Sort of the same question as Jeff's 'D7000 or D300s' just slightly modified.
I am looking at getting a new, used, body after christmas and am going back and forth on what to get. I am shooting with a D40x now so either option is going to be an upgrade. I was pretty set on the D90 but it was brought to my attention that you can get a D300 for around the same price, both used. The D300 would be more, but only by about $200 which seems pretty minimal. I've looked at the specs, reviews, comparisons, etc. and still am a little lost.
I guess I'll start with why I am looking at a new body. First and foremost, the D40x does not have the autofocus motor in the body. Meaning that I need to buy lenses with motors or am forced to shoot manual focus. I have 2 lenses now that do not autofocus and have missed several shots either because I couldn't focus fast enough or was slightly off. The low FPS and lack of high ISO are also major concerns. Also the body size, I have pretty big hands so having a small body can get uncomfortable at times and also makes me feel like I am going to drop it occasionally.
On to the good stuff. Probably the biggest difference in the D90 and the D300 is the HD video of the D90. Honestly, this is a very minor detail for me. I really don't see myself shooting video. I've had a point and shoot for years with video and have never once used it, so I doubt having it on a DLSR would make me want to use it. ; From the reviews I've seen the D90 seems to have lightly better high ISO noise reduction, but the 300 has better noise reduction at normal to low level ISO. The 300 is a bigger body which is nice as I have large hands and it also has a nicer build quality with the weather proof seal.
The 300 does only use CF cards and the 90 uses SD. Not a huge deal, but I already have SD cards so getting the 300 would mean getting all new cards.
The 90 seems more consumer friendly with more auto features and scene modes. I almost never use these on my 40x so this really isn't a breaking point either.
What I really like in the 300 is the faster FPS and better/faster autofocus. ;
there are other differences, but I think these are the most meaningful to me.
Just writing all this out I may have convinced myself of the D300, but I wanted to get some opinions and see what other people thought. Coming from a D40x, is going to the D300 going to be too big of a jump?
Thanks!
I am looking at getting a new, used, body after christmas and am going back and forth on what to get. I am shooting with a D40x now so either option is going to be an upgrade. I was pretty set on the D90 but it was brought to my attention that you can get a D300 for around the same price, both used. The D300 would be more, but only by about $200 which seems pretty minimal. I've looked at the specs, reviews, comparisons, etc. and still am a little lost.
I guess I'll start with why I am looking at a new body. First and foremost, the D40x does not have the autofocus motor in the body. Meaning that I need to buy lenses with motors or am forced to shoot manual focus. I have 2 lenses now that do not autofocus and have missed several shots either because I couldn't focus fast enough or was slightly off. The low FPS and lack of high ISO are also major concerns. Also the body size, I have pretty big hands so having a small body can get uncomfortable at times and also makes me feel like I am going to drop it occasionally.
On to the good stuff. Probably the biggest difference in the D90 and the D300 is the HD video of the D90. Honestly, this is a very minor detail for me. I really don't see myself shooting video. I've had a point and shoot for years with video and have never once used it, so I doubt having it on a DLSR would make me want to use it. ; From the reviews I've seen the D90 seems to have lightly better high ISO noise reduction, but the 300 has better noise reduction at normal to low level ISO. The 300 is a bigger body which is nice as I have large hands and it also has a nicer build quality with the weather proof seal.
The 300 does only use CF cards and the 90 uses SD. Not a huge deal, but I already have SD cards so getting the 300 would mean getting all new cards.
The 90 seems more consumer friendly with more auto features and scene modes. I almost never use these on my 40x so this really isn't a breaking point either.
What I really like in the 300 is the faster FPS and better/faster autofocus. ;
there are other differences, but I think these are the most meaningful to me.
Just writing all this out I may have convinced myself of the D300, but I wanted to get some opinions and see what other people thought. Coming from a D40x, is going to the D300 going to be too big of a jump?
Thanks!