens. I could have taken better indoor shots of my kids with a fast lens and an SB-600 to bounce off walls or ceiling. The camera body could have been any of the ones mentioned already.

Good luck and have fun!

NK

chuxter said:

SO, your progression is a BIG part of learning. If you start out with
a D300, you may eventually learn to be a photographer, but I doubt
it. Take small steps, grasshopper...

--
Charlie Davis

Click to expand...

Lovely!
I know I would have enjoyed high speed driving lessons from you!

--
ecube

I have difficulty assessing the technical ability of a person in front of me without giving that person a task to complete in a given time, hence, a few exchanges on-line it is impossible, thus, I have to tread with caution.

I have demonstrated how to set and use the D200 to friends who were still puzzled six months into owning their camera, two of these individuals have master degree in engineering (grrrrrr, I am an engineer). These individuals both the D200 because they know I have one. One of them took my advice, sold his D200 including lenses, and bought a Panasonic FZ50. He could not be happier. His photography improved too.

--
ecube

There is a great deal of customization involved in a camera at the level of the D300 to get the kind of pictures you want. Even with the D40, I was surprised how much I could customize to get it to behave the way I wanted, but the D300 will be a whole 'nutha level. This is something to be careful of - I think that if you still struggle with the 'A' mode, there MAY simply be too much going on for you to be able to make a good photograph.

I'm also an engineeer/physicist. Tend to expect people to comprehend elementary arithmetic/algebra at least and get proven wrong a lot.

It's very hard to predict how specific individuals will take to things that you or I may consider intuitive, once shown.

IMHO, without basic photographic knowledge (which P&S cheat you out of having to learn) starting with a D200/D300/D3 class camera is a recipe for disappointment and substantial money wasted.
--
Andy_F
[Equipment in use -- see profile]

Andy_F said:

I have a D200, for 6-months now. IMHO, the D50 was/is the best
out-of-camera .JPG DSLR made by ANYONE to date (have not tried the
D300).

How long did it take you to find the right D300 settings???

Click to expand...

On the D300, setting up the autofocus settings was the trickiest part. I used it a day after I got it with the picture controls set to standard and got some great shots at a family Christmas party with an SB-800. It handled the flash exposure much better than my D50 did too. I think I took a couple hundred photos and used flash compensation twice. I was very pleasantly surprised with the way the .jpegs looked without any extra processing.

Now, I'm just talking about the out of camera .jpegs, not the way the camera works, mind you. I never used the idiot modes on my D50, and I understand how ISO, apertures, shutter speed, and flash interact. Someone coming straight from a P&S with very basic knowledge is going to be totally overwhelmed by a D300, I would think.

silver22 said:

On the D300, setting up autofocus settings was trickiest...
it a day after I got it with the picture controls set to standard
and got great shots at family Christmas party with SB-800...
I was very pleasantly surprised with the way the .jpegs looked
without any extra processing.
I understand how ISO, apertures, shutter speed, and flash interact.

Click to expand...

And without that knowlege the D300 wouldn't have been set correctly to get these shots for you. Which is one of my main points.

Interesting that Nikon has the standard picture mode set to give good .JPGs. Definitely not the case with the out-of-box D200. Believe they assumed anyone buying a D200 would go the raw processing route and designed it that way.

I don't much like the look of flash and did our family Christmas using available light, ISO1000, and the 17-55/f2.8 DX which is a fast, extremely sharp, pro lens designed specifically to be used at or near wide-open apertures. Consider it to be the ideal "kit lens" for the D200/300, but that immediately adds ~$1200 to the D200/300 effective kit price.

Had to go through my learning curve to get good hi ISO out of the D200 and can't seem to do it with out-of-camera .jpegs from the D200.

Do you think you could live with just out-of-camera .jpegs from the D300; most of what I hear says no -- at least from those that make a living with their cameras.

I raised that point originally because it adds yet another level of complexity to be mastered by someone coming from a P&S only background.
BTW, setting up autofocus on the D200 is a trip also.
--
Andy_F
[Equipment in use -- see profile]