Another D300 vs D7000 post !

Started Jun 13, 2011 | Discussions
DavidCZ Junior Member • Posts: 27
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

I will find out the focus ability of D7000 soon. Noise reduction is not enough for ISO 1600. I use Noise Ninja and still see noisy spots in certain places after the noise reduction. Correcting dozens of such photos one by one is very tedious. I am a perfectionist and I hate to see the low quality of photos.

As a user of both D700 and D300, D300 can not match D700's ISO 1600 at all. D7000's high ISO performance will be close to D700 and it will help a lot. As to the body, I just have to live with it.

rpps wrote:

Well I must have been the only one that experienced bad focus and soft photos with the 2 D7000's I once owned, to me all the extra resolution of the D7000 means nothing or the higher ISO's if a camera can't produce a sharp nicely focused shot.
As far as higher ISO Topaz denoise does a fantastic job in PS

-- hide signature --
ebsilon Contributing Member • Posts: 628
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

I just replaced my D300s with a D7000, got a good price for the D300s. I bought the D300s before last summer, not wanting to wait longer for the D90 replacement and not really expecting it to be such an upgrade in terms of important features (i.e. AF, viewfinder, Ai-s metering, double cards). Since the arrival of the D7000 with all its improvements, I was really in doubt wether to change, but did so for the following reasons:

  • The better dynamic range and high ISO (but the extra 4MP I don't care)

  • I wanted a more compact body

  • The AF is important when tracking my kids around (my D70 couldn't quite keep up), and according to reviews it appears the AF of the D7000 loses very little compared to the D300s.

  • Loosing separate AF-on (must have) and AE-lock buttons is a con, but I figured I would get by with reprogramming AE-lock to AF-on

  • I don't shoot contiunous bursts, so fps and buffer size does not mattter to me

Well, after using it for a couple of weeks, these are my thoughts

  • The IQ is definitely a step up and up to my expectations. The dynamic range is amazing, visibly better than the D300s in shadow areas both with respect to noise and tonal gradation.

  • The metering is excellent - just remember to dial in -0.3 to -0.7 EV in bright conditions.

  • The compact body is certainly nice, and makes it nicer to carry around - but , on the flipside, the grip is more cramped for my long fingers, and the shutter and AF-on (AE lock) buttons are not as conveniently placed.

  • Build quality is not up to D300s standard. In particular, the the shutter button feels cheaper when pressing it - it does not have the same soft feeling as with the D300s. So with respect to portability vs. ergonomics tradeoff, I'd say it was all in all a small step back

  • The U1 and U2 buttons are nice, and more readily accessible than the D300s custom settings banks. But, as many have noted, the settings wheel is to easily moved out of position inadvertently.

  • The AF speed seems more than adequate for my needs, I'm not able to notice a difference to the D300s. To birders an sport photogrpahers this might be different though.

So, all in all, to me it was (just) worth it on reaons of the sensor improvement alone. But one should seriously consider that it's a step back in terms of ergonmics and build quality - and also buffer capacity as I understand.

-- hide signature --

Eirik ----------

HSway
HSway Veteran Member • Posts: 3,168
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

Hi,

Hard to tell. Making mind can be difficult (!)

D7000 pluses are obvious to one, less so to other one. - The d300s like a copy page.

Not being really helpful I suspect, but I’d like to stress the general strategy one should imo take into account as a guideline making tricky decisions. Playing down d7000 is a false argument and again, the same about the d300/s. Thinking long term is the key to making long term pleasing decisions. Nikon will keep these cameras different in some aspects. It’s crucial to see clearly what they mean (those differences) for you or not – in principle.

And then, time for a bold decision - or - a little bit of discipline and appreciation for what you’ve got already. (With a view of d400 round the corner in perspective - if just to see more and assess the situation even better).

Good luck,

Hynek

-- hide signature --
Jarski Mela Forum Member • Posts: 52
Re: What about video?

Manual video control ISO, shutter speed. Video codec is better but still not perfect (little muddy).
--
http://vimeo.com/17713914

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jarnomelartin/

FuzzTheKingOfTrees Contributing Member • Posts: 733
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

gwenhael appere wrote:

Any thoughts / comments ?

Dilemma has no N it?

Seriously though for me the things putting me off a D7000 are the reduced buffer size, a few short burst in succession will wipe the D7000 buffer out, this never happens to me on the D300.

No dedicated AF-ON button, this could be OK, I have a D80 and I'm not as comfortable using the AE-L button as AF-ON because it's further away from the grip and I only have small hands. The D300 AF-ON button seems to be in a much better place.

So I'm not tempted to move over to a D7000 but I am intrigued to see what Nikon come out with to replace the D300. The D7000 shows a lot of promise for what is to come.

joaquin100 Senior Member • Posts: 1,813
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

gwenhael appere wrote:

Hi guys,

Standard dilemna...i've got a D300s, that i'm using with 16-85VR, Sigma 10-20 and 50-500 OS. I like shooting landscapes, night/low ISO shots, as well as birding.
I realised that i can buy a D7000 brand new for the price i can sell my D300s.

I'm tempted because of the better D7000 high-ISO capabilities, the small body, the higher resolution, the "u1" & "u2" practical buttons .

I loose : 1 fps (any difference ??), a ton of options that i'm not using, a stronger body, higher AF performance (??)

Any thoughts / comments ?

I think you should stay with your current set up, you know how it works, you have faster AF for the long Zoom and the little diff. in DR at base ISO it wont be relevant that often.

i like my D7k but i think D300s is overall a better camera. except for the size (very subjective).

Joaquin

Mannypr Veteran Member • Posts: 3,363
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

I've been lately on the same bandwagon as to buy the D7000 or just wait a bit to see what Nikon has up it's sleeve with the D400. A friend of mind which has much more experience then I in photography told me to hold it off and I found merit in his way of thinking.

He told me that the D90 was the evolutionary efforts of Nikon of the experiences bought from the designs of the D50 , D70 , D80 and D100 . I would dare say that's why it is so good and hardly anyone has had complaints on it's performance( thats also the reason no firmware updates haven't come out on the D90 ever) . It was a mature product design from experience

Now the D7000 is not an evolutionary product but rather a revolutionary product in the sense that it is a whole new design . The metering is new, the autofocusing system is new . Plus he says that it seems Nikon rushed the production in an effort to get the camera out on the market for the christmas selling season.

With all this , he said it is wise to wait just a few months time as he is sure that the D400 will be a glorified super D7000 much better then it with all the bugs smoothed out. The fact that the D5100 seems not to have the overexposure issues of the D7000 in high contrast conditions seems give credibility to that way of thinking.( I dare say that some believe that the D5100 has been design around the beginners market and the D7000 more around the advance amateur and as that given the metering system the capablity of better dynamic range using PP ) That way of thinking does not fare well with me because as I see it the better metering and the more exact metering system is the better one. I can't see Nikon Designing a metering system prone to overexposure just so that those who know how can get better DR using pp.

 Mannypr's gear list:Mannypr's gear list
Canon PowerShot A640 Nikon D90 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR +8 more
Mannypr Veteran Member • Posts: 3,363
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

One thing I forget is that the new D400 when it comes out will be substantially more expensive then the D7000 . It will be in the 2 grand , so that is 800 more expensive then the D7000. Will it be worth it ? Will see when it comes out.

 Mannypr's gear list:Mannypr's gear list
Canon PowerShot A640 Nikon D90 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR +8 more
Mannypr Veteran Member • Posts: 3,363
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

joaquin100 wrote:

gwenhael appere wrote:

Hi guys,

Standard dilemna...i've got a D300s, that i'm using with 16-85VR, Sigma 10-20 and 50-500 OS. I like shooting landscapes, night/low ISO shots, as well as birding.
I realised that i can buy a D7000 brand new for the price i can sell my D300s.

I'm tempted because of the better D7000 high-ISO capabilities, the small body, the higher resolution, the "u1" & "u2" practical buttons .

I loose : 1 fps (any difference ??), a ton of options that i'm not using, a stronger body, higher AF performance (??)

Any thoughts / comments ?

I think you should stay with your current set up, you know how it works, you have faster AF for the long Zoom and the little diff. in DR at base ISO it wont be relevant that often.

i like my D7k but i think D300s is overall a better camera. except for the size (very subjective).

Joaquin

I to think the way you do Joaquin. Come to think of it , the D300s has everything the D7000 has plus more . So at least at this point in time the D300s is it. It is a more mature design well proven in the hands of thousands of photography lovers everywhere. All the D7000 has above the D300s is the new metering system and autofocusing system which many say is below the one in the D300s plus a slightly better video system which is still rather primitive in nature.

 Mannypr's gear list:Mannypr's gear list
Canon PowerShot A640 Nikon D90 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR +8 more
OP gwenhael appere Contributing Member • Posts: 788
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

Hi Eirik,

thnaks for your thoughts, it seems you were/are in the same position than me now, and i'm glad to have your comments.

i can't say i'm not happy with the D300s, acually i am. But i now i am not using the full capabilities of the camera, and i feel the d7000 would bring me just what i need, with a plus on the ISO side and the U1 U2 buttons. i was woondering if you used the scenes settings, and whether they were giving you good results ?
Thaks !

 gwenhael appere's gear list:gwenhael appere's gear list
Sony a7R III Sigma 8mm F3.5 EX DG Circular Fisheye Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS +4 more
ebsilon Contributing Member • Posts: 628
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

gwenhael appere wrote:

Hi Eirik,

thnaks for your thoughts, it seems you were/are in the same position than me now, and i'm glad to have your comments.

i can't say i'm not happy with the D300s, acually i am. But i now i am not using the full capabilities of the camera, and i feel the d7000 would bring me just what i need, with a plus on the ISO side and the U1 U2 buttons. i was woondering if you used the scenes settings, and whether they were giving you good results ?
Thaks !

Hi Gwenhael,

I never use the scene settings, I usually use U1 programmed to aperture priority, program mode, or manual mode. I also shoot RAW and process in Lightroom, so I don't fiddle much with picture control settings for jpeg in camera. For your use - landscape, low light, and birding - the increased dynamic range and iso capabilities will be an improvement compared to D300s (although more a step improvement rather than a big leap). Also I've learned from other posts around here that AF tracking is good enough for birding. Just make sure that you understand the trade-offs wth respect to build, ergonomics, size and weight if you choose to switch. I strongly recommend you go to a store to try yo evaluate these things for yourself, as these factors are highly dependent on your personal preferences.

-- hide signature --

Eirik ----------

--
Visit my gallery at http://eirikbs.smugmug.com/

john Senior Member • Posts: 1,620
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

gwenhael appere wrote:

Hi guys,

Standard dilemna...i've got a D300s, that i'm using with 16-85VR, Sigma 10-20 and 50-500 OS. I like shooting landscapes, night/low ISO shots, as well as birding.
I realised that i can buy a D7000 brand new for the price i can sell my D300s.

I'm tempted because of the better D7000 high-ISO capabilities, the small body, the higher resolution, the "u1" & "u2" practical buttons .

I loose : 1 fps (any difference ??), a ton of options that i'm not using, a stronger body, higher AF performance (??)

Any thoughts / comments ?

if you shoot inside a studio with lots of strobe flash, d7000 should be ok, but if you shoot birds, d300s is a better choice, there are many situraation like little bird with back light, will drive your d7000 crazy, and there will be place like dim light, you will hate yourself if every photo came from soft. I tried a d7000from a friend, the d7000's AF system is no where close to any d300, specially the tracking AF.

if you have too much $$$, I will suggest you go for d700 or buy a lens

kk123 Regular Member • Posts: 388
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

I also do birding. D7000 is significantly better than D300/D300s as concerns image result, especially in low light.

See last pictures of on http://www.ketilknudsen.com taken with 500mm + 20 TC III.

NikonMike Senior Member • Posts: 1,250
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

I think it really comes down to whether you like your D300s or not. If you like it, to me it makes no sense to trade down to a lower level body, but if you don't like it (e.g., the heavier weight) then it may make sense. To put it another way, if I owned a D7000, loved the camera, and in a couple years a D5200 comes out with 24megapixels & slightly better high ISO performance, I think I would keep my D7000.

Mike

 NikonMike's gear list:NikonMike's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +2 more
Brockscorner Junior Member • Posts: 28
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

Low light, weddings? I'd be using the Canon 5D II, simple as that.

n057 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,821
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

Brockscorner wrote:

Low light, weddings? I'd be using the Canon 5D II, simple as that.

The 5D II, the D700 and the D7000 are a toss. They are all within 1 stop of usable low-light/high ISO, and IQ is pretty close. But if like the OP you have a 16-85VR, Sigma 10-20 and 50-500 OS in Nikon mount and you do birding, the 5D II is out of the picture.

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

 n057's gear list:n057's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D200 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +7 more
HSway
HSway Veteran Member • Posts: 3,168
good point

That’s a point one should follow in the first place. There might come other considerations but some way after this attitude.

Hynek
--

http://www.sunwaysite.com

kk123 Regular Member • Posts: 388
Re: good point

The thing is that D7000 has a significantly better sensor than D300. This is very worthy for birding, because you normally have to crop the pictures. The bottleneck no. 1 is DISTANCE. Her the pixel density on D7000 helps significantly. As you see from my picture of the pintailed sandgrouses, 1000mm focal lenght is not more than needed. With D300, the result would not have been at same level as here.

caspianm Senior Member • Posts: 2,471
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

7k offers about one stop better shadow detail if you take photo's with that kind of EV (low light) and one stop better iso above 1600. If you take a lot of high iso and low light the 7K makes sense. There are compromises with 7k as well that already been mentioned. For most everyday pictures the difference is none or better with D300's.

 caspianm's gear list:caspianm's gear list
Nikon D800E Samsung TL500 Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon Coolpix B700 Sony a7 +19 more
olyflyer
olyflyer Forum Pro • Posts: 26,081
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

caspianm wrote:

7k offers about one stop better shadow detail if you take photo's with that kind of EV (low light) and one stop better iso above 1600.

Where did you get those figures from?

 olyflyer's gear list:olyflyer's gear list
Nikon Z7
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads