A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Nikon SLRs > D7000 that much better than...

Featured Equipment Deals

Digital Photography Developing (Video Tutorial) Read More

Digital Photography Developing (Video Tutorial)

Learn what digital developing is, the difference between Lightroom and Photoshop, and why Lightroom will help your photography.

Latest Equipment Articles

Sun Position Tracking Apps Read More

Sun Position Tracking Apps

These 5 apps, ranging in price from free to $8.99, are our top picks for tracking sun (and moon) light. Also ranging in complexity, some help you keep tabs on the ideal lighting of the day while...

Latest Learning Articles

Basic Image Development in Lightroom: Color Editing (Video Tutorial) Read More

Basic Image Development in Lightroom: Color Editing (Video Tutorial)

Learn basic HSL (hue, saturation, and luminance) color adjustments as well as split toning (adjusting color in highlights and lowlights) in this next video.


D7000 that much better than the D300?

Sanford Edelstein , Feb 02, 2011; 10:01 p.m.

Is the D7000 demonstratively (thank you Mac spell check for these new big words in my vocabulary) better than the D300 at base and higher ISO? Actually I would settle for "just as good" as I feel the D300 is already excellent.

Responses


    1   |   2   |   3   |   4   |   5   |   6     Next    Last

Jose Rivera , Feb 02, 2011; 10:07 p.m.

Sanford, I believe that the D7000 is the replacement for the d90. The cameras are getting better and I believe that the tests have proven that it is a little better than the D300, but I believe when Nikon replaces the D300/300s that camera will surpass the d7000 in all aspects.

Sanford Edelstein , Feb 02, 2011; 10:11 p.m.

What I'm looking for is a lighter weight Nikon. I've been using a Panasonic GF1 and loving the results at ISO 100 but this last week I went back to the D300 and was reminded what a great all-around camera it is. Just way to heavy for hours walking around.

Alan Sevilla , Feb 02, 2011; 10:25 p.m.

Ive used almost all the Nikon bodies and without a doubt the new Nikon dx bodies are soo close to the quality of the fx systems that makes it such a great buy. The d300 is pretty old already so its natural that the newer bodies are much more improved. Of course build quality of the d300 and focusing speed still makes it an able body but the d7000 features make up the price diff. HD video, color ( much more pop), exposure and white balance id say edges the d700 more so the d300. The only thing the d700 is superior is its high iso. The d7000 is no slouch its just that in the really high iso range of course the dx is nosier but not by much. So to answer your question yes it is better than the d300. Another thing to ponder on is you can get a d300 and just use the extra money for good glass but the d7000 makes it a worthy purchase for anybody looking for a good priced dx body coz its just stellar :)

Shun Cheung , Feb 02, 2011; 10:30 p.m.

First of all, the D7000's base ISO is 100 while the D300/D300S/D90/D5000 are ISO 200. I cannot see a whole lot of difference at ISO 400 or even 800. However, from 1600 and up, you should see perhaps 2/3 stop difference in the shadow areas. The D7000 has acceptable ISO 6400 but the D300 tops out at 3200; the D300 has a Hi 1 ISO 6400 equivalent that produces terrible results.

I follow Nikon's specification that the D7000 is not a replacement of anything. It is a new class of DSLR that is between the D300/D300S and D90. To me, it is closer to the D300 than to the D90 in terms of features, but the D7000's controls and size are similar to the D90's.

I still use my D300 mainly due to its better AF and higher frame rates, including a bigger RAW buffer. The D7000 is not intended to be a sports/action camera and its buffer is much easier to fill up (partly due to SD memory cards instead of CF). For just about anything else, the D7000 is the better camera.

There should be little doubt that Nikon will have some "D400" this year that combines the best from the D300S and D7000, and perhaps a little more. The D300 design is close to 4 years old and an update is certainly due.

Peter Foiles , Feb 02, 2011; 10:32 p.m.

If you believe DxOMark then yes the D7000 sensor is demonstrably better than the D300/300s. Other aspects of the D300 such as build quality, frame rate are still superior but for sensor performance three year old tech doesn't keep up.

Walt Flanagan , Feb 02, 2011; 10:33 p.m.

Have you looked at the D3100? It's controls and AF are more basic but its image quality is excellent and it is about half the weight of the D300.

Javier Gutierrez , Feb 02, 2011; 10:41 p.m.

Since I bought my D7000, I had not used my d300s until this past sunday and to be honest the d7000, is simply better and i will disagree with shun and even go as far as to say that the auto focus is faster in the d7000. the auto focus is something to behold. so the d300s is now the back up body to the d7000.

Michael Dougherty , Feb 02, 2011; 10:58 p.m.

I own and use both the D300 and D7000. My first impression is that the D7000 is a nice replacement for my D200. It's small, light and much higher resolution. I then put it on my Sigma 300-800 to see if it can capture birds in flight. The release button is perfect and the auto focus is pretty decent at grabbing and maintaining focus on flying pelicans. Actually better at this than my D300. Now the downside. Obviously the body is a little small for the Sigmonster but that isn't the main problem. The D7000 just isn't sharp on this lens. Even when the pelicans were sitting on the cliffs in La Jolla, the images were soft. Also, as the pelicans were flying, lighting conditions changed and it seemed the D7000 just couldn't keep up. As noted in previous posts, even at JPEG fine, there simply isn't enough buffer. Since my original intention was not to use this body for birds in flight, this isn't an issue. I would like to point out that under similar conditions, the D300 never misses a beat, the images are crisp and the exposures perfect. I will continue to work with the settings on the D7000 to make sure the soft images are not my fault. I also need to do some testing with smaller lenses to make sure there isn't an issue with the camera body. I originally noticed the softness in my Nikon 200-400 F4 AFS lens so I can't blame the softness on the Sigma. I suspect the D7000 just may not be suitable for longer lenses. At the present time, I just don't know the reason why.

Javier Gutierrez , Feb 02, 2011; 11:12 p.m.

michael, i noticed the same thing with the soft images when i used my 70-200f/2.8 but after i fine tuned the camera to the lens, it fixed the problem. i downloaded a focus chart and spent about an hour or so fine tunning it. i have come to realize that this is pretty common practice for all my dslr's now. i also agree with the buffer and it is annoying. the pentax k-5 had a similar buffer problem and pentax fixed it with firmware. i am hoping nikon does the same and fix it with firmware as well. as for BIF, AF.C in 3d mode is fantastic for that. amazing actually.


    1   |   2   |   3   |   4   |   5   |   6     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses