Need opinions from the photography nuts.

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
jclyde13

jclyde13

Blue Tier VIP
MFK Member
Jun 18, 2009
4,611
177
371
30
Louisville, KY
I just bought my Nikon D3000 not even two years ago, but I've already found myself feeling ready for an upgrade for two main reasons: it seems that the higher tier models have much more practical controls, not requiring you to go back and forth through menus quite as much just to make simple setting changes (especially with AF modes and metering, which are starting to get annoying to have to change), and because they supposedly perform significantly better in low light (which comprises probably half of my photography). So, I've been looking into eventually (probably within the next year or so) upgrading to either the D90 or the D300, but I'm having a hard time deciding between the two, since several sites state that the D90 is better, despite the specs seeming (to me, at least) to say otherwise in many ways (as per this comparison: http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D300-vs-Nikon_D90 ). So if you where making this decision, which would you choose, and why?


And btw, whichever one I end up getting, it will be used (from Adorama), so the price difference between these two models will be relatively small (about $160), if that makes a difference.
 
The D90 doeant have weather sealing and dust proofing that the pro bodies have.

Also, its made of plastic rather than alloy.

Get the 300.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
 
Okay; I was sort of leaning towards the D300, but some of those websites were confusing me a bit. The only downside is that I'll have to get a CF card for it (the only one I have is 2gb) and probably a new CF reader, as well (I think my old USB one shorted out like 3 years ago).


Sent from my iPod touch using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
I like the D90 a lot, and even the D60 - but those are some really good points up there about the seals and such. If you are actually going to use the camera, I'd go with the D300. I got a grain of sand in the gear of my old camera's retractable lens and it killed it. Any kind of weatherproofing and dust proofing is on the top of my list now.
 
The only other thing you mentioned was shooting in low light - looking at the page of stats you linked, the D90 actually seems to perform better in low light than the D300. You may want to check that aspect one more time and see if the noise level is going to bother you. I shoot a lot of stills in low light, so I can afford lower my ISO and let the shutter stay open a bit longer to make up for it, but there are times I would like a camera that can handle better at higher ISO.
 
Lusus_Naturae said:
I like the D90 a lot, and even the D60 - but those are some really good points up there about the seals and such. If you are actually going to use the camera, I'd go with the D300. I got a grain of sand in the gear of my old camera's retractable lens and it killed it. Any kind of weatherproofing and dust proofing is on the top of my list now.
Click to expand...
Well the D60 would actually be a downgrade from my current camera.

Lusus_Naturae said:
The only other thing you mentioned was shooting in low light - looking at the page of stats you linked, the D90 actually seems to perform better in low light than the D300. You may want to check that aspect one more time and see if the noise level is going to bother you. I shoot a lot of stills in low light, so I can afford lower my ISO and let the shutter stay open a bit longer to make up for it, but there are times I would like a camera that can handle better at higher ISO.
Click to expand...

I know that they state that, but looking at actual comparisons ( see the 2nd and 3rd pics on this page: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d90/iso-3200.htm ), while the D300 is lacking a bit more in sharpness, the out of focus areas seem to be much more naturally rendered on the D300 than on the D90 at a high ISO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom