I've owned a D40 for almost a year now. Shot 10,000 frames so far.
Yesterday I was in the area, so I stopped at B&H to mess around with cameras. Then I did something potentially dangerous: I handled the D300 at the Nikon table.
It was awesome. It sat just right in my hands, the LCD and viewfinder were great, the controls were so responsive and intuitive. I thought, This is a camera I could shoot day after day, year after year, and not have to think about upgrading, and never feel camera-limited.
When I bought the D40 it seemed big and heavy to me, but that was because I was used to compacts. It's a bit small for my hands, so my pinky is always dangling off the edge, and since I started lifting weights, the bigger cameras suddenly don't seem heavy at all anymore, but instead feel more stable.
I shoot almost entirely with primes, so I have AF-D lenses that will require a camera upgrade to autofocus. I have some old AIS manual lenses which would be much easier to focus with a bigger viewfinder.
That said, I've been waiting for the D80 upgrade, because it seems a waste to get a D80 now with an update coming soon and when I already have a great camera in the D40.
Now, looking at the D300, I'm thinking, why not "skip the middle man"? I could keep the D40 as the backup and for casual stuff, and use the D300 for serious work. The D300 is available now, while the D80 successor might not be around until Christmas. The D300 would also give me metering with my AIS lenses. I worry that if I get a D80/D90 in 2008, later on I may want a D300 and wish I had gotten it from the beginning (the way I frequently wish I'd bought a D80 instead of a D40). The D300 is a lot of money, though -- almost 4 times what I paid for my car back in college. Not a purchase to be made lightly.
What would you do?
Yesterday I was in the area, so I stopped at B&H to mess around with cameras. Then I did something potentially dangerous: I handled the D300 at the Nikon table.
It was awesome. It sat just right in my hands, the LCD and viewfinder were great, the controls were so responsive and intuitive. I thought, This is a camera I could shoot day after day, year after year, and not have to think about upgrading, and never feel camera-limited.
When I bought the D40 it seemed big and heavy to me, but that was because I was used to compacts. It's a bit small for my hands, so my pinky is always dangling off the edge, and since I started lifting weights, the bigger cameras suddenly don't seem heavy at all anymore, but instead feel more stable.
I shoot almost entirely with primes, so I have AF-D lenses that will require a camera upgrade to autofocus. I have some old AIS manual lenses which would be much easier to focus with a bigger viewfinder.
That said, I've been waiting for the D80 upgrade, because it seems a waste to get a D80 now with an update coming soon and when I already have a great camera in the D40.
Now, looking at the D300, I'm thinking, why not "skip the middle man"? I could keep the D40 as the backup and for casual stuff, and use the D300 for serious work. The D300 is available now, while the D80 successor might not be around until Christmas. The D300 would also give me metering with my AIS lenses. I worry that if I get a D80/D90 in 2008, later on I may want a D300 and wish I had gotten it from the beginning (the way I frequently wish I'd bought a D80 instead of a D40). The D300 is a lot of money, though -- almost 4 times what I paid for my car back in college. Not a purchase to be made lightly.
What would you do?
