A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Nikon SLRs > D300 vs D7000

Featured Equipment Deals

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

State of the ART: Rag Mama Rag! Read More

State of the ART: Rag Mama Rag!

In his latest exploration, fine art photographer Pete Myers reviews and compares some of the highest quality rag-based photographic papers on the market today.


D300 vs D7000

Anthony R , Apr 08, 2012; 08:27 p.m.

Ok,
I just sold my D200 and am going to get either D300 or D7000. (Dont have money for D700... sad...)

I have been to pretty much all the links that compares D300/D300s vs D7000 and 80% of the comparison and comments (recommendation) are D7000.

Love D7000 for low light performance and light weight. D200 was a bit heavy but good size although I didnt really mind the size of D7000 either.
For many reasons, I too like the D7000.

However, I still am questioning D7000 (over D300) for these two reasons:
1) Built quality, especially the weather seal. I know D7000 does have partial weather sealing on it but I do lot of storm chasing during summer where I'd be shooting under rough environment. Dust is not a huge concern but I also would like to take that as a consideration.
I want to know if D7000 has enough sealing to it. Has anyone done anything like it? (AND yes, I've seen youtube videos where people shower D7000 with weather sealed lenses :p)

2) I still have 2 batteries for D200 that I sold along with 4GB CF memory card which will be useless if I got D7000. Not a huge deal, I guess I could sell them or whatever but if I got D300, it'll be nice.

I am no pro and since it will be my only camera, getting used to the new settings and buttons won't be a problem and I just dont care for HD Video right now.
I currently own:
18-70mm, 50/1.8, 35/2, sigma 10-20/4-5.6
I am planning to replace 18-70 and 35/2 with 18-200 and sigma 30/1.4.

Let me know what you guys is better choice for me.
Thank you

Responses


    1   |   2   |   3   |   4     Next    Last

Dieter Schaefer , Apr 08, 2012; 10:03 p.m.

I am planning to replace 18-70 with 18-200.

Why - this is certainly a step down in terms of optical quality.
Can't comment on the weather sealing - but if you are in a rough environment then maybe using some raincover or even a simply plastic bag might not be a bad idea.

I would not let the two batteries dictate which camera to buy.

If the small size of the D7K isn't a problem for you, then I don't see a reason not to chose it over the D300. Even though the D300 has the more extensive bracketing range and more AF points - these may or may not matter to you.

Kent Staubus , Apr 08, 2012; 10:15 p.m.

You told us all sorts of things, except what you photo. That's the WHOLE THING--the idea is to match the gear to what you photo.

Kent in SD

Errol Young - Toronto, ON, CA , Apr 08, 2012; 10:38 p.m.

I have both. I recommend the D7k. Lighter but just as well built. Better IQ.
There is no flash pc outlet, other than that a classic. The 300 is slightly older tech.

Shun Cheung , Apr 09, 2012; 12:24 a.m.

I too have both. The D300 has been my backup camera since I bought the D7000. To me, the choice is a no brainer. However, this is photo.net: something that is obvious to me is not necessarily obvious to someone else.

Anthony R , Apr 09, 2012; 12:49 a.m.

Just out of curiosity how is replacing 18-70 with 18-200 a step down?
I never tried 18-200 but I "thought" 18-200 would be better if not similar... (although I guess it could be more glasses = less quality)
Thought about plastic bag but while running around and climbing places it just gets in your way a lot! If I am after something like lightning where I use tripod, yes I used plastic bag on my D200 most of the time, strong winds will just blow everything away :p

Kent, I thought "storm chasing" would give you a good idea what photos I take. Yes, it is true I do street photography as well but, I wanted to focus outdoor, nature/weather photos going after storms...

Errol and Shun, good to hear that both of you own both cameras.
I also believe that D7000 IS much better camera. D300 may be a "pro" body but it is quite outdated compared to D7000. I just am not so sure about it's built quality and weather-sealing. What are your thought on that???

Thanks guys!

Owen O'Meara , Apr 09, 2012; 12:51 a.m.

I own both cameras as well and I love them both. I love the size of the d300 but I love the IQ of the 7K as well as the high ISO performance. I am slowly getting used to the size of the 7K. The build of the d300 is better but if I could only own one of the two it would be the 7K. I am glad I have both and I am looking forward to what the d400 will offer. the upgrade beat goes on.

-Owen

Dieter Schaefer , Apr 09, 2012; 01:12 a.m.

18-70 vs 18-200: see for yourself: (link) and
(link)

Even just considering the zoom range - ~11x vs ~4x - hints on which lens will entail more compromises in its optical design. I actually owned the 18-70 (sold it when I sold the D70 I bought it with) and have also taken some shots with the 18-200 (which I had on order when it first came out and which amazon cancelled my order on after almost a year of waiting - bringing me to my senses to not acquire the lens after all). The only advantage - under certain circumstances - that the 18-200 has over the 18-70 is the VR.

Unfortunately, the price raises Nikon's lenses underwent in the last few years make the 18-70, 16-85, and 18-200 appear quite overpriced for what they essentially actually are - kit lenses. To get a versatile lens to upgrade to from a 18-70 at a reasonable cost - look no further than the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 Macro OS HSM. If I recall correctly, then the 18-70 when it was introduced cost a little over $250 - nowadays the price is around $400 - and at that price the lens is no match to the Sigma at around $450.

Michael Kohan , Apr 09, 2012; 01:13 a.m.

I chose the D300s over the D7000 last year because I wanted the faster AF, frame rate, build quality, CF card and fit, and especially, I did not want the program dial on the upper left that I so often nudged to a different setting just at the wrong time on my D70s.

ross b , Apr 09, 2012; 01:30 a.m.

I think I would rather have the D300 because it's layout is pretty much like my D200. I checked out the D7000 at CostCo and did not like the the control knob on the left with scene modes and such and I thought the grip was extra fat and uncomfortable. I am not shopping for a camera but I am sure I would be happy with the D300.


    1   |   2   |   3   |   4     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses