Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon D300... ran out of $pondolas
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
Feb 16, 2018 11:03:25   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
bkyser wrote:
I think you should plan on keeping that body for a LOOOONG time. Many waited years and years for the replacement to come out. Unless you want to specialize in low light, or weddings (which it was an awesome wedding body in its day) I doubt you will outgrow it any time soon.

Don't worry when people say that you can't print large with it, trust me, you can. I have several 24x36 and 30x40 family portraits hung in client's homes that were taken with a D-200, which was lower MP, and worse noise issues and quality as your D300.
I think you should plan on keeping that body for a... (show quote)


I was one of the ones waiting for a D400. Wound up getting a D7100 as I got tired of waiting...

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 11:08:17   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
I was one of the ones waiting for a D400. Wound up getting a D7100 as I got tired of waiting...


Evidently Nikon got tired of waiting too.
Skipped the 400 and came out with the 500.
I wonder what goes on in those board rooms?

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 11:10:04   #
wyoutfitter Loc: Montana
 
Those old cameras take great shots. People on my tours sometimes have the older equipment, and they take amazing photos.

Reply
 
 
Feb 16, 2018 11:10:09   #
WayneL Loc: Baltimore Md
 
bellgamin wrote:
After I finished buying a guitar, a uke, bunch of macro gear, 2 Nikon film SLRs, a point&shoot, & a couple of Nikkor lenses, I pretty much drained 1st quarter's fun-money-bucket dry. But I still had to have a DSLR -- an el cheapo, obviously -- to learn digital with. So I bought a "condition excellent++" Nikon D330 body (a bit over 18,000 clicks) for $300, fob Hawaii, & that included its original box & ALL the stuff that came in it waaay back when it was new. (I wanted the D300s but couldn't find right seller/condition/price.)

PLEASE comment on the following:

1) Did I get screwed on the D330 for $300? (I probably won't be happy with the answers, but please be blunt... I need to learn how to do deals when it comes to used photo gear.)

2) Now that I am married to the d330 for the next 4-5 months, I need to buy a prime lens for it. If I want to eat for the rest of February, I have to find something decent for under $150. Any suggestions would be muchly muchly appreciated.
After I finished buying a guitar, a uke, bunch of ... (show quote)


That's a fair price and to compare check KEH. If you want a zoom the Nikon 16-85 is a good lens for the D300.I was very happy with mine.

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 11:20:24   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
WayneL wrote:
That's a fair price and to compare check KEH. If you want a zoom the Nikon 16-85 is a good lens for the D300.I was very happy with mine.


Yes! I don't use the D300 as much any more but I have the 16-85 and it's a very good performer, though used prices are above $300 from KEH.
I prefer the 17-55 2.8 but it's even more $$$.

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 11:23:11   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
GoofyNewfie wrote:

Evidently Nikon got tired of waiting too.
Skipped the 400 and came out with the 500.
I wonder what goes on in those board rooms?


I remember reading various announcements over the years.

At one point they said they would never do full frame because the DX sensors would continue to improve making FF unnecessary.

Once they produced their full frame camera the said there was no need for high end DX cameras because people wanting highest quality would buy full frame.

They stumbled around for years, but 'maybe' the D850 means they are back on track.

Time will tell.

--

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 11:45:28   #
Rick1948
 
Nikon D300 is a Fine camera and at that price a Good Deal.
I have the D300s same camera just a few extra Bells and Whistles that I do not really use.
And FYI I just spoke with Nikon Repair yesterday 2/15/18 and they will repair, clean & service the D300 series
until 2013 !!! ( Not sure but I think Only USA Models )

Rick

Reply
 
 
Feb 16, 2018 11:47:19   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
2013 ?
Rick1948 wrote:
Nikon D300 is a Fine camera and at that price a Good Deal.
I have the D300s same camera just a few extra Bells and Whistles that I do not really use.
And FYI I just spoke with Nikon Repair yesterday 2/15/18 and they will repair, clean & service the D300 series
until 2013 !!! ( Not sure but I think Only USA Models )

Rick

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 11:49:43   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
2013 ?


Instant coffee in a microwave oven lets you go back in time.

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 12:12:31   #
mmeador
 
I had a D3200 and loved the camera. Light weight, lots of goodies for a new photographer. I traded it in for a D300. I don't plan on going to full frame so I bought the 35mm 1.8 but don't use it very often. The advantage of the D300 is the ability to use old lenses. I bought an old 135mm 2.8 AI for $50.00. Super sharp. I also have quite a few old automatic lenses. When you look at it the D3xxx and D5xxx, they will cost you more in the long run because of the price of buying new glass. I can use any lens Nikon built from 1977 on.

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 12:14:34   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
mmeador wrote:
I can use any lens Nikon built from 1977 on.

Plus you get metering in "M" or "A" modes with them.

Reply
 
 
Feb 16, 2018 12:24:11   #
agillot
 
been using a D300 for over 2 years now, has 80.000 cliks , bullet proof , great camera .as for lenses , a small zoom would do .the kit lenses are not that bad .if you are looking for used , quantaray [ sigma ] are descent .

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 13:27:51   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
bellgamin wrote:


The only lens I have that isn't on a film-based Nikon is a Nikkor AD 28-105mm f3.5-4.5D macro.


I have this lens and have used it on my FX D810. I find it to be quite good over most of the frame, with some softening at the corners and far sides. If you are going to use this on a DX camera, you won't notice that. At least you have something to start with and would be able to quickly identify any shortcomings. (Not wide enough on the wide end, maximum aperture too small for your needs, lack of VR.)

By the way, I've used the "macro" function in a pinch, and though it's a bit clunky to get to it, it actually works all the way down to 1:2. It's sharp enough for non-critical photos of 3 dimensional subjects. It doesn't have the sharpness or flat field that you get with a dedicated macro lens.

Two other things about this lens are an almost complete lack of distortion and relatively light weight.

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 13:30:02   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
therwol wrote:
I have this lens and have used it on my FX D810. I find it to be quite good over most of the frame, with some softening at the corners and far sides. If you are going to use this on a DX camera, you won't notice that. At least you have something to start with and would be able to quickly identify any shortcomings. (Not wide enough on the wide end, maximum aperture too small for your needs, lack of VR.)

By the way, I've used the "macro" function in a pinch, and though it's a bit clunky to get to it, it actually works all the way down to 1:2. It's sharp enough for non-critical photos of 3 dimensional subjects. It doesn't have the sharpness or flat field that you get with a dedicated macro lens.

Two other things about this lens are an almost complete lack of distortion and relatively light weight.
I have this lens and have used it on my FX D810. ... (show quote)

I have this lens as well. Plan on taking it with me on a trip to Montana later this year and use it on my D610...

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 13:53:28   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
I have this lens as well. Plan on taking it with me on a trip to Montana later this year and use it on my D610...


I replaced it with the 24-120 f/4 VR, only for the VR. I think that overall the older lens is sharper out to about 85mm. The newer lens is like a brick in comparison.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.