D90, D300s or maybe wait?

I am looking into buying a DSLR and are currently looking at the Nikon D90 and D300s. I have also considered the Canon 550D and 7D, but I prefer the Nikon ergonomics. Also, I have a Nikon F80, with some cheap kit lenses and a SB-800.

I haven't been using the F80 since 2007 'cos of the cost of developing film, but been using a Canon G9. I got the G9 as a comprimize as I wanted to take it under water and my pocket wont allow for a DSLR UW house. However, I miss the speed, accuracy and options of SLR's.

I mostly take pictures of my kids (In that sence the G9 is a pain). I also enjoy UW (I will continue to use the G9 for that, unless I win the lottery), travel, macro and nature photography and will be getting more into nature photography after getting my DSLR. I will also be using it for simple videoes of my family etc. I am looking into buying a body which I can learn and grow into and that will last for a while (I'm not planning to exchange body every time something new and better comes along).

As far as I have read, the image quality and ISO preformance of the D90 and D300s is the same, but D300s offers faster AF, tougher body and more customization options(buttons). Are there any other advantages for gettin a D300s as the price is almost the doubble of the D90?

Also, its the rumors of a new D90 sometime this fall. Will this be a mayor improvement, or give a nice drop in d300s price? I don't really need more pixels or full HD, even though it sounds nice. Or do I?

I am planning to get the 16-85mm VR and a 50mm 1.8f nikkor lenses as a start, and later supply with a macro and a tele zoom (when I have saved up enough). Does that sound reasonable, or any other suggestions?

Maybe alot of questions for a single post, but hope someone can help.

Hi David
I have just done exactly the same thing as you’ve have set out in you post!

Eventually I went for the D300s + 16-85 lens – Very , very pleased with the investment. The twin card slot did it for me - brilliant

I also have a G10 so I’m speaking with complete confidence that your would me makeing a good choice with the D300s!, dont get me wrong the D90 is a good camera but the build on the D300s is in another league.

If want to play then you've got to pay

--
One Camera,One brain part used!

David Strand said:

I am looking into buying a DSLR and are currently looking at the Nikon D90 and D300s. I have also considered the Canon 550D and 7D, but I prefer the Nikon ergonomics. Also, I have a Nikon F80, with some cheap kit lenses and a SB-800.

I haven't been using the F80 since 2007 'cos of the cost of developing film, but been using a Canon G9. I got the G9 as a comprimize as I wanted to take it under water and my pocket wont allow for a DSLR UW house. However, I miss the speed, accuracy and options of SLR's.

I mostly take pictures of my kids (In that sence the G9 is a pain). I also enjoy UW (I will continue to use the G9 for that, unless I win the lottery), travel, macro and nature photography and will be getting more into nature photography after getting my DSLR. I will also be using it for simple videoes of my family etc. I am looking into buying a body which I can learn and grow into and that will last for a while (I'm not planning to exchange body every time something new and better comes along).

As far as I have read, the image quality and ISO preformance of the D90 and D300s is the same, but D300s offers faster AF, tougher body and more customization options(buttons). Are there any other advantages for gettin a D300s as the price is almost the doubble of the D90?

Click to expand...

Metering with Ai lenses and that's about it.

David Strand said:

Also, its the rumors of a new D90 sometime this fall. Will this be a mayor improvement, or give a nice drop in d300s price? I don't really need more pixels or full HD, even though it sounds nice. Or do I?

Click to expand...

A d90 successor end of august now seems almost certain. I sincerely doubt this will do much to D300s prices. It may cause a 10-20% drop in D90 prices

David Strand said:

I am planning to get the 16-85mm VR and a 50mm 1.8f nikkor lenses as a start, and later supply with a macro and a tele zoom (when I have saved up enough). Does that sound reasonable, or any other suggestions?

Click to expand...

If the money is tight I'd start with a 18-105. Almost as good and a lot cheaper.

What lenses do you have with the f80?

David Strand said:

Maybe alot of questions for a single post, but hope someone can help.

Click to expand...

--
Don't wait for the Nikon D-whatever, have fun now!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/j_wijnands/

Hi David. I've had a D300 for a couple of years now, and for the past week I've been borrowing my buddy's D90 to see if it would be a suitable replacement for travelling (right now I have a D60 for that role).

The D300's ergonomics are, imo, definitely better. The ability to switch AF patterns and modes, and metering patterns, so easily is very useful. Also having an AF-lock and AE-lock button gives me much better and faster control in fast-changing conditions.

I thought the D300's memory banks would be useful but Nikon's implementation of them isn't very good (the Canon implementation, even in the G-series P&S cameras, is better). So for me, that's not an advantage over the D90.

The D300 can also meter with non-chipped lenses (ie: you can meter with lots of the manual focus glass) which is useful, if you're interested in that. Myself, I'm not. I shot with my ancient Kogaku 35/2 but only a few times.

I find the D300 to also be superior to the D90 in terms of its ability to capture a wider range of highlights. The D90 is definitely superior to my D60, but the D300 is superior to them both.

I'll probably end up getting a D90 but I'll also probably end up shooting with some negative exposure comp. dialed in.

Personally, as much as it bugs me to say it, I'd buy a D300 again, if I could afford it. The handling is so much better. I wouldn't buy it for the metering ability with MF lenses.

BUT if I've never used the D300 before, then I would be perfectly happy with the D90. The dynamic range is almost as good as the D300 and the camera has, for me, all the major features that I require. Plus it's a fair bit lighter. I'm not too concerned about its build quality. I've used many SLRs and a few DSLRs in dusty and wet environments and they've held up just fine.

Also, if weight is a concern, then get the D90 for sure. I'm fortunate in that I was able to buy the D300 and also get another DSLR for travelling. I sometimes shoot weddings and I also do a bit of action photography so for me, the D300 is the primary purchase. But if I only wanted the camera for family stuff, landscapes, and travelling, then I would rather have spent the money on a D90 and lenses.

Speaking of which, Bob Krist, a well known travel shooter, uses a pair of D90's as his basic travel kit. I think he also includes a 16-85VR and 70-300VR in his kit. His site is at bobkrist.com. In his blog, I think there's an entry where he details the contents of his travel kit.

larsbc

Hi TS,

I'm about in the same situation as you: looking to get a nikon and using it on taking pics of my kids, and now mulling where to just pull the trigger and get the D90. I've not considered the d300 at all, as i feel the extra dollars would have been better spent on a fast lense, as opposed to blowing it on a body that suffers from digital decay...

Hi,

You will receive differing views as all our needs, photographic experiences, desires, subjects and budgets differ. Here is my take. While the D90 is a great camera the specs are far from identical. I looked at the D90 and D300s last autumn and bought the latter as an upgrade from a D80. The D300s has over and above the D90:

• CAM 3500 AF engine (D90 has the CAM 1000) for faster, more accurate and more consistent auto-focus. This contributes significantly to a higher keeper rate for moving subjects being in focus.

• 1005 exposure meter (D90 420 meter) for more consistent exposure accuracy. The differences can be compensated for by user input.
• A faster frame rate; 7 fps vs (I think) 4.5.
• Faster shutter speeds; 1/800 vs 1/4000.
• Ability to 14bit process images.
• Weather sealing and a more robust body.
• More button driven facilities rather than in menus.
• More customization with shooting banks.
• Twin cards: CF and SD for security and flexibility.

Others will think of more differences. I am not sure if there are any differences in video or live view as I seldom use them; others will know. The sensor, ISO performance and IQ are to all intents and purposes the same. For me it was the CAM 3500 for moving subjects and the more consist metering from the 1005 meter that persuaded me to go with the D300s over the D90. These two advantages mean more keepers, especially for moving subjects where you have a higher chance of them being in focus. So, you have to judge if that advantage is worth paying for and that the additional weight is worth carrying. For me they were and I got the D300s.

I also have the 16-85VR, which balances well with the D300s (it would too with the D90) and delivers excellent IQ.

Hope that helps.

--
J.

http://jules7.smugmug.com/

So many questions, too many, it strikes me that you will never buy a dslr because of what maybe around the corner. Go out buy something and enjoy taking picture and do not worry..

It sounds like if you buy the D90 you will always say 'what if' or 'that pciture would have been better if I had bought the D300.' The D300 has more options but will you ever even use them? Reallly, for the kids soccer game and a Peter Pan play? The point is exactly what the last poster said - get something and start shooting. Of course the new D90 replacement (could be October) will likely have a auto-focus in the video. . . good for soccer!

I thought of waiting back in June. I bought a D90 body with better glass (Tokina 16-50 / 2.8) and have enjoyed learning on it and have taken several 'keeper' photos in last month and 1/2 that old camera would not have produced as well. If I feel the need to upgrade my camera as I learn and improve it is a Nikon so resale will not be a problem and they retain value very well.

The answer is that all 3 are the right answers, wait for new better mousetrap, buy D90 with better glass, or buy the D300. It just depends upon if you are always going to say what if. Me I have no regrets but, I did have one shot in the Mountains where if I had had the D300 then . . . just joking! No regrets and good luck.

Indeed, if you are just shooting family photos and kids soccer games the D90 is more than sufficient to fill those rolls. Only if you are on the clock and really take tons of photos will the D300 be a better fit for you. At the end of the day it is the glass that counts and the money that you save can get you some decent Nikon glass, which is the main reason we shoot Nikon in the first place.

--
Catallaxy

Thanks for all the replies!

If I were just gonna use it for family I would definitely just go with the D90, however I am planning to get more serious about my photo-hobby (I have recently quit my time consuming online gaming hobby so I can have more time for photography). I am therefore leaning more towards the D300s as it seems more like a camera that I will "grow into" and not "out of".

As for my budget I will have enough for the D300s with the 16-85 and needed accessories. And I will later on supply it with more glass.

As waiting for the new D95 (according to rumors) I don't have the patience. My brothers wedding is coming up this weekend and I will most likely get the camera by then

decision. Photography can be quite addictive and with digital you get instant gratification. Yes it is wise to get a camera that you will be pleased with from the start because you will eventually find an excuse to purchase it anyway. A D300 is a wonderful camera and will last you for years so after that you can concentrate solely on acquiring good glass. Good luck.

One useful feature of the D300 that I think you missed is the ability to fine-tune autofocus for different lenses. It really helps when you've got a lens that back- or front-focuses.