Well I almost finalized until i read dpreview review - D300S

Alright, I'm living with D70S + a few lenses for around 5 years . i almost finalized myself to go ahead and upgrade to the awesome D300S. But after reading the highly detailed camera review from DPREVIEW and the tricky conclusion, I'm now more tempted to move to EOS 7D!!

I'm confused.

Well I know I have t buy new lenses..Wwell I can very well start with one of those canons 2.8s.
The sweet D70S will still bemy second camera.

Any advise please?
--

Being a Good Human is more important than being Great human.

If you're planning on keeping your current camera as a backup, then you're looking at duplicate everything (lenses, flash, etc) which will drive up the acquisition cost a bit.

Questions that are probably worth asking yourself:

• What does your current camera not do that you want to do?

• Do you print large enough to make the difference between 12 and 18 megapixels matter?

• Do you like the Nikon interface, or do you prefer Canon?

• Are you happy with your current lenses? How much will it take to replace them?

• If Nikon comes out with an 18 megapixel DX camera in the next 6-12 months, will you feel stupid for switching and all of its resulting costs?

• What do you really want?

All told, the D300s and 7D are both probably solid cameras, and both can probably do just about anything most amateurs could ask of them. You should buy what makes you happy, but odds are you aren't going to see much of a difference in real prints.

But then, I don't know you or your photography. If you're like many here, you likely never print images and just view them at 300% on-screen, so if that's your game then feel free to move to the 7D. If course, if that's the case then look at the Sony A850 as well.

(Don't take this the wrong way -- I'm looking to upgrade a Fuji S5 Pro myself and so I pay a lot of attention to these posts. But I also downloaded a NEF from the D300s, tweaked it a bit, and sent it out to be printed at 20x30 so I could judge the quality myself. I was looking at the A850 myself, but if the D300s is up to the task then that's the cheapest way forward and I'll take it. In the end it's just a tool, after all. I know mechanics probably fight over Snap-On versus Mac tools, but from an outsider's perspective we all know that tools pretty much are interchangeable, right?)

It's weird, but the more similar things are the more people want to argue about the differences, as minute as they may be.
--
Derek

Don't quite understand the tricky review and conclusion points?

I used a 7D briefly and while it has more pixels, I found the AF of the D300s to be better, definitely felt the ergonomics were better (personal preference) but the one area that the 300s excelled at for what I do was ISO capability and fine detail retention.
--
Jim Fenton
My Wildlife Images at:
http://www.pbase.com/soonipi1957

The reviews of the 7D just highlight the obvious advanges it has vs the D300s. They don't tell the whole story as there are other less obvious but just as important advantages that the D300s hold over the 7D.

To name a few:

• Better autofocus
• Better evaluative metering (less fiddling with the EV controls)
• Better Auto ISO
• Less noise at low ISO
• Dual memory card slots
• Better ergonomics - subjective but I never hear anyone choose Canon because of Ergonomics

The first two alone are good enough reasons not to switch as they'll probably result on more keepers which at the end of the day is what we really want a camera for.

Don't make the switch just because a review gave the 7D a score of 99 while the D300s got just a 98.

If the advantages of the 7D suit you better and you're not too invested in Nikon gear then go ahead and make the switch. I'm sure the 7D is an awesome camera.

Usually moves to a diffrent brand are not the wisest.

Specs can be a bit diffrent, but then you also have to ask if Nikon comes out with a new camera when your ready to buy and it has the best specs...are you going to jump ship again and spend more money than you need to to upgrade?

Usually even a modest investment in lenses would make the switch not wise.

Canon ergonomics are quite diffrent and having a Nikon for several years very uncomfortable and even frustrating in the field.

And last but not least. Do you push your equipment hard enough to notice the slight diffrence between them? (that answer requires a hard look in the mirror.)

Either way...both are very competent cameras. Probably more competent than 90% of the people that buy them.

Good luck in your choice.

Roman

Roman
--

New Web Presence Coming Soon:
http://blog.commercialfineart.com/

Old Web Site
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

.. more general. Highly detailed review... sellers have also such a kind of very detailed everything.

You see, sometimes the right details somehow melt in mass, pretty tables n pages. Are they there at all.

Grabing the thing to fire off a few shots under the bush or other nice places looks less impressive but can be just that kind of detail missed out.
Good luck,
Hynek

--
http://www.sunwaysite.com

I like mine a lot and the only thing I think is better in the 7D is the number of pixels. On the other hand, the ergonomics of the Nikon is in my opinion better.

I bought mine about a year ago, and while I some times wish it was better in many ways, the 7D is just not it. Maybe the D400 once it is out on the market... but right now there is just nothing else for me.

Never the less, if you see a future in the 7D than I wish you good luck, but why do you feel you have to tell us you like the 7D more than the D300s?

Just like buying a car purely on specs, you should avoid that approach with cameras. Some of the other advice regarding reviewing what you want/need the camera to do and the investment in lenses is very wise. For me, when I upgraded from a D70s, the D300 allowed me to shoot in lower light. I prefer the controls on the Nikon as well. Good luck on your decision.

I settled on the Nikon line when I bought my first DSLR. Then as now, I discovered that nearly any DSLR was capable of taking great pictures. The deciding factors, for me, were ergonomics, backward compatibility, installed customer base for support and my ability to grow within the brand. Also, right or wrong, I think Nikon makes superior lenses.

I've upgraded bodies twice and now use a D300s and have a small collection of older (AF-D) pro lenses.

Technology moves rapidly and the major players (Cannon and Nikon) will leapfrog each other every couple of years. Today, the D3s is miles ahead in low light performance and the D3x is the king of pixels. As for the D300s, IMO, it remains the best overall crop body on the market. I don't need or want more pixels, so having 18mp would only serve to fill up my hard drives faster.

LIGHTS_n_SHADOWS said:

Alright, I'm living with D70S + a few lenses for around 5 years . i almost finalized myself to go ahead and upgrade to the awesome D300S. But after reading the highly detailed camera review from DPREVIEW and the tricky conclusion, I'm now more tempted to move to EOS 7D!!

I'm confused.

Click to expand...

-Dan Rode
http://rodephoto.com

Well, i highly appreciate all your valued feedback. Yes i asked myself most of the questions you all asked.

other than the extra 6 megapixels and the 1080p full HD video, nothing attracted me much towards the canon.

But then some of the sample images comparison in dpreview too tempted me. I never wanted to leave nkon, but then if Nikon comes out with a 18 MP with a full Hd video, containing all the same high ISO performance of D330S, I will be extremely happy.

Considering the investment, yes, choosing the D300S path or waiting for D400 is worth it!!! i don't want to miss my SB800 too.
in a state of ambivalence..really
--

Being a Good Human is more important than being Great human.

D300s and 7D are both fantastic. I prefer the D300s because of the autofocus and dual card slots. I'm more accustomed to Nikon and so the overall interface seem more natural to me. I know I could get used to the Canon if I spent more time with it. There are two areas where the 7D excels. The custom modes retain settings like true memory positions while the Nikon shooting banks don't quite cut it. Also, Canon has better video if you're into that.

If you're keeping the Nikon you have, it seems odd to have two systems.

--
The best things in life aren't things...
Images: http://www.reyspadoni.com
Words & Images: http://www.vnaceo.com

Don't know how you could go wrong with either camera, but what about your investment in lenses?
--
Bob

Ok was faced with a similar dilemma, tho I was moving from Pentax and the 7D and D300 were the choices.

The most important thing is ergonomics. You have to hold, use and shoot with the cam, so it has to be comfortable to hold and logical in its function otherwise you will either miss shots, come to hate it, or both.

My own experience:

Canon ergo's are just plain awful compared to Pentax or Nikon

Canon AF is just "off" don't know how else to describe it, but couldn't consistently get sharp images no matter the lens. I spoke to a pro using one to shoot motorsport and he was about to throw his in the bin!
Metering of images appeared to me to be over exposing.

The Canon does have more MPix but if the resultant image isn't up to scratch...

Still curious if Nikon will get caught up in the MPix wars and increase the sensor size...
--
Gordon

D300 + MB-D10, AF-S 70-200 f2.8 VR1, TC-14EII, AF 50 f1.8 D, AF-S 35 f1.8 G, and AF-S 300 f4.0 ED TBA.
http://www.flashpixx.net

flashpixx said:

Still curious if Nikon will get caught up in the MPix wars and increase the sensor size...

Click to expand...

...at least one newer camera with higher MPs yet either a compromise on the high ISO end or even reducing a bit could be on the way (at some point). This is according to an interview with a senior Nikon executive some months ago:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10022304nikonbalance.asp

Take that however you like. (I personally think they're likely to go for a modest resolution boost to about 16-18 MP, possibly at expense of trading off a stop of high ISO performance?)

It could be 2011 before we see manna from Sendai. So I'm not holding breath on release dates; just think it's coming at some point in that kind of package.

Hocus Pocus said:

flashpixx said:

Still curious if Nikon will get caught up in the MPix wars and increase the sensor size...

Click to expand...

...at least one newer camera with higher MPs yet either a compromise on the high ISO end or even reducing a bit could be on the way (at some point). This is according to an interview with a senior Nikon executive some months ago:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10022304nikonbalance.asp

Take that however you like. (I personally think they're likely to go for a modest resolution boost to about 16-18 MP, possibly at expense of trading off a stop of high ISO performance?)

It could be 2011 before we see manna from Sendai. So I'm not holding breath on release dates; just think it's coming at some point in that kind of package.

Click to expand...

--

wow..thats news!!!!

Being a Good Human is more important than being Great human.

Thats really something to ponder about! Great info Grdon. Thanks a lot!!!

flashpixx said:

Ok was faced with a similar dilemma, tho I was moving from Pentax and the 7D and D300 were the choices.

The most important thing is ergonomics. You have to hold, use and shoot with the cam, so it has to be comfortable to hold and logical in its function otherwise you will either miss shots, come to hate it, or both.

My own experience:

Canon ergo's are just plain awful compared to Pentax or Nikon

Canon AF is just "off" don't know how else to describe it, but couldn't consistently get sharp images no matter the lens. I spoke to a pro using one to shoot motorsport and he was about to throw his in the bin!
Metering of images appeared to me to be over exposing.

The Canon does have more MPix but if the resultant image isn't up to scratch...

Still curious if Nikon will get caught up in the MPix wars and increase the sensor size...
--
Gordon

D300 + MB-D10, AF-S 70-200 f2.8 VR1, TC-14EII, AF 50 f1.8 D, AF-S 35 f1.8 G, and AF-S 300 f4.0 ED TBA.
http://www.flashpixx.net

Click to expand...

--

Being a Good Human is more important than being Great human.

To me this indicates that the D3s will stay where it is now, and the D700 may get something a bit bigger in Mp then it is now, but at the expense of high iso performance -compared to the current D3S , not the D700 !

lock

LIGHTS_n_SHADOWS said:

Alright, I'm living with D70S + a few lenses for around 5 years . i almost finalized myself to go ahead and upgrade to the awesome D300S. But after reading the highly detailed camera review from DPREVIEW and the tricky conclusion, I'm now more tempted to move to EOS 7D!!

I'm confused.

Well I know I have t buy new lenses..Wwell I can very well start with one of those canons 2.8s.
The sweet D70S will still bemy second camera.

Any advise please?
--

Being a Good Human is more important than being Great human.

Click to expand...

I highly recommend that you read Thom Hogan's comments on the issue of MP and cameras in general. But particularly this part. Hogan is not a fanboy and is frequently critical of Nikon.

Need more megapixels. I challenge this assertion. Yes, there are some people who may need more megapixels, I won't deny that or the fact that I have some cameras with "more megapixels." But we're talking about an affordable camera here for the masses. Do they need more megapixels? My question to each one who said yes was to ask them what types of things they shoot. Landscapes (learn how to do panos, it's easy). Portraits (will your subject really like to see their zits in detail?). Kids playing, casual stuff (are you really going to blow that up to 48"?). Not much else. Sorry, I'm calling a BS on this claim. Not a single person I challenged has yet given me an exact scenario where those extra megapixels buy them much they don't already have.

More here:
http://www.bythom.com/2010%20Nikon%20News.htm
--
Regards,

JR

I bought the magic lantern 7D guide and crash course 7D for beginners. I WENT to the local camera store to buy the 7D and a 70-200 2.8, and after spending three hours there (my poor, (and soon to be significantly poorer!) long-suffering wife was begging me, "Just buy something!", I went with the D300s and the 70-200. If video is important to you, go with the 7D (I speak from reviews, not from personal experience). If it's the camera, well I have been very happy with the D300s. Either one is great, but if you've already got some lenses, don't know why you'd want to switch.
--Steve

The D90 replacement, rumored to be named the D95, is due out soon so it may be worth considering.