Should I upgrade to a D300 from a D70 (yes, I know this is 2014, oh well)?

Hello all,

I'm VERY much an amateur/hobbyist, but I like technology and a good DSLR over a point-and-shoot ;-) I currently own a D70 that functions well and a couple of lenses that I like, and it has suited me for the past decade.

Recently though, I tried taking some indoor action sports shots, and I realized that the D70 just wasn't going to cut it. The lens I was using could only go down to f/3.5@28mm, which just wasn't letting enough light in, and I had to set the shutter speed to 1/100 or 1/60 with a ISO 1600, which produced pretty much unusable images. I decided it was time for a body upgrade, but I'm pretty strapped on cash – I guess my budget is $300 used.

I'm thinking about the D90 or D300 because they use CMOS censors as opposed to CCD in the D70, and can reach higher ISO with hopefully less noise (correct me if I'm wrong)? Unfortunately, this is all coming at a really inconvenient time because I would like to take my camera up to the mountains snowboarding this week, so I will need the low-light, high-speed features I can't seem to get in my D70. At the same time, I'm pretty cash-strapped so I need the ultimate bang-for-the-buck deal here.

I can get a D80 for ~$175, but that has a CCD sensor and I'm not sure much better it will perform. The D90 will be $300 shipped, which seems OK. But right now, I can get a D300 local for $300 in good condition, but with 44k actuations on it (about half the life gone).

QUESTIONS: Is there any significant differences in the sensors and low-light IQ between the D90 and D300? What about improvement over the D70 and D80? Or is all the technology I am looking at significantly outdated? Am I going to be better off or OK taking action shots now? Is $300 a D300 body a good deal, or am I likely to lose money if I decide to sell within the next month?

Thanks,
JGAN96

jgan96 said:

QUESTIONS: Is there any significant differences in the sensors and low-light IQ between the D90 and D300? What about improvement over the D70 and D80? Or is all the technology I am looking at significantly outdated? Am I going to be better off or OK taking action shots now? Is $300 a D300 body a good deal, or am I likely to lose money if I decide to sell within the next month

Click to expand...

D90 and D300 are almost identical sensor-wise. I was never able to detect a difference between my D90 images and my D300s images. The D300 series has superior ergonomics and frame rates over the D90. Also, the AF system is much better in the D300, which is a big plus for action shots.

And, yes, they are an improvement over the D70 and D80 !!

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Reivilos said:

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Click to expand...

You can get a D3200 or D5200, refurbished, for very little more than $300. Should be a big step up in image quality from a D90 for some downgrade in features/handling.

go with the 300 and you'll never look back.

Thanks everyone,

Reivilos said:

jgan96 said:

QUESTIONS: Is there any significant differences in the sensors and low-light IQ between the D90 and D300? What about improvement over the D70 and D80? Or is all the technology I am looking at significantly outdated? Am I going to be better off or OK taking action shots now? Is $300 a D300 body a good deal, or am I likely to lose money if I decide to sell within the next month

Click to expand...

D90 and D300 are almost identical sensor-wise. I was never able to detect a difference between my D90 images and my D300s images. The D300 series has superior ergonomics and frame rates over the D90. Also, the AF system is much better in the D300, which is a big plus for action shots.

And, yes, they are an improvement over the D70 and D80 !!

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I guess I won't be getting the D80 now. Is $300 for the D300 a good buy?

olliess said:

Reivilos said:

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Click to expand...

You can get a D3200 or D5200, refurbished, for very little more than $300. Should be a big step up in image quality from a D90 for some downgrade in features/handling.

Click to expand...

I was actually looking at those two along with a D5100, but the lenses I have are AF-D and require an AF motor in the body. I wish I could spring for it though

UPDATE: I just got an offer for $259 for a D90 online. Is this a deal breaker with the D300?

jgan96 said:

Thanks everyone,

Reivilos said:

jgan96 said:

QUESTIONS: Is there any significant differences in the sensors and low-light IQ between the D90 and D300? What about improvement over the D70 and D80? Or is all the technology I am looking at significantly outdated? Am I going to be better off or OK taking action shots now? Is $300 a D300 body a good deal, or am I likely to lose money if I decide to sell within the next month

Click to expand...

D90 and D300 are almost identical sensor-wise. I was never able to detect a difference between my D90 images and my D300s images. The D300 series has superior ergonomics and frame rates over the D90. Also, the AF system is much better in the D300, which is a big plus for action shots.

And, yes, they are an improvement over the D70 and D80 !!

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I guess I won't be getting the D80 now. Is $300 for the D300 a good buy?

olliess said:

Reivilos said:

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Click to expand...

You can get a D3200 or D5200, refurbished, for very little more than $300. Should be a big step up in image quality from a D90 for some downgrade in features/handling.

Click to expand...

I was actually looking at those two along with a D5100, but the lenses I have are AF-D and require an AF motor in the body. I wish I could spring for it though

UPDATE: I just got an offer for $259 for a D90 online. Is this a deal breaker with the D300?

Click to expand...

In practical terms, IQ wise the D90 and D300 are at the same level. And the D90 has the same "feel" as your D70.

In terms of everything else, AF speed, construction, ergonomics, lens choices, the D300 is a battleship.

If I had to choose between the two, I would pick the D300


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

I own both the D70 and the D300.

I've had my D70 since early 2005. It has been a great camera (and still is) and it is still going strong for me.

I bought a D300 in late 2008 and was blown away by it. I used it for minor league football photography last year and it performed flawlessly. The frame rate at 6fps easily trumps the D70 plus I needed to shoot at ISO 1600 to 3200 for night games and the pics came out nice. With the grip and AA batteries, the frame rate went up to 8fps.

In short, if you like the D70, you will love the D300.

jgan96 said:

UPDATE: I just got an offer for $259 for a D90 online. Is this a deal breaker with the D300?

Click to expand...

The D300 is still the easy choice here.

jgan96 said:

olliess said:

Reivilos said:

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Click to expand...

You can get a D3200 or D5200, refurbished, for very little more than $300. Should be a big step up in image quality from a D90 for some downgrade in features/handling.

Click to expand...

I was actually looking at those two along with a D5100, but the lenses I have are AF-D and require an AF motor in the body. I wish I could spring for it though

UPDATE: I just got an offer for $259 for a D90 online. Is this a deal breaker with the D300?

Click to expand...

Yeah, unfortunately if you have an investment in AF-D lenses then the D3x00/5x00 are a no-go.

For $40 extra I'd definitely go for the D300 (assuming similar used conditions). You'd have to spend some of that buying SD cards anyway.

olliess said:

jgan96 said:

olliess said:

Reivilos said:

However, there are better, newer sensors in Nikon's latest DX offerings. Those are probably not available for $300 yet, though.

Click to expand...

You can get a D3200 or D5200, refurbished, for very little more than $300. Should be a big step up in image quality from a D90 for some downgrade in features/handling.

Click to expand...

I was actually looking at those two along with a D5100, but the lenses I have are AF-D and require an AF motor in the body. I wish I could spring for it though

UPDATE: I just got an offer for $259 for a D90 online. Is this a deal breaker with the D300?

Click to expand...

Yeah, unfortunately if you have an investment in AF-D lenses then the D3x00/5x00 are a no-go.

For $40 extra I'd definitely go for the D300 (assuming similar used conditions). You'd have to spend some of that buying SD cards anyway.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that to get the most out of a D300 you will want a UDMA CF card which is likely an upgrade to whatever is being used in a D70. Nonetheless, and even if the D90 has less use, I still think the D300 is the better choice.

Thanks guys, I sprung for the D300 this afternoon and I'm absolutely LOVING it. The first words out of my mouth after I shot that first picture literally were "holy f***!" The AF is so much faster than my D70, taking action shots at ISO 1600 produces usable images, and I'm not sure how I could have worked without the 3" LCD before. It is a little bigger and heavier of a body than I would have liked, but I got used to the controls pretty fast. Definitely think it was worth the upgrade, thanks again!

On a slightly unrelated note, does anybody own the 70-300mm f/4-5.6G lens? Someone offered to trade for my SB-22 which I never use and is outdated, but I'm not sure if I will end up putting this lens to much use? Will it be a good addition to what I have right now? It offers a larger focal length than anything I own, but I'm thinking that for sports a minimum f/4 aperture isn't going to be great? I have never tried it though, am I wrong?

jgan96 said:

On a slightly unrelated note, does anybody own the 70-300mm f/4-5.6G lens?

Click to expand...

The VR version is considered much better. I tried a used VR version and ended up sending it back to the retailer because it had issues -- I ended up with better results from my $400 one-ring Nikkor 80-200/2.8, so that's my current telephoto lens on my D300.

I ended up going for the G version because I figured it would be more use than an ancient speedlight, and I ended up liking the lens better than the 28-200mm I currently have. I took some test photos on a tripod, and I think that at about the same higher focal lengths, the 70mm is sharper. Pincushion distortion is about the same, while barrel distortion seems to be better in the 70mm.

Unfortunately though, I absolutely despise the plasticky feeling of the lens and zoom. The zoom feels extremely sticky, and the whole thing practically just reeks of plastic. I looked up the VR, and it doesn't seem to be any better. Is there anything I can do, maybe some sort of lube a local shop could supply?

Sorry if this is getting off topic, there is just so much seemingly happening now with a new body! :-O

jgan96 said:

I ended up going for the G version because I figured it would be more use than an ancient speedlight, and I ended up liking the lens better than the 28-200mm I currently have. I took some test photos on a tripod, and I think that at about the same higher focal lengths, the 70mm is sharper. Pincushion distortion is about the same, while barrel distortion seems to be better in the 70mm.

Unfortunately though, I absolutely despise the plasticky feeling of the lens and zoom. The zoom feels extremely sticky, and the whole thing practically just reeks of plastic. I looked up the VR, and it doesn't seem to be any better. Is there anything I can do, maybe some sort of lube a local shop could supply?

Sorry if this is getting off topic, there is just so much seemingly happening now with a new body! :-O

Click to expand...

When I handled the VR version my feeling was that its build quality was okay for the price.

Not only okay for the price, but one of the better-built consumer lenses. At a used price of $300 or a bit less, it is an all-time, absolutely smash, best buy! As to whether f4 or f5.6 is usuable for sports....yes they are. You won't get the creamy oof backgrounds of an f2.8 (unless you are very close to the action) but you will get sharp, colorful, well-exposed photos.