To buy a D300 in 2010: still worth it?

<p>Hi everybody,<br>

i just sold my D200 and started to look around for a worthy replacement. I've come to think of a D300 given the big leap in color and overall performance.<br>

My question is: Does it still make sense to buy a D300 (non s) now in 2010?<br>

Granted they seem to go by a whole 850 Euros/ 1000 $ i dont know if i should wait for something newer by Nikon or what.. ;)</p>

<p>please help me! :D</p>

 

<p>Hi Jack, it made sense for me. I just upgraded from a D80 I bought new in 9/08 to a used D300 within the past month. I got a good deal ($800) for one with de-laminating rubber grip all around it but otherwise in good shape. Honestly even at around $1000 I would say it is a worthy sucessor.</p>

<p>From my reading it looks like the D300s, while fantastic would not significantly impact my shooting when compared to the D300. I am not looking for video clips, and while I'd love to stick with SD cards rather than change over to CF I'm not worried about card redundancy to a great extent.</p>

<p>Your needs may be different, I'd say that since you already sold your D200 you need SOMETHING right away! :) </p>

<p>there was a generational leap from the d200 to the d300. in addition to the improved low-light performance, the D300 benefited from the AF system which trickled down from the D3. that's still the top-of-the-Nikon line module, so the d300 is far from obsolete. the d300s adds a few minor tweaks, but for $1000 the d300 is definitely worth it.</p>

 

<p>Made sense to me as well. Unless you want the movie feature on the D300s. I made the same change; the D300 is a significant step up from the D200 as Eric has mentioned. I'm very happy.</p>

<p>Hi Jack,<br>

I just went down the B&H superstore last weekend in NYC and scored a factory reconditioned D300 for $1199. Yeah, I could have probably picked one up in the classifieds for around a grand but I preferred the peice of mind of having a factory body with B&H warranty. It came in a Nikon branded silver box with sealed accessories, documentation and Nikon software as it were bought off the assembly line. It only had 4,100 shutter actuations and it is spotless. I am very pleased. I also own a D50 and a D2H, and I felt the D300 was an appropriate fit for me---as I wanted bettrer ISO handling and faster AF system. (I'm selling the D2H, but keeping the D50, but thats a different story)<br>

Even if a D400 is announced later this year with better ISO handling, I thought (for me) it wasn't worth the wait or the anticipated added expense. IMHO, DX technology has matured to the point where I expect to be satisfied for at least 2-3 years. The D300 far exceeds the exposure flexibility from what I (barely) remember with film...and so from a creative standpoint I know I have a solid tool that can deliver and help challenge me and raise my skill to the next level. Don't hesitate to pull the trigger on the D300. I think its a smart move. There is always going to the "next best thing" lurking around the corner. At some, pt., in my opinion--the value pt.--(which is 12-18mos after new model relesae)--it's time to pull the trigger---get back to shooting, and stop obsessing about new gear. </p>

<p>for about $1,000? absolutely!<br>

two years from now, it might still be worth close to a thousand $.</p>

<p>Besides much higher ISO performance (i.e. D3s level) I'd have a hard time coming up with what the D300 doesn't do for me ... or why I'd want to get rid of it to 'upgrade' to something else in the DX realm. :)</p>

<p>I went from a D200 to a D90 which i don't regret. The D90 does almost everything the D300 does.</p>

<p>It's a fine camera when it was introduced. It's a fine camera today. Why wouldn't it be worth it? The monetary "value" of the camera decreases with every passing day, but it's "worth", as a capable picture taking machine, remains the same. An F3, today, it still "worth it".</p>

<p>i've had my D300 for almost 2 years (march 9), and while i consider the D700 my "main" camera these days, i still use my D300 A LOT, and honestly would have to get another one if i lost this one. the update doesn't speak to me, and the next generation won't appear til 2011. i'll stick with the D300.</p>

<p>I should pick one up. It would stay attached to my 500mm f4 P. I had a D200 before my D700 and miss DX for tele work. A good D300 would do all I need and maybe a bit more.</p>

<p>Repeating what mostly has been said already. As long as you don't need the video, the D300 can be had for lower prices now that the D300s is out, and since folks are waiting for a soon to be announced replacement. I have the D300, and so far I have not had any reason to want to upgrade, for once I am completely satisfied with a DSLR, and it will easily allow me to skip a couple generations of upgrades. Of course I am not taking too many pictures in candlelight, and the widest wide angle I can get is 18mm full-frame equivalent with my 12-24mm DX lens, and with that, the D300 is more than adequate for me. If I have the craving for more, I will wait till the D700 replacement is out and early adopters start dropping their D700s (plural, not the "S" model :-)).</p>

<p>I just did the same thing albeit I kept my D200 for a backup. I love it for all the things already mentioned. Low light, better AF, and the larger LCD. I gave $1100 for mine but it had just been factory serviced at Nikon for cleaning and a checkup. I don't think I got a great deal but it was decent and I love it.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone!<br /> The consistence in all your answers is truly pushing me towards the mighty D300 ;)<br /> In fact i sold the D200, not without some hesitation, for that very leap in color and performance. And honestly, i feel 1600 are more than enough even in the dark if you got the proper lens ;)<br /> So, indeed, it looks like the perfect all-round choice, for the time being.<br /> Above all, from the general enthusiasm for the D300 on this thread, you can really understand why at Nikon are postponing the lainch for a D400 ! :D</p>

<p>Don't hold your breath... personally I hate to go above ISO 400 with my D300. Certainly there is no reason not to get a used D300 right now. But for the price of a new D300s, a used D700 is pretty attractive, and will probably continue to get more attractive as new FX cameras are introduced.</p>

<p>I would rather not go above the base ISO on any DSLR, but I think ISO 800 on the D300 is still ok, although there is certainly some difference from ISO 400. And if you are that picky, you'll likely have problems with anything above ISO 800 on the D700. After all, the difference in terms of the high ISO capability between the D300 and D700/D3 is merely one stop, and it is another one stop or perhaps a little more from the D3/D700 to the D3S.</p>

<p>It always boils down to the same question: Is it worthwhile to pay a lot more for a D700 for that one-stop gain? The D700 is certainly not panacea.</p>

<p>I have had a D700 for about a year and half, but I still use the D300 regularly. Nikon put so much into the D300 back in 2007 that it is still an excellent camera today. Any successor to the D300S will likely appear towards the end of 2010 or some time in 2011. If you don't have any DSLR to use, that is a long time to wait. However, I wouldn't underestimate how much digital technology will advance in the mean time.</p>

<p>For 850 euros yes; any future D400 or D800 is going to cost at least twice that on launch and there's no knowing when such cameras would be available. 850 euros is a low price for a D300 if you're serious about what you're doing.</p>

<p>You could wait for the next one(D400 or whatever), and get a D300 cheap, get the new one(D400 or whatever), or just get a D300 now, if it were me I'd just wait and get a D300 cheap. Then again, I'd rather use rangefinders. Perhaps my advice isn't great.</p>

<p>I don't see how a D300S replacement could be coming very soon, since the D300S just came out. And there's not a heck of a lot of difference between a D300S and a D300 if you don't care about video. Since you're used to a D200 you're probably going to prefer the D300 to the D90.</p>

<p>Yes! The D300 is a terrific camera, just as good now as it was in November, 2007, when I bought mine.</p>

<p>Want a really, really detailed comparison of the D300 to the D200 and D2x?</p>

<p>http://www.bythom.com/nikond300review.htm</p>

<p>I still love mine, I got it when they first came out.</p>

<p>The D70/D70S is maybe a comparison for the D300/D300s. I think the D70s was not around very long before the D80 was released? I'm not sure. But if there is a new DX camera, probably it will have a few new MP, but nothing really to make you regret buying a D300.</p>

<p>The differences between the D70 and D70S are very minor, and the D70S was in production for a little more than a year: May 2005 to August 2006. The D2XS was also in production for just over a year.</p>

<p>The D300S and D3S both have more significant improvements from their earlier counterparts. I would expect them to be in production for roughly a year and half or so, give or take.</p>

<p>Hi Jack,<br>

I bought my D300 just after they were released and have never regretted it, great camera. Recently my off-sider wanted a camera so she bought a D90. For some time after that I felt I still had the serious camera and that the D90 was just another nice camera. <br>

But, after some time using both cameras, I would suggest that the D90 may be worth looking at. It has many features taken from the D300 as well as a few differences. Of course you will have to weigh up the differences and decide which best suits you, but I would suggest reviewing the D90 if you are in the market for a D300.</p>