Another D300 vs D7000 post !

Started Jun 13, 2011 | Discussions
Reilly Diefenbach
Reilly Diefenbach Forum Pro • Posts: 13,127
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

That about says it all, right there. Very very glassy. The difference is far more than the pixel count, folks, it's the noise factor.

 Reilly Diefenbach's gear list:Reilly Diefenbach's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850
olyflyer
olyflyer Forum Pro • Posts: 25,964
Re: Honestly

PhillyFotog wrote:

enkindler wrote:

I would argue that the 95% view finder of the D7000 would make you lose as many shots as you would gain from the extra resolution.

Please cite your source for 95% viewfinder. I find the viewfinder on my D7000 superior to my D300. Roughly 100% coverage. Also the quicker blackout interval is palpable. The only things I prefer about my D300 are the size and the shoulder button config. D300 Feels better in my hand. All in all, I'd say the IQ diff between thee two is slight to marginal. I'm just neurotic enough to want that slight improvement. When you really nail your shot, the D7000 does take a slightly better shot. But I'd say that most of the time, it makes no difference. In any case, I'm dying to see the D400 and D800 details.

I think he is confusing the Viewfinder magnification, which is 94% with the Frame coverage, which is 100%. The data is the same for both the D300s and the D7000, so of course, if you are (or he is) missing any shots it won't be because of the view finder. BTW, what do you recon is better in the D7000 VF? With the same lens, focused on the same object it is the same. The only difference is that the D7000 has shorter eye point (18mm) as opposed to the D300s which has 19.5mm.

 olyflyer's gear list:olyflyer's gear list
Nikon Z7
nfpotter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,080
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

olyflyer wrote:

The D300s is the better camera. As simple as that.

In YOUR opinion.

I own a D7000 and a D300. I was a skeptic about the D7000, but now that I've gotten used to it, I am not using my D300. At all.

enkindler
enkindler Regular Member • Posts: 194
Re: Honestly

No I was mistaken, the D7000 does have a 100% viewfinder.

My main point was that they are all great cameras, and that I doubt the 15% increase in vertical lines makes many shots that would be lost on the D300.

I have big paws and thus I didn't look too closely at the d7000.

 enkindler's gear list:enkindler's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon Coolpix A Nikon D800 Nikon Df Fujifilm GFX 50S +20 more
nfpotter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,080
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

TITCHY wrote:

if you like birding you will be sorry ,the AF on the d7000 is no where near as slick as on the D300/S

D400 cannot be that far away ,most say autumn this year . it will have to be something special I reckon.

but you already have the better camera .High ISO DR are better on the D7000 ,but the D300 s wins in every other department. (in my oppinion) .

Wrong. AF on my D7000 is as good as my D300.

nfpotter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,080
Re: Another D300 vs D7000 post !

LiveFromPhilly wrote:

I'd save money and get the 5100 if I was going to downgrade from my D300s. I'd put the savings towards a new lens.

The D5100 doesn't have an internal focus motor. Deal-breaker, for me.

PhillyFotog Regular Member • Posts: 379
Re: Honestly

The viewfinder of the D7000 specs the same as the D300. It is nicer to use due not only to the very fast blackout time (due to mirror/shutter but impacting view) but the cameras feel against my face (my nose isn't large) and eye relief. YMMV. They're effectively the same. Admittedly, we are splitting hairs here, to be sure.

olyflyer wrote:

I think he is confusing the Viewfinder magnification, which is 94% with the Frame coverage, which is 100%. The data is the same for both the D300s and the D7000, so of course, if you are (or he is) missing any shots it won't be because of the view finder. BTW, what do you recon is better in the D7000 VF? With the same lens, focused on the same object it is the same. The only difference is that the D7000 has shorter eye point (18mm) as opposed to the D300s which has 19.5mm.

olyflyer
olyflyer Forum Pro • Posts: 25,964
Re: Honestly

enkindler wrote:

No I was mistaken, the D7000 does have a 100% viewfinder.

My main point was that they are all great cameras, and that I doubt the 15% increase in vertical lines makes many shots that would be lost on the D300.

Actually, I think it's wrong to say that it is only 15% more vertical resolution. The total number of pixels is about 33% more and that is clearly a visible difference. Of course, you won't lose any shots because of that, but you lose resolution.

I have big paws and thus I didn't look too closely at the d7000.

I don't have big paws but the D7000 is not comfortable to hold and there are some missing buttons, so it is not as user friendly as the D300s.

 olyflyer's gear list:olyflyer's gear list
Nikon Z7
olyflyer
olyflyer Forum Pro • Posts: 25,964
Re: Honestly

PhillyFotog wrote:

The viewfinder of the D7000 specs the same as the D300. It is nicer to use due not only to the very fast blackout time (due to mirror/shutter but impacting view) but the cameras feel against my face (my nose isn't large) and eye relief.

I don't know what you mean by "fast blackout time". The D300s VF blackout time should be faster since it shoots with higher frame rate, but in any case, I doubt the difference is noticable.

 olyflyer's gear list:olyflyer's gear list
Nikon Z7
Tony Beach Forum Pro • Posts: 11,841
Re: Honestly

olyflyer wrote:

enkindler wrote:

My main point was that they are all great cameras, and that I doubt the 15% increase in vertical lines makes many shots that would be lost on the D300.

Actually, I think it's wrong to say that it is only 15% more vertical resolution.

It's not a mistake, it's a fact.

The total number of pixels is about 33% more and that is clearly a visible difference.

As I said earlier, it is the difference between a 20" print and a 23" print; and that assumes you actually got everything the D300/D300s had to offer in the first place, and were then able to improve on that with the D7000. For narrow DOF focus is a bigger issue, and for wide DOF diffraction is an issue -- so the number of shots where the increased resolution from a D7000 will be noticeable compared to a D300/D300s are more infrequent than the MP numbers would suggest.

Tony Beach Forum Pro • Posts: 11,841
Re: Honestly

PhillyFotog wrote:

The viewfinder of the D7000 specs the same as the D300.

I wonder about information being displayed in the viewfinder -- specifically ISO.

It [the D7000 viewfinder] is nicer to use due not only to the very fast blackout time (due to mirror/shutter but impacting view)

Do you have those numbers? The blackout time on the D300 is comparable to the D2x for instance, which is very fast.

but the cameras feel against my face (my nose isn't large) and eye relief. YMMV.

Yes my mileage does vary, I prefer more eye relief and not less. I can easily press the D300 against my face and eye relief does not hinder that. Another issue for me is the diopter adjustment, but I already ran out of room on my D300; I just wish these cameras had more of it rather than less of it, and that can be an issue for people with milder prescriptions than mine.

Tony Beach Forum Pro • Posts: 11,841
Re: Honestly

olyflyer wrote:

I don't know what you mean by "fast blackout time".

It is the combination of shutter lag and how long it takes the mirror to go up and come back down.

A related issue would be mirror dampening, and I'm also wondering how well that works on the D7000 compared to my D300 (which is pretty darned good).

PhillyFotog Regular Member • Posts: 379
Re: Honestly

LOL. You are most welcome to doubt whatever you like. But the difference is indeed noticeable. The mirror in the D7000 is a blink. Very nice.

On a different note, I shot a bunch of pics with my Bigma (no flames please) at my daughter's lacrosse game this weekend. I was surprised to notice that despite having fewer cross type sensors, the D7000 did a better job of focusing than the D300 when I switched bodies. I expected the opposite, intending to use a smaller faster lens on the D7000 for that reason. Nope. So I put the 28-70 on the D300.

olyflyer wrote:

I don't know what you mean by "fast blackout time". The D300s VF blackout time should be faster since it shoots with higher frame rate, but in any case, I doubt the difference is noticable.

PhillyFotog Regular Member • Posts: 379
Re: Honestly

The whole operation (mirror slap and blackout) is much quieter and quicker on the D7000 than the D300. I see there are some skeptics here. Just head to a shop with your D300 and snap a few frames on it and the D7000. It will be obvious to you. I promise.

Tony Beach wrote:

It is the combination of shutter lag and how long it takes the mirror to go up and come back down.

A related issue would be mirror dampening, and I'm also wondering how well that works on the D7000 compared to my D300 (which is pretty darned good).

PhillyFotog Regular Member • Posts: 379
Re: Honestly

Tony, the iso is displayed in the D7000 VF ONLY when being adjusted. In the D300 it is always shown. Exp comp is also only illuminated when adjusted (D7000). This may or may not be an issue for you. Personally, I like to see it all the time; and in this regard, prefer the D300.

Tony Beach wrote:

I wonder about information being displayed in the viewfinder -- specifically ISO.

enkindler
enkindler Regular Member • Posts: 194
Re: Honestly

I'm not sure that using a lens that is slower then spec means much.

When things get that dark and you make the camera work fewer points will focus faster. Even without an extra few years of developement.

