horsedoctor1

I have a Nikon D300 and I admit I have not mastered it but I am wondering if I should try the D600 since everything seems to be pushing full frame? Can the D300 do everything a simple amateur wants? Is there that much difference?

Race Shooter Loc: Baltimore, Maryland

I love the 300 series, still have a 300s as a backup body, it was top of the crop sensor Nikons in it's day. Poor high ISO performance, it starts to get real noisy above 2600, it's the only factor that prevents this camera from still competing with the newer models. IMO when your ready to go FX look at a used D800, I'm seeing them on CL right around 2K, some less, a better camera all around.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

D300 does everything you want. From being top of the line it has been relegated to average.

The camera is noisy in high ISO.
The format size is DX and offers a reasonable pixel count.

As to D600, avoid at all cost and consider the D610. The D600 could have been a great camera but there has been so many problems with that that purchasing one, even dirt cheap, is really not a good idea.

If you have the means consider the D810 instead. That one will not be obsolete for a long time and will open a new world. I owe to know I jumped from the D300 to D800e (and keep using the D300).

Another thing you need to consider BEFORE jumping is the cost of upgrading the lenses from DX to FX. Beside the camera price this is where the real cost lies. So regardless of body you select consider your budget including the lens upgrade.

Ah, oh, while full frame is really nice to have the DX format works just fine so you need a really good reason to jump onto the FX bandwagon. As you mention that you have not yet mastered the D300 I doubt you need a FX camera. An upgrade is not needed as the D300 still beats the crap of many other DX camera despite its short comings in high ISO.

horsedoctor1

Thank you. Just the info I needed. I will stick with the D300 and not go over ISO of 1600. Thank to all.

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

The D300 came out about 6 years ago, if you haven't mastered it yet, what makes you think you will master the D600 any quicker? The D300 is a fine camera even by today's standards, except for low light shooting. If you really want to upgrade and you have the funds for a D600...go for it.

amehta Loc: Boston

Yes, the D300 can do everything a "simple amateur" wants. Have you found shots which you wanted to take, but the D300 just couldn't pull off? If so, we could talk about those and what camera might have a better chance with them. But if you haven't, then there is little reason to change.

I disagree that "everything seems to be pushing full frame." If Canon and Nikon only announce full frame cameras in the next month or two, then there may be some validity to the statement, "some manufacturers seem to be pushing full frame." But other manufacturers like Olympus and Panasonic are pushing micro 4/3 while Fuji is going all-in with APS-C, the same size sensor as your D300. And Sony is pushing everything, as is their style. :-)

Baz Loc: Peterborough UK

I have a D300s and a D800. You can be sure that your D300 will take excellent photos, and probably continue to do so for many years to come. When you change format size, you are changing far more than the camera body. In all probability your lenses will be for the smaller format, and not full frame, and that is where the real expense comes in. I see that several members have advised considering the D800 series rather than the D610. I would also agree with that. If you are going down the full frame route, then that is the way to go. I would suggest looking at what lenses you would want, and buy them first. They can be used on your current system, and by the time you then get round to the body, who knows what will be available ? The D600/800 series could well be the D300 of the day.

erasmus666 Loc: Nuneaton England

The phrase "don't run before you can walk" springs to mind. I have a D300 and love it except as others have mentioned when taking photos in low light. It's solid, takes excellent photos especially at airshows where the high fps is invaluable. I'd suggest that you work out what you like taking photos of and only then decide if the D300 is not suitable. If it is then learn to master it (it took me ages to do this). If not, then upgrade as others have said to the D8xx range and not the D6xx. You've not mentioned how long you've had the camera. Another point to remember is this: why do the D300 and D300s hold their value? Answer, because except at high ISO they are superb cameras! Don't give up on it yet as you may regret the decision later.Finally, N-Photo magazine did a comparison of Nikon DX cameras and they compared the D7100 and D300s As far as performance went it said "..the D300s's lab scores for resolution exceed those of the D7000. Under decent lighting conditions image quality is gorgeous". the D300 got the same number of stars as the D7100 - 4.

PaulR

I really must come out of hiding for this one...thanks to all of the expertise that I have absorbed from such knowledgable people who have helped me a lot. I have a D800....all I can say is wow!!!!! Unbelievable resolution.
Got D300 on the cheap just a few days ago...all I can say is Wow!!!!!!! Again....Don't underestimate the D300..Learn how to use it and you'll say WoW like me to an old crop sensor camera....Go Nikon!!!!!!!

(Download)

horsedoctor1

Thanks to all. Great advice. Will work hard to learn d300. Best web site on internet!!!

Fotografer Loc: Denmark WI

So what about the D3s?

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

I think $4000 for a used one puts it in a different category than the D300.
Link HERE.
A used D300 goes for $450. Link HERE.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

My acquisition syndrome is starting to rumble and it's not even noon. This helps remind me why I don't need full frame:
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2013/02/27/nikon-d7100-vs-d600-which-dslr-should-you-choose/

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

I thought that was thunder from the rain we're getting!