It's basketball season and I'm currently using my D700 because of its clean iso 3200 performance. The D300s that I own is quite noisey at iso 3200 so I'm looking to replace it as a second body. I'd like to add a body to use with different lenses. Can't afford the D600 or 800 so I'm wondering how much better the iso performance is between the D7000 and D300s is? Also, the D7000 body is selling for less than $900 at B&H and other online retailers which make it very tempting.
#2. "RE: D7000 iso 3200 compared to D300s iso 3200?" In response to Reply # 0
SF Bay, US
It won't be better than the D700 but it is cleaner than the D300s. I own all three and I still love the D300s, sometimes I think the colors look better and cleaner on the D300s than the D7000 but I guess it's all subjective.
It wasn't until recently that I got the D700 and boy do I really love it... But all three have their uses for me.
#4. "RE: D7000 iso 3200 compared to D300s iso 3200?" In response to Reply # 0
The noise performance is somewhat better, but the autofocusing performance is somewhat worse. Even though the D7000 has a newer generation of AF, it's a more consumer-grade design than the Multi-CAM 3500DX of the D300. I wouldn't say the D7000 AF system is bad, really, but you will definitely notice the difference from the Multi-CAM 3500FX and Multi-CAM 3500DX systems you are used to, especially when shooting in poor light at wide apertures -- as in basketball!
Whether the tradeoff is worthwhile is a personal opinion. Myself, I'd rather miss focus on a few more shots and have the better noise performance, so I opted for a D7000. But there are sports shooters who would argue the other side of the case. (Now, if Nikon would just make a true D300s replacement... but let's not get that thread going again!)