Move up to D300s: Signed up in April, but new to the forum. Looking for feedback on the following: If I were to purchase a new Nikon D300s, is it reasonable to think that any problems...

The Villages Loc: The Villages, Florida

Signed up in April, but new to the forum.

Looking for feedback on the following: If I were to purchase a new Nikon D300s, is it reasonable to think that any problems that there might have been with earlier production have been addressed.

I have a D200, and like everyone else, I await a possible D400, but given the recent history of production problems with newer Nikon models, I think I'm willing to forgo some upgrades for production reliability. Less problems to deal with. I'm not in the professional ranks, so the very latest and greatest isn't a necessity.

Your thoughts.

Sheila Loc: Arizona or New York

Like you, I own a D200 but upgraded to a D300s some time ago. The problems with the earliest releases were solved within a relatively short time after the camera's release so unless you got one of the first few cameras they were fine. I really like the improvements in the D300s over the D200 but I think I would hold out for a few more months. The D400 has been rumored for quite some time and several reports have the release date anywhere from Sept 2013 to early next year. The rumored changes would be well worth having.

If cost is a problem when you decide, the D300s is an excellent camera to use. I prefer the layout of the controls to the D600 or certain other models. The D800 is similar in layout to the D300s but is more expensive and I have considered the D800 or D800E.

The Villages Loc: The Villages, Florida

Thanks for the reply. Its not a matter of cost or timing for a newer model, but rather not having to be concerned about QA problems from a new model. I guess I don't like the unexpected.

PrairieSeasons Loc: Red River of the North

PCity wrote:

Signed up in April, but new to the forum. br br L... (show quote)

I have a D300s and have taken slightly over 100,000 shots with it. It's a great camera with pretty good feel to it. My only complaint is noise / graininess that starts to become apparent at ISO 800 and gets pretty annoying at ISO 1600 and higher.

Sheila Loc: Arizona or New York

The D300s has many positive values but there have been many technological advances since it's introduction. I hate dealing with quality issues so I waited a bit after the initial release to see what the early feedback by users would be.

There is an excellent article at photography life.com about the details of the D400. This article dates to the end of May and explains the expected features in great detail.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

PrairieSeasons wrote:

I have a D300s and have taken slightly over 100,000 shots with it. It's a great camera with pretty good feel to it. My only complaint is noise / graininess that starts to become apparent at ISO 800 and gets pretty annoying at ISO 1600 and higher.

The 300s is great camera when the light is good.
The D7000 is tons better at high iso performance, but the interface is awkward for someone use to using a D200.

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

PCity wrote:

Signed up in April, but new to the forum. br br L... (show quote)

Consider a D2xs. A pro body. I bought my used one for approx. $700 US. I continue to see them offered in that range on eBay almost every day.

I started with D100's, and moved up to D200's, which I still shoot a lot.
The D2xs has a built in grip, and a much larger battery.
The shutter is faster and QUIETER. It uses the same sensor as the D200 but has a better processor.
One of the few minor drawbacks is pro bodies don't have pop-up flashes.
So, I make sure I've got one of my SB800's in the bag at all times.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

I don't know why they still sell the D300s the D7000 beats it in every way

The Villages Loc: The Villages, Florida

I acknowledge that DX models like the 7000/7100 are more up-to-date then the 300s with improved features, but I like the heavier feel of the D200, D300s and maybe D400, as well as their better build.

Again, I'd jump at a potential D400, but as stated previously, my concern is with the shake out period of any new model. Maybe I wait a year to see if any problems arise, or just go with a 300s after a new (?) model is announced. From the specs, the 300s has a number of features not available in the 200...so it would be a step up.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d7000.htm

"The D7000 is Nikon's most advanced camera at any price. The fact that it sells for under $1,000 in 2012 make it a no-brainer, which is why it's sold out. The D7000 is Nikon's best DSLR ever.

Yes, the D800 and D4 are more expensive, but also a lot more clumsy. The Nikon D7000 handles better than any Nikon DSLR, regardless of price.

D300, D300s and every other DX camera

Replaced by the D7000, although Nikon will still sell them to the less well-informed.

PrairieSeasons Loc: Red River of the North

JR1 wrote:

I don't know why they still sell the D300s the D7000 beats it in every way

The D7000 is a better camera in many ways. Unfortunately Nikon chose to have one general layout of buttons and controls that is common to the D90, D7000, D600 and others.

They have a completely different layout of buttons and controls that is common to the D300, D700 and D800.

For me (and for several other photographers I have discussed this with), it is much easier to have two bodies with the same set of controls. For three years a D300s was my primary camera. I bought a D600 last year and couldn't put one down and pick up the other and shoot. I sold the D600 back at a loss and bought a D800. Having the D800 as a primary body with the D300s as backup works well for me. Having one from each control layout just doesn't work.

PrairieSeasons Loc: Red River of the North

JR1 wrote:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d7000.htm br br ... (show quote)

And Ken Rockwell remains a legend in his own mind.

Spaaarky Loc: Norfolk/Cambs border UK

JR1 wrote:

I don't know why they still sell the D300s the D7000 beats it in every way

I have a D300s and a D7000, I will go to the D300s more often than the D7000, unless the light is poor.

The D300s has a far superior AF system and a much, much better buffer and the FPS is higher, just right for sports and wildlife.

Before owning the two bodies above I had a pair of D7000's and I have been looking to replace the D7000 for many months as I do a lot of BIF etc., I do not want to go full frame and I do not think the D7100 is for me.

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Spaaarky wrote:

I have a D300s and a D7000, I will go to the D300s more often than the D7000, unless the light is poor.

The D300s has a far superior AF system and a much, much better buffer and the FPS is higher, just right for sports and wildlife.

Before owning the two bodies above I had a pair of D7000's and I have been looking to replace the D7000 for many months as I do a lot of BIF etc., I do not want to go full frame and I do not think the D7100 is for me.

Just curious, what abut the D7100 puts you off? I love my D7100, although had I had a D7000 first I would not have bothered upgrading, just curious as to your thoughts. Also, why do you want to upgrade the D7000 for shooting BIF - buffer size, or something else?

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

PrairieSeasons wrote:

And Ken Rockwell remains a legend in his own mind.

ALL reviews can't be wrong

"The D7000 produces great image quality and feels very responsive in most shooting situations. It shines especially in low light. From a specification point of view a 16.3 MP resolution sensor, 6 frames per second continuous shooting, 1080p full HD video and an abundance of customization options place this camera firmly into the upper end of the mid-range segment of the market. "

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond7000/22