I am not discounting how nice the D7000 is but I bet spending that body money on faster better glass would have done more to improve your shots.

The 300 f/4 tends to be a great lacrosse lens and would focus much faster then a bigma. (I am not a bigma hater but is not a lens I would choose for sports it is just way too slow.)

 enkindler's gear list:enkindler's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon Coolpix A Nikon D800 Nikon Df Fujifilm GFX 50S +20 more
PhillyFotog Regular Member • Posts: 379
Re: Honestly

Yup. Totally agree -- and I spent the $$ to get that infrequent marginal improvement. Much as I like the D7000, I'd like to mush it together with my D300 to yield the D400. Until then, the D7000 is the cam I reach for most often. I do like my $14 wireless shutter release, too.

Tony Beach wrote:

As I said earlier, it is the difference between a 20" print and a 23" print; and that assumes you actually got everything the D300/D300s had to offer in the first place, and were then able to improve on that with the D7000. For narrow DOF focus is a bigger issue, and for wide DOF diffraction is an issue -- so the number of shots where the increased resolution from a D7000 will be noticeable compared to a D300/D300s are more infrequent than the MP numbers would suggest.

Mannypr Veteran Member • Posts: 3,363
Re: Honestly

Knowledge and expectations is a curious thing. It changes in many instances what we feel and see . I always read what peoples opinions are on different topics , not always I agree , but always respect them , knowing before hand the subjective nature of photography and what many percieve as differences and the amount involved in those differences .

Now . I can agree or disagree but one thing is for sure , it's my eyes and nobodies else that tells me if there are differences or not. I do acept the fact that in a blind test it would be practically imposible with any statistical significance for me to say which photo came from which camera , more so knowing that in digital cameras we have the options to change so many parameters as to make one camera seem like many others.

All that being said the fact remains that at least for me my eyes always tells me the story and in this controversy over if the differences between one camera and the other are visible , everywhere I have seen photos taken with the D7000 I can always see a mark difference between it and the photos taken with my D90 which uses the same sensor as the one in the D300s and has the same noise performance . Photos taken with the D90 always have what I might call simplicity ( in comparison to photos taken with the D7000). There just seem to be more resolution . You can see more deeply into the substance of things permeating the photograph.

Take a tree for instance. With the D90 it seems to be very nice and you can see that it is a tree with all it's raw nature to its surface imperfections . The same photo with a D7000 you will be able to see just more clearly into those imperfections in the surface of the tree . I am one who have thought that those differences I was seeing were in fact the added amount of pixels but right now I'm not so sure as if the differences I am percieving are really related to pixel count . I'm beginning to believe those differences that I see in the D7000 photos are a combination of factors that as a whole give the D7000 the ability to make photos seem more 3D in nature.

So , if you can see a difference in the D7000 photos in comparison to the D300s , remember it's your eyes and not theirs. It's your expectation and not theirs. If you can see them , great , if others can't see them , that's ok because I can truly see them and what I can see and percieve with my eyes tells the whole story to me and that's it and nobody can tell me otherwise.

 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
PhillyFotog Regular Member • Posts: 379
Re: Honestly

See, I just knew someone would have to go and pick on my poor Bigma! Hehe. But I have to agree with your assessment, though the Bigma really is decent on a bright day with ISO juiced a bit (I know, I know). But a non zoom lens is not an option. I am a big fan of constant zooming from the sidelines to get good framing for the very variable distance the game field and players present. To get a zoom F4 or 2.8 that would really be righteous, I'd be in it for $$$$. I am open to suggestions.

I have a handful of good primes, and some better zooms. So it's not like I only shoot through the Bigma. C'mon. I've had that thing since my D100. It's like a kid to me, imperfect as it is.

enkindler wrote:

I'm not sure that using a lens that is slower then spec means much.

When things get that dark and you make the camera work fewer points will focus faster. Even without an extra few years of developement.

I am not discounting how nice the D7000 is but I bet spending that body money on faster better glass would have done more to improve your shots.

The 300 f/4 tends to be a great lacrosse lens and would focus much faster then a bigma. (I am not a bigma hater but is not a lens I would choose for sports it is just way too slow.)

enkindler
enkindler Regular Member • Posts: 194
Re: Honestly

The shutter lag time on the D300s is 49 milliseconds, this is 1/6th the amount of time it takes you to blink.

I think this may be new toy bias.

 enkindler's gear list:enkindler's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon Coolpix A Nikon D800 Nikon Df Fujifilm GFX 50S +20 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads