Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon D90 vs D300 have to decide!

Go to last post
Ruslicus said:
Could you give me some practical advise and resons why I should pay
500CAD more for D300.
Click to expand...
Yes.
Ruslicus said:
My primary shots subjects are sky, landscaping, macro (I still have to
buy a lense - trying to use Tamron 17-50), Sports and portraits. So
really everything :)
Click to expand...
For landscapes and macros, MLU (Mirror lock-up) is a big plus. Some will say Exposure Delay Mode works, but with MLU you can actually decide when (within 30 seconds) to take the shot -- for instance, when the wind stops blowing for a brief second. Also, a 100% viewfinder makes composition more accurate.

For sports the better AF (much better in fact), more fps, option to go to 8 fps with the optional MB-D10, and the larger buffer all come into play.
--
Anthony Beach
 
For me, the main decision point between these two cameras would be autofocus.

1. The D300 has AF microadjustment. This feature alone can save time, money and aggravation if you have lenses that front- or back-focus. When I had a D80 last year, my 50mm f/1.8 showed pretty bad front-focus, and my Tamron 17-50 showed less but still noticeable front focus. With AF microadjustment I would have been able to resolve this issue in a quick and simple way.

To me AF microadjustment is a big plus that allows you to get more from each of your lenses (if their focus is not perfect).

2. D300 has superior AF tracking. If your photography involves tracking of fast moving subjects, the superior AF of the D300 will pay for itself with its performance.

If these two features are not critical for you, a D90 will give you the same image quality in a more compact size, and add video as well.
 
Unless the size is a problem, if you have the money, why not go with the 300? You'll hardly ever be sorry for getting the best model you can afford, but it's easy to look back and say many why didn't I get that when you buy less than you can afford.
 
I suspicion you would have to look pretty deep to find really newer technology in the D90. More consumer oriented features for sure and output probably more targeted to consumers, but no comparison in build and responsiveness. Typical marketing, come out with the new model and then about a year later, take away some features and build quality, tailor to more consumer oriented audience, lower the price and get more miles out of the basics. The D90 can for sure compete image quality wise, but certainly does not have the build quality of the 300.
 
The D300s is what most people believe Nikon's next release will be should be in the market place give or take three months. If possible thats the camera to go for.
Claude
 
If the choice was a D300 now or a D300s now, both for the same price; then the choice would likely be obvious, but that's not going to be the choice. I don't know of a single D300 user who expects to upgrade to a D300s, and that says something to me about both the quality of the D300 and the anticipated value of the D300s. Currently the D300 can be had for around $1500, but a D300s will cost at least $1800 -- so the question is whether or not video and minor improvement of high ISO performance are worth waiting for so you can spend more?

Also, arguments put forward that a new release will put downward pressure on the D300 price are wishful thinking. Unlike what happened with the D200, Nikon is likely not going to have large inventory of D300 bodies sitting on retailer's shelves when the D300s comes out.
--
Anthony Beach
 
The D300 is a prosumer model ... weather sealed, better AF, real mirror lockup (you do landscapes?), meters with AI and AIS lenses (cheap and incredibly sharp), built like a tank, fast ... really fast with grip ...

D90 is small and light and has video. It's alleged IQ improvements are trivial ...

Pick based on your real needs ... or wait a while and see what Nikon does. Might get a few hundred off the D300.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
 
Thank you guys for your comments. I did some more research and have decided to go for D300 but wait till Aug for possible discount. D300 has great features that are important for my shot style and subjects, like sport and landscaping. Additional I think thsi is good investment that would not loose the value and price - D90 is still on a way to drop the price in future, i think.
--
Your attitude determines your altitude!
 
photonut2008 said:
Claire Dupuis said:
...and I don't hesistate letting the auto ISO function
picking pretty high settings for me, up to 2000 for instance, with no
negative impact on the images.
Click to expand...
See, right there I know to take everything you write with a grain of salt -- actually, a bag of salt.
--
Anthony Beach
Click to expand...
Use a truckload of salt if you wish, it will not change the result from real life experience I had with both cameras. Shot by the same user (me) under the exact same lightning conditions and with the same lenses, at the end of the day (it actually took me two days to decide to get rid of the D300), the D90 stays and the D300 is sent back...

Opinions tend to vary though, and that's what make them interesting...

Claire
--

'I guess if everybody went crazy together nobody would notice, what do you think ?'
 
Claire Dupuis said:
photonut2008 said:
Claire Dupuis said:
...and I don't hesistate letting the auto ISO function
picking pretty high settings for me, up to 2000 for instance, with no
negative impact on the images.
Click to expand...
See, right there I know to take everything you write with a grain of salt -- actually, a bag of salt.
--
Anthony Beach
Click to expand...
Use a truckload of salt if you wish, it will not change the result from real life experience I had with both cameras. Shot by the same user (me) under the exact same lightning conditions and with the same lenses, at the end of the day (it actually took me two days to decide to get rid of the D300), the D90 stays and the D300 is sent back...
Click to expand...
There's no reconciling "The D300 pictures got noisy real easy, even at not so high ISO..." with the D90 can go to ISO 2000 with no problems; except perhaps if you are shooting JPEG and there is something in the camera's settings that is making the D90 acceptable at fairly high ISO while the D300 by your assessment seems to be a stop or more behind it. I would also say that coming to a conclusion in two days is hardly enough time to investigate all the settings and isolate why what you saw might be different between the two cameras; you solved the problem by choosing the D90, I have no problem with that, but I wouldn't base much on what you write beyond that it is what you prefer.
--
Anthony Beach
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top