What is next?

For Nikon, 300/300s is the highest model for DX models. Have you guys think of upgrading to FX?

Please share your thought on why you plan to switch and why not. I am perfectly happy with my d300 and if I do 'upgrade' the possible reasons now could be:

1) i will get true 10 mm wide angle and not crop images and
2) better iso?

3rd but not a good reason is a more professional feel.

As far as feel, the D700 is the same as your D300, no difference in feel. I am sticking with what I have, does what I need and don't relish the thought of starting over with lenses.

WJYPhoto said:

As far as feel, the D700 is the same as your D300, no difference in feel. I am sticking with what I have, does what I need and don't relish the thought of starting over with lenses.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what I thought until I tried a D700 - there is no comparison. The D700 wins hands down - even compared to my D7000, however having said that - I like the D7000 much better and is better suited for taking wildlife photos - just because of the extra reach(1.5 crop)

The main advantage FX has over DX is way better noise performance...that is basically the only thing it does better and with decent light you really can't tell the difference between DX and FX...

Not to mention some of the new DX sensors are getting pretty dang good at high ISO situations eg. the D7000...

salvatore said:

That's exactly what I thought until I tried a D700 - there is no comparison. The D700 wins hands down - even compared to my D7000, however having said that - I like the D7000 much better and is better suited for taking wildlife photos - just because of the extra reach(1.5 crop)

Click to expand...

I have access and have used a D700 many times, my friend (he prefers his P&S) that owns it doesn't have much in the way of glass, so I just stick with my D300. I have no complaints about what my D300 can do, still makes me $.

Maybe I'll be ready when the D400 comes out.

Like I keep saying, if I had the funds for it, I'd get a D300 right now! Awesome camera. I had the pleasure of shooting with one that my buddy owns and I seriously want one! Until that happens, I'm happy with my D200.

Way too much is made about the camera bodies, I always consider what's needed for my work and I typically show up with my D300 and D200. Rock solid bodies, D300 does better at higher ISO but picture quality under normal conditions is nearly exact. Jack have you ever watched the D300 in the shower or under a sprinkler on youtube, pretty neat camera if you ask me.

See if you want to give this a try with something less than a D300: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug6Pere-5rM

WJYPhoto said:

I have access and have used a D700 many times, my friend (he prefers his P&S) that owns it doesn't have much in the way of glass, so I just stick with my D300. I have no complaints about what my D300 can do, still makes me $.

Maybe I'll be ready when the D400 comes out.

Click to expand...

So true Bill - The D300 is a great camera - it's the person behind the viewfinder that makes or breaks a photo. I know a fellow who uses a D100(on his 3rd one) - the photos he shoots are outstanding. Another great Wildlife photographer Alex Bernasocni up until a year ago he used a D100.

Going FX is not always for everybody. Main deterences are: price (more expensive), lenses are typically heavier and more expensive. Entry level D700 $2,400. approx body only. $6k for D4.

It is better to personally try the camera body first so that you can see the difference and if it is worth the shift or maintain both.

Most people will be happy with the DX and a fast pro zoom or prime lens.

WJYPhoto said:

Way too much is made about the camera bodies, I always consider what's needed for my work and I typically show up with my D300 and D200. Rock solid bodies, D300 does better at higher ISO but picture quality under normal conditions is nearly exact. Jack have you ever watched the D300 in the shower or under a sprinkler on youtube, pretty neat camera if you ask me.

See if you want to give this a try with something less than a D300: Testing water resistance on D300 - YouTube

Click to expand...

I don't care, I still want a D300. lol

I shoot with both a D700 and a D300. They each have their own advantages. With the D700, the high ISO performance far exceeds the D300. I also find that while both are 12MP, the lager photosites of the D700 provides slightly better color depth and dynamic range. The D300 really shines in the area of extending the apparent focal length of telephoto lenses by 50%. I can have my AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8 on the D700 and my AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 on the D300 and in two lenses cover from 28-300mm (effective focal length) with constant f/2.8 aperture lenses. With the TC-17EII installed between my AF-S 300mm f/2.8 and my D300, I have the equivalent of a 765mm f/4.8! The layout and controls of the D700 & the D300 are identical allowing me to easily switch between the two seamlessly.

I have friends with D700's and I think the low light/higher ISO is way better than the D300. With that being said, there is no way I am getting a D700 unless I find one used with low shutter count for a great price.

Stangman98 said:

there is no way I am getting a D700 unless I find one used with low shutter count for a great price.

Click to expand...

With the introduction of the D4, and the anticipated announcement of the D800 in the very near future, it appears that the sell-off of D700s has already begun. I just picked-up a mint condition D700 with less than 10k actuations, an MB-D10, 3 batteries, an 8GB card and a card reader, all with the complete, original packaging and accessories for just over $2,200.

LensWork said:

With the introduction of the D4, and the anticipated announcement of the D800 in the very near future, it appears that the sell-off of D700s has already begun. I just picked-up a mint condition D700 with less than 10k actuations, an MB-D10, 3 batteries, an 8GB card and a card reader, all with the complete, original packaging and accessories for just over $2,200.

Click to expand...

That seems to be an excellent deal. Enjoy the camera.

When the D700's are under $2k I will start to look

Marcel said:

That seems to be an excellent deal. Enjoy the camera.

Click to expand...

I agree. That is a bargain IMO especially with the grip. Congrats on your D700.

I have a novice question. why is the number of actuations so important? Most cameras can have up to 200k actuations without having to replace the part. Even if one has to change the part, it the cost very high?

Bukitimah said:

I have a novice question. why is the number of actuations so important? Most cameras can have up to 200k actuations without having to replace the part. Even if one has to change the part, it the cost very high?

Click to expand...

If you are a casual shooter, then whether the expected shutter life is 100,000 , 150,000 or 200,000 , then it is probably of little or no concern. If you are a working pro, then it can mean a lot as some will shoot 50,000 , 100,000 images or more per year. And yes, the cost to replace the shutter can be several hundred dollars Consider the shutter as the engine of a car. If a car has 90,000 miles on it, then you can expect that it will not last as long as a car with only 10,000 miles before it requires a major investment in repairs.

Yes I understand about the actuation replacement. I also understand it cost couple of hundreds (maybe $300) but it is fraction of the camera cost. Is there other parts that need to be replaced?

Bukitimah said:

For Nikon, 300/300s is the highest model for DX models. Have you guys think of upgrading to FX?

Please share your thought on why you plan to switch and why not.

Click to expand...

Personally I am very happy with my D300. I upgraded from a D70s when the D300 was first released. Once I became comfortable with a pro style body, I noticed a big improvement in my results. I haven't actively looked into moving to FX but have considered the possibility while purchasing lenses - especially primes.