Am I crazy to want to downgrade from a D300?

Back story: I got my first DSLR back in 2006, the Nikon D50. It opened a whole new world of photography for me but then I started reading about all of these new BETTER cameras with $1k lenses and I must not be a good photographer because I don't have $10k in gear oh no! I HAD to keep up, I mean look at the sigs on that site dpreview!

So I went out and blew $2,500 on a D300, Tamron 17-50 (love it), 2X speedlights, Tokina 12-24 (that I've used maybe 3 times) and much more because I wanted to be a real photographer! I did a couple paid gigs so I eventually recouped the money but then I realized the d300's complexity made me miss my trusty D50 for it's simplicity. Set ISO, f/stop, aperture and shoot away.

Trouble is now I barely use it because life got too crazy and now I just do on-the-go and travel pics. Lately I've noticed I'm grabbing the D50 more and more because I can slap a 50mm 1.8 on it with my tiny SB-400 for family/friend events and get the same for 1/2 the weight/size. I guess I realized.. I don't really 'need' this heavy duty camera, it never leaves the house!

Now I've been debating on picking up something like an LX5/S95 + GF1/EPL1 and seeing how I get by with one of those.. I could go for a used D90 (almost an even trade for my D300 value used) but nothing lower like a D3100 since my lenses are all non-AFS. (CURSE YOU NIKON!)

So (finally) I get to my question to you guys: Have you come to a point where you seriously questioned the amount of gear you have and if you really need it? Have you sold expensive equipment and kept the entry-level gear, or gasp, a P/S!? Am I just crazy and I should sleep and come to my senses?

Anyway if you made it this far thanks for reading and I look forward to any responses!

I bought the D50 + 18-200VR + Sigma 70-300 APO back in 2006,

after a year and 10.000 clicks it seemed to me that it was too heavy and big, so i sold it and got an Olympus E-410 + 14-45 + zuiko 11-22,

after a year it seemed to be very small and slow, so i sold it and bought the D90 + 18-105 VR + AF-S 50mm, f1.4

Now, after 2 years and a total of 50,000 clicks, i only shoot candid pictures in my vacations so the P7000 seem the best choice for me.

DSLRs were perfect when i wanted to experiment with photography, but now i just want to shoot beautiful pics once in a while, so i cant excuse the weight and the size.

The only thing that keeps me from buying is the SONY Nex, which is smaller and has better image quality (but i don;t want interchangable lenses any more!!!!)

and the nikon mirrorless ....when it comes!!!

Hahaha That sounds exactly like my digital progression! CP775 > CP5000 > D70 > D80 > D300 and collecting a swag of Nikkor lenses along the way. Sold all but my under rated 18-200VR and SB600 and I am now very happy with a secondhand D60 and P7000.

Simple & easy, quality images and always ready to go shoot. It's what best suits me and at the end of the day that's all that is important. On occasion there's a shot that I miss not having a particular lens (Eg 70 - 200 2.8) but I don't find myself missing the D300. Cheers.

Tim G said:

Hahaha That sounds exactly like my digital progression! CP775 > CP5000 > D70 > D80 > D300 and collecting a swag of Nikkor lenses along the way. Sold all but my under rated 18-200VR and SB600 and I am now very happy with a secondhand D60 and P7000.

Simple & easy, quality images and always ready to go shoot. It's what best suits me and at the end of the day that's all that is important. On occasion there's a shot that I miss not having a particular lens (Eg 70 - 200 2.8) but I don't find myself missing the D300. Cheers.

Click to expand...

Wow yeah I started with a couple of old kodak/canon p&s, then 35mm Nikon N75 (photo class) eventually moved to a Canon A620 + D50 kit and on and on. The only lens I regret is the Tokina 12-24mm since I've barely touched it. It isn't bad at all but I just found myself doing mostly landscape/portraits and my Tammy 17-50 rarely left the camera.

I'm seriously debating selling the D300 and 50mm 1.8 for a D3100 + 35mm AFS combo but man I'd cry if I couldn't use my Tammy anymore!

Everyone needs more than one camera. If you can afford it, keep the D300 and your favorite lens and a flash...buy a Canon G11 or something small like that for everyday use.

I bought my D50 after my D300...

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D50, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info

"If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-Samuel Adams, 1776

There seems to be a theme running here, I started with a D50 and all the ones inbetween till I got my D300 and a few Nikon F2.8 lenses.

I kidded myself they were easy to carry around but after a couple of days happy snapping around London and Paris with a D300 and 17-55 f2.8 attached and 70.200vr in a bag, I decided it was just all too heavy and cumbersome.
I sold up and bought a Panasonic GF1 with 14-45 lens and a Nikon Coolpix P7000.

Ok, so I miss the D300, but wouldnt go back because the GF1 and P7000 are just so easy to carry around in a jacket pocket. Image quality from both is excellent; not as good as the other kit but not far off and certainly not worth worrying about. I dont miss the viewfinder as much as I thought I would either....

Good luck with your choice of camera, I would definately recommend the GF1 to start.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/allans/

Because all my lenses are FF and some are non-AFS, I got a D700 and several bags for different combos, even one for the camera and Sigma 100-3000 f4, but then I got the P7000, which gives great results and large prints. BUT--- the camera always in my shirt pocket is the L 22, which always seems to perform better than expected.

Well there is a lot to be said about that little dslr that could. It's funny how it has a flash sync of 1/500sec and modern high-end only do 1/250sec! If I could just perform surgery on the screen to make it have the D90/300 level.. sigh.

chuxter said:

Everyone needs more than one camera. If you can afford it, keep the D300 and your favorite lens and a flash...buy a Canon G11 or something small like that for everyday use.

I bought my D50 after my D300...

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D50, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info

"If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-Samuel Adams, 1776

Click to expand...

tugelbend said:

I kidded myself they were easy to carry around but after a couple of days happy snapping around London and Paris with a D300 and 17-55 f2.8 attached and 70.200vr in a bag, I decided it was just all too heavy and cumbersome.

Click to expand...

I truly wish I could afford the 70-200 VRII but I know I just wouldn't use it enough to justify the cost! (I mainly do indoor parties, landscape and street shots on vacation) but just carrying the D300/Tammy 17-50/50 1.8/Tokina 12-24 was heavy enough, can't imagine the weight (and bag size) to accommodate the 70-200.

tugelbend said:

I sold up and bought a Panasonic GF1 with 14-45 lens and a Nikon Coolpix P7000.

Ok, so I miss the D300, but wouldnt go back because the GF1 and P7000 are just so easy to carry around in a jacket pocket. Image quality from both is excellent; not as good as the other kit but not far off and certainly not worth worrying about. I dont miss the viewfinder as much as I thought I would either....

Click to expand...

tugelbend said:

Good luck with your choice of camera, I would definately recommend the GF1 to start.

Click to expand...

I think size is the hardest deciding point... pocketable vs IQ. I tried out an s95 at Best Buy and it just seems too small for my meaty man-hands. My fingers were overlapping trying to hold onto it. Really it seems to be down to the LX5 vs GF1/PL1 but after playing with the E-PL1 I really hated the screen and lack of functions. I don't want to dive into menus just to change the ISO.

Now if I can just get my wife to want one of them it would make this a whole lot easier...

The D50 and the D70 both have a hybrid shutter...part mechanical and part electronic...that's why the sync speed is higher. The downside is that it can cause "blooming", where a bright photosite overflows electrons to adjoining photosites.

Every camera design is a compromise...

DWR0082 said:

Well there is a lot to be said about that little dslr that could. It's funny how it has a flash sync of 1/500sec and modern high-end only do 1/250sec! If I could just perform surgery on the screen to make it have the D90/300 level.. sigh.

chuxter said:

Everyone needs more than one camera. If you can afford it, keep the D300 and your favorite lens and a flash...buy a Canon G11 or something small like that for everyday use.

I bought my D50 after my D300...

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D50, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info

"If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-Samuel Adams, 1776

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D50, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info

"If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-Samuel Adams, 1776

DWR0082 said:

Have you sold expensive equipment and kept the entry-level gear, or gasp, a P/S!?
Am I just crazy and I should sleep and come to my senses?*

Click to expand...

I started out in 35mm film. I was really happy with the quality of my gear, and then I started printing larger. I upgraded my lenses. I started printing larger. Got a tripod. Worked on my technique. Took 35mm film about as far as it could get me.

Eventually, I sold off all my 35mm gear except for one body and one lens, and bought a large format camera and enlarger.

Eventually, after moving, I realized that another LF darkroom probably wasn't going to happen, and I didn't really have the time, either, so I sold off all the film gear and just used a Coolpix 5000. I probably got that in 2003, and that's been my camera until I just recently got a D3100.

Now I'm happy with that, and probably will be. Until I start printing larger.

;-)

I have a D90 not even a year old...I have been looking to upgrade to the d300. R u interested in doing a trade?

It's an interesting line of thought which really comes back to the variety of photographs we take... I currently use a d90 with a horribly heavy bag of lenses and other bits when i'm 'deliberately' going out to take photos, an Olympus OM2n when feeling a bit nostalgic, an iPhone for its great range of photo apps, and a Panasonic LX3 as a carry about. I have a suspicion that the future of non professional photography is probably best represented by a combination of the LX3 [super compact, surprisingly good images if you're not pixel peeping] and the iPhone [great variety of apps].

As an insufferable pixel peeper I will no doubt still be lugging 10kgs of kit around...

Unless you like chimp shooting (using the back panel LCD as a "viewfinder") don't go for one of the finderless boxes like the GF1. You'll need the accessory finder anyway and it not as good as the finder in the DSLR-style bodies with built in EVFs. And the accessory finders by Panasonic and Olympus don't secure well to the cameras, so you'll have to fuss with removing and installing it frequently. You can get the G1 at smoking deals now (I saw $350 earlier today). If you want video, the G2 gets you there for not much more. Don't spend a mint on a GH2 unless you'll be shooting a lot of video.

I have a D300 and an extensive Nikon system. I'll be traveling with it next week because I'll need some flash lighting and Nikon's system is light years ahead of the weak offering for Micro Four Thirds. But the G2 and a handful of MFT lenses make for a much more pleasant travel system and I'm not giving up a lot in terms of control and image quality for my style of shooting.

Even a compact Nikon body with the slower, compact zooms adds up to a significantly bigger and heavier camera bag. I need the two systems, but I may bite the bullet on my Nikon system and get an FX body and some appropriate replacement lenses. If I'm carrying a robust DSLR system, I may as well get the full benefit of depth-of-field control and low light performance.

--
BJ Nicholls
SLC, UT

I still have my D70 and D50 and never cared to go beyond them. I always go out with one camera and one lens so I have never carried around a huge bag of lenses. The D70 usually has the 28-200G lens on it which does a good macro fully zoomed. It was a $300 film lens. Occasionally I trade off to the 85 mm f/1.8 prime or the 50 mm f/1.8 prime. They are better lenses, and better for low light, but less versatile. The D50 always has the 35 mm f/2 prime on it. I have taken all sorts of photos with it. I rarely use either kit lens any more.

I kept my old Coolpix cameras - 995, 4500, 4300, 5700, 8800, and the P5000.

I have a Sony H2 and a Panasonic FZ35 zoomers for variety.

Yes, I have too many cameras, but absolutely no regrets. I bought almost all of them when they were going out of production, some of them for half price. Each does something particularly well and each represents a step in photography for me. I could not stand to part with any of them.

My thoughts: Sometimes newer is not better. Sometimes one lens is really all you need. Sometimes that is on a DSLR and sometimes it is a funky old camera that is like an old friend or a camera I can stick in my pocket.