- This topic is empty.
D300 or D700
-
I currently use a Nikon D200 and I am thinking about upgrading next year. One of the reasons is that I want a camera that performs better than the D200 at high ISO’s. The D200 is a great camera and I love it but its performance at 800iso and higher is not great.
Now my question is this. What is the main benefit of a full frame camera like the D700 over a D300 bearing in mind that a used D700 is nearly twice the price of a used D300. And also taking into consideration that I would probably have to change a lot of if not all my lenses if I was to go to a full frame.
So what is the main advantage of a Full frame over a cropped frame ? I could probably afford to upgrade to the D300 at the beginning of next year but if I was going for the D700 then it would be the following year.
All advice, opinions and suggestions welcome.
Mark S.
Went from a D200 to a D300, and feel exactly as you did about the D200 – great camera, but iso 800 started eating into image quality, and iso 1600 was not ideal for anything critical. The D300, I feel offers me an additional stop of useable iso, with 1600 starting to eat into quality, and 3200 useable, but not for critical purposes.
If you want an evolutionary upgrade, the D300 is the one. If a revolutionary upgrade, the D700 is the one to go for. Just bear in mind the aging nature of these models now though, more so with the D300.
I was in the same boat as you when I upgraded, in that I considered full frame but realised changing lenses would be an expensive proposition and opted to remain with DX for now. Given the reach a D700 would be for you now, I suspect you may be better off looking at an evolutionary upgrade like the D300 for the moment if you really need to upgrade.
Re: full frame itself, the only appeal it holds for me is mainly for super high iso and being able to use FX/ legacy lenses at their designed field of views. Others may feel differently, but those are the only two material factors for the things I shoot, and even then, just for one or two of them, not all of them.
Thanks Damien,
I posted the same question on ephotozine.com and a lot of people came back and suggested moving to the D7000 instead of the D300 due to the age of the D300. I have looked at Ken Rockweells review of the D7000 and he is raving about its performance at high ISO’s, much higher than 1600 too.
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Mark S.
Yes, considered the D7000 also, but having experienced the D50 and D80, preferred the handling of the D200/ D300, as the D7000 seems to be somewhere between the two. Plus do not like how Nikon tends to tie exposure in matrix metering to whats underneath the focus point in their dslrs below the D200/ 300, as I tend to focus and recompose, so with my subject bearing no relation to the focus point after I recompose, I found I could end up with overexposed shots in matrix mode sometimes with my D80, and had seen the same issues noted with the D7000. Sensor-wise, the D7000 is a notch above with regard to high iso, etc, so worth bearing in mind alright.
I held on to my D50 (my first DSLR) when I got the D200 and I am glad I did as I use this for IR stuff with my Hoya R72 filter. One of the girls here in work has the D7000 so she is going to bring it in for me to have a look at it and see how it feels in my hand.
Mark
Just as an update to this thread – I bought the D7000 and the performance at high ISO is fantastic. Really happy with it – especially as I managed to sell my D200 and pick up a Nikon A grade D7000 body in Conns.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
