Nikon D90 v D300 (1 Viewer)

[Des!]

I'm still looking to upgrade my D50 & was considering a D300 until I read this - "Although in a smaller plastic body, the D90 is essentially the same as the D300."

Can anyone shed any light on whether this is true & what warrents the extra couple of hundred quid.

:t:

Cheers!

Des

 

[Helios]

I wnt from the D80 (the D90's predecessor) to a D300. The main reason was because the D300 will meter with all of Nikon's old AI and AIS lenses. I was able to buy a AI-P 500/4 at about 1/4 of the price of an autofocus AFS one. The D300 autocorrects for CA as well, which is very useful as the older AIS lenses were more prone to CA.

THe D300 lacks the pre-set scene modes, but otherwise is easier to use as it has more buttons, and you don't have to dig around in the menu settings as much. Having a separate AF button from the shutter release is a godsend.

The D300 has a much better build quality which suits the rigours of wildlife photography, and can also shoot continuously at twice the speed of the D80, which is useful. I found the picture quality is about the same, with the D300 having a little less noise. i'm still happy to shoot with the D80 though, and often do.

 

[Duke Leto]

the D300 has a better AF system, with more focus points
TIFF and 14bit Raw on the D300
1/8000 D300 1/4000 D90
Weatherproof seals on the D300

 

[rezMole]

I dropped mine (with a Sigma 500mm Lens) and there was no damage. Not sure if the D90 would have survived.

 

[Leif]

No they are not equivalent. I'm sure there are lists of differences online, but the D300 has MLU, meters with manual lenses, has a more rugged body, has faster AF and higher FPS, and so on. I would have thought the D300 was much better for birdies.

 

[Des!]

Thanks for all your input! B

 

[Gentoo]

I'm still looking to upgrade my D50 & was considering a D300 until I read this - "Although in a smaller plastic body, the D90 is essentially the same as the D300."

Can anyone shed any light on whether this is true & what warrents the extra couple of hundred quid.

:t:

Cheers!

Des

Yeah I said it was "essentially" the same. They give the same image quality and look to their pictures. There are other differences but some users use those and others don't. I personally do like the metal body of the D300. I also like it's larger size sense I have large hands with long fingers.

However if you're on a budget (something a lot of photographers seem to find hard to understand) then get the D90 and a really good lens.

 

[Cashie]

Des: Have a read of this link! http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d90.htm

 

[Leif]

Des: Have a read of this link! http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d90.htm

IMO Ken Rockwell talks nonsense and the above link is no exception.

 

[Gentoo]

I've seen pictures out of a D90 and I can tell you that in this case, Rockwell has a point. There really isn't any difference that can be seen at all between the D90 and D300. However if you are used to those extra focal points, the 11 being the max in the D90 may annoy you. If you're used to a D200 or D300 the D90 is smaller, plastic and the buttons are in "weird" places by comparison. It's very light! Almost D40 light but not quite.

While the D90 is good at tracking moving subjects, one important feature it is missing is the 3D focus tracking which some may find indispensable. I rarely use mine but some may want this feature.

If it's just the same image quality you're looking for and the missing features aren't that important the D90 is 500 dollars less and gets you the same results. The D90 actually has slightly better ISO performance as it's noise reduction doesn't soften images as much as the D300's does. Unlike Ken Rockwell, I would never say "forget the old D300". It's still an awesome camera and can offer more features, especially with focusing than the D90.

 

[Evie19]

IMO Ken Rockwell talks nonsense and the above link is no exception.

:C Yes but Ken Rockwell is a professional and you are not!!

 

[Leif]

:C Yes but Ken Rockwell is a professional and you are not!!

No he isn't. He often makes claims that suggest that he sells large numbers of pictures. But he doesn't. And he makes derogatory comments about some world famous pros such as Art Morris. But he is am amateur photographer, who makes a living from advertising on his web site. Take a look at his images, and they are for the most part snap shots. Nothing wrong with snapshots, unless you try and make grandiose claims for them.

If you take the trouble to read his site - not that I recommend such an activity - you will find numerous howlers, and downright stupid comments. There is some good information, but it is outweighed by badly written tripe.

He is most 'famous' for an essay called something like "Your camera doesn't matter". The following is a well written critique of what is basically nonsense:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/cameras-matter.shtml

 

[Leif]

I've seen pictures out of a D90 and I can tell you that in this case, Rockwell has a point. There really isn't any difference that can be seen at all between the D90 and D300.

Most of what you say is sensible and reasonable. But what Ken says is "If you're considering a D300, forget it. Get the D90 instead. ".

To say as Ken does that the IQ is the same is misleading and simplistic. In many situations the IQ is not the same. If the shutter speed is in the danger region, about 1/15" say, then you probably do NEED mirror lock up, and the D90 will give you a soft image, whereas the D300 will give you a sharp image. And as you indicate, if you need fast focus and high FPS, then the D90 will not cut the mustard.

It is of course up to you to decide whether or not you will use the extra features and hence whether or not they are worth having.

Unfortunately Ken's 'essay' was (unlike your sensible post) rather simplistic.

Actually his essay makes sense if you realise that the target audience is happy snappers who want to take pictures of their family and friends. Nowt wrong with that, but that is not the same as bird and nature photographers.

 

[Gentoo]

Most of what you say is sensible and reasonable. But what Ken says is "If you're considering a D300, forget it. Get the D90 instead. ".

To say as Ken does that the IQ is the same is misleading and simplistic. In many situations the IQ is not the same. If the shutter speed is in the danger region, about 1/15" say, then you probably do NEED mirror lock up, and the D90 will give you a soft image, whereas the D300 will give you a sharp image. And as you indicate, if you need fast focus and high FPS, then the D90 will not cut the mustard.

It is of course up to you to decide whether or not you will use the extra features and hence whether or not they are worth having.

Unfortunately Ken's 'essay' was (unlike your sensible post) rather simplistic.

Actually his essay makes sense if you realise that the target audience is happy snappers who want to take pictures of their family and friends. Nowt wrong with that, but that is not the same as bird and nature photographers.

I could not agree with that last statement more! He is a good starting point if you're a beginner and getting into SLR photography. He knows absolutely nothing about nature photography but this is true of a lot of photographers. Our field is a completely different ball game altogether.

Overall, I'm glad I rushed out and bought the D300. If not I would have gotten the D90 and had no idea what being able to chose 21 out of 51 focal points would be like. Your explanation of IQ makes perfect sense too concerning slower shutter speeds. Personally, I now could not live without my D300!

 

[Des!]

Some interesting perspectives - My main use will be Birding.

Anyone else heard about the proposed D500x (?)

:t:

 

[Leif]

Anyone else heard about the proposed D500x (?)

Nope. What's that then?

 

[Des!]

D500 - http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d500.htm

 

[Leif]

D500 - http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d500.htm

Aha. An impeccable source then. We'll see. I'm waiting for something nice by late Summer 2009 to replace my D200.

 

[pduxon]

Aha. An impeccable source then. We'll see. I'm waiting for something nice by late Summer 2009 to replace my D200.

yeah a VERY impeccable source

 

[Gentoo]

This one is better for Nikon Rumors =)

http://nikonrumors.com/