Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising
visionguru

Chicago, US
227 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
visionguru Registered since 03rd Nov 2008
Thu 10-Feb-11 01:29 AM

I know, there are tons of "vs" threads, however, as a previous D300 user, I'd like to hear comments about D7000 from a previous/current D300/s user, especially:
(1) Do you notice improvement in IQ?
(2) Anything you dislike about D7000?

Thanks!

beemerman2k

Ellington, US
440 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#1. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 0

beemerman2k Silver Member Nikonian since 27th Mar 2006
Thu 10-Feb-11 02:09 AM

I read somewhere (dpreview.com maybe) that the D7000 has a better *sensor* than the D300(s), but that's about it. The D300(s) is better in pretty much every other area, except maybe weight -- oh, and video capability.

I would agree with this view.

Beemerman2k
2000 BMW R1100RT Motorcycle
Nikon D7100
Nikon D70s w/ SB600
Nikon N70 w/ SB28

Visit
My photo gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

kytra

RO
8 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#2. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 1

kytra Registered since 27th Mar 2010
Thu 10-Feb-11 07:16 AM

Better sensor means a lot in my book: better resolution, better ISO, better DR all of which should give better IQ. Is all this justifying an upgrade? IMO only if one needs better low light capabilities, larger prints, more pp headroom or, of course video and/or a more compact body. By switching to D7k one compromises a bit on ergonomy, AF speed and ruggedness. It is simply a matter of priority. I have a D40 and a D7k and I must say that at 100-400 ISO and daylight there is a very slight to unnoticeable difference between the two when viewed on a computer screen or printed in normal sizes.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

rasworth

Austin, US
1191 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#3. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 0

rasworth Basic Member
Thu 10-Feb-11 12:16 PM

I purchased the D7000, sold my D300, and found nothing on the D7000 to dislike as well as no disadvantage wrt to D300.

DR is better, more pixels are nice but not that noticeable, and it's a half pound lighter. The capability of controlling ISO with the command dial is very useful, i.e. in Aperture mode (my main usage) the sub-command dial controls aperture and the command dial controls ISO, makes for a very quick adjustment process shot to shot.

I have it set up similarly to the D300, AF-ON only, function button sets FV-Lock, and the Preview button is exposure lock. For $200 (net difference between D7000 cost and sale on D300) it was pretty much a no brainer.

Richard Southworth

bradbort

somerville, US
156 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#4. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 3

bradbort Silver Member Nikonian since 16th Oct 2006
Thu 10-Feb-11 07:15 PM

I sold my D300 and bought the D7000. I love the IQ, light weight, easily accessible U settings (hated the banks on the 300). I have no regrets at the moment. Of course, if it ends up not holding up as well, I could change my mind, but at the moment, really loving it...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

poc

US
320 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#5. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 4

poc Silver Member Nikonian since 08th Jan 2008
Thu 10-Feb-11 11:30 PM

Currently have both D300s and D7th. Nothing wrong with either, you can do great work with both. My original thought was to replace the D300s with a smaller body, but after a number of weeks, I won't part with my old standard. Many of the threads I have read on the subject really focus on details that don't likely mean much to most photographers.

While high ISO quality is significantly better in D7th, I prefer the functionality and customization of the D300s. If I am on a tripod, I use the latter. If I am just hiking or at a family event where I don't want to think, I'll take the lighter package in the D7th.

Having the ability to shoot more than 3 bracketed images without doing a workaround is a big deal for me. That would be about the only thing I actually dislike about the D7th (limited to 3).

Having said all this, the main thing to consider, is that the actual feel of the cameras is totally different. The D300s is definitely a more rugged body that can probably handle more abuse. If I had to choose one over the other, at this point it would likely be the D300s. But that is my shooting style.

POC

http://cabreraphoto.smugmug.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Len Shepherd

Yorkshire, UK
12722 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#6. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 0

Len Shepherd Gold Member Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003
Fri 11-Feb-11 07:17 AM

I have recently bought the D7000, and kept the D300s, but put the D300 up for sale.
Whilst the D7000 has more resolution potential, for many purposes you do not need it, and the noise advantage only starts to become relevant at 1600 ISO and higher.
Video is better than the 300s - but the D7000 does not have a sync socket so I will not use it at the studio next week.
Build quality is good for a consumer camera - but definitely below a D300.
AF settings are moved to the command dials - with more options when you get used to the change.
The D7000 is smaller and lighter. Some of the retouch menu options such as outline drawing etc are perhaps esoteric, but converging vertical correction should be useful.
UK prices including our 20% VAT are dropping toward £900 whilst the D300s seems to have settled around £990.
Looking to the near future I anticipate a D90 replacement soon and a D400/4 later. If a D400 has a built in pro grade battery it will be much bigger and heavier than the standard D300/s.

Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.

Len Shepherd

Marlin4E

Hamilton, US
46 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#7. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 0

Marlin4E Registered since 14th Jan 2011
Fri 11-Feb-11 12:27 PM

I bought the D7000 for the higher pixel count, HD video and more updated IQ. I have a D300 and have never been pleased with the sharpness of the pictures I was getting even on a tripod and forever forgetting what the menu settings were that I last set it on.

I have found the D7000 to be more compact and easier to use with about the same features. I agree with the one person that my biggest dislike is only having 3 bracketing levels. There are workarounds that I have not tried. Plus, most HDR enthusiasts have indicated that 3 levels at +/- 2EV is sufficient for realistic HDR.

I enjoy BIF photography. I have not taken any BIF pictures with the D7000 yet to know how it compares to the D300.

Like any Nikon, there is a growing experience with where all the features are located and how to set it up for what you want to do. I have found this is no different across the 3 Nikons I have owned.

My intent is to sell the D300, but I have held on to it so far to see if the D7000 meets my needs. To date, I have been very pleased with the D7000 and my bet is the D300 will be sold.

Mark4ENikon

KnightPhoto

Alberta, CA
4955 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#8. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 3

KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006
Sat 19-Feb-11 02:16 PM

Wow Richard you did very well on the buy-sell! Was yours a low-actuation model and where did you sell it?

For $200 I think I would sell my D300 and get a second D7K. But it's hard to say for sure what and when I should do. My D300 has about 60-70K actuations.

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

visionguru

Chicago, US
227 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#9. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 0

visionguru Registered since 03rd Nov 2008
Sat 19-Feb-11 10:32 PM

I got my D7000 already. Here are some quick impressions:

(1) D7000 is trigger-happy. The shutter is quiet and quick, much quicker than any of Nikon cameras I've used.

(2) D7000 is very sharp. The IQ is outstanding, a step up over D90/D5000, and D300.

(3) D7000 feels just like D90 in terms of weight and feel, not a pro level body like D300.

(4) D7000 is still far behind D700 in ISO performance.

Len Shepherd

Yorkshire, UK
12722 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#10. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 9

Len Shepherd Gold Member Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003
Sun 20-Feb-11 09:34 AM

>(4) D7000 is still far behind D700 in ISO performance.
As an owner of the D3, D300 and D7000 I do not agree on this one.
The D7000 is about .66 - 1 stop better than the D300 at higher than about 1600, and the D3 is about 1 - 1.3 stops better than the D300 at high ISO's.
The D3 still has a slight edge on the D7000 from about 3200 ISO - but it is slight and seems no more than half a stop.
Up to 1600 in a 20 inch wide print I can detect no obvious difference.
Adding a new difference the mode setting dial D7000 top left is easily accidentally changed. On the other hand being able to turn it quickly to U1 or U2 gives fast access to 2 bank settings.
The D7000 does not have a flash PC socket - though pc connectors are less likely to be used these days.
The D7000 is not as robust as a D300 or probable D400 and does not match the fps, but it has great features for the money.

Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.

Len Shepherd

visionguru

Chicago, US
227 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#11. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 10

visionguru Registered since 03rd Nov 2008
Tue 22-Feb-11 12:31 PM

1 stop is a lot. Roughly,
D300 is 1/2 stop better than D70.
D7000 is 1 stop better than D70.
D700 is 1 stop better than D7000.

JPJ

Toronto, CA
1327 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#12. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 11

JPJ Silver Member Nikonian since 19th Aug 2009
Tue 22-Feb-11 02:22 PM

>1 stop is a lot. Roughly,
>D300 is 1/2 stop better than D70.
>D7000 is 1 stop better than D70.
>D700 is 1 stop better than D7000.

For me the only real issue is at what ISO are your prepared to shoot at and still expect some keepers. On my d90 it was 800, maybe 1600 if the scene was low in fine detail.

For both the d700 and d7000 the answer for most imo is about 6400.

I don't personally think that the d7000 3200 ISO = the d700 6400 ISO. At 6400 from what I have seen the d700 retains detail better while the d7000 holds the colour better. The d700 at 6400 has maybe 1/3rd to a half stop advantage in noise which puts me more in line with Len's view.

It is a bit subjective so I would expect people to differ on this. The fact that we can even have this discussion (i.e. that people think it is even close) still amazes me given the bump in MP's and the crop sensor. We are of course comparing the newest DX camera to an aging FX line. I am sure once the new FX entry level camera is released it will widen the gap.

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

visionguru

Chicago, US
227 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#13. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 12

visionguru Registered since 03rd Nov 2008
Tue 22-Feb-11 03:02 PM | edited Tue 22-Feb-11 03:04 PM by visionguru

I haven't done any formal comparisons, but under similar conditions, the D7000 shows obvious noise while D700 is almost noise free.

The DXO mark seems a more scientific way of judging performance:
D7000 vs D700 vs D300s

Jay

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#14. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 11

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Tue 22-Feb-11 03:24 PM

>D300 is 1/2 stop better than D70.

In my experience ( I have owned both) the difference between D70 and D300 is much greater than that; maybe 1.5-2 stops at high ISO settings.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

visionguru

Chicago, US
227 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#15. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 14

visionguru Registered since 03rd Nov 2008
Thu 24-Feb-11 01:14 PM | edited Thu 24-Feb-11 01:16 PM by visionguru

>In my experience ( I have owned both) the difference between
>D70 and D300 is much greater than that; maybe 1.5-2 stops at
>high ISO settings.

True if we consider the noise level in higher ISO. My assessment was based on the "almost" noise free ISO settings under decent lighting. D300 is about ISO 800, D70 is about ISO 500. Also, if we compare the noise by downsampling to same pixel count, the D300 will pull ahead even further.

So far, I like my D7000 very much. Some of the controls, such as ISO control, are well thought out. Quick, quiet and a pleasure to use.

Jay
- Chicago Nikonian

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#16. "RE: D7000 vs D300/s ?" | In response to Reply # 15

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Thu 24-Feb-11 01:32 PM

>True if we consider the noise level in higher ISO. My
>assessment was based on the "almost" noise free ISO
>settings under decent lighting. D300 is about ISO 800, D70 is
>about ISO 500.

I guess it's all down to personal interpretation. I would have put the D70 at ISO 400 ISO about equal to the D300 at ISO 1000.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

G