Looking for advice on Nikon buy

[hutchinson]

I've been working with old film Nikons (EM and lately FE-2) for about three years and feel it's time to move to

digital. I'm going to school for photography next year and there will be intro darkroom courses where I'll still

need my old cameras, but I want to get acclimated to digital and I'm getting tired of all the processing costs of

film (since I unfortunately can't put up a darkroom in my basement).

 

So, anyway, here's the question. Which Nikon should I go for? I've been looking at the D300 because of the

improved auto focus, the dust-removing sensor (how effective is that, by the way?), improved ISO from the D200,

along with higher megapixel count and faster CMOS sensor.

 

I've seen some people on here post to other new-to-digital photographers that they should go for a lesser model

like the D80 if they're not as serious or to get used to digital, but I'm quite serious and will be using the

camera a lot.

 

Any input is greatly appreciated.

[2yellowdogs]

If you can afford the D300, I can't recommend it enough. Fabulous camera. But it also depends on what you'll be

shooting, too. If you'll be shooting sports or PJ types of assignments, the D300 is it. If you want to save a lot of

money and have most of the same capability, pick up a good used D2Hs.

 

If you'll be shooting less demanding subjects, a D80 or a used D70s would be great. They'd give you a very good

intro to digital and produce excellent images.

[ronald_moravec1]

To utilize your existing lenses as much as possible, D300. This assumes you have Ai or newer lenses. Otherwise a

D90 should be adequate. If you are willing to hand meter, a D40/60 are ok. google Nikon lens compatability chart

 

The tests I have seen do not report great things on auto dust removal. My method is to change lenses mount down

and do it quickly. Dust off the new on before it goes on. Lastly occasionally blow out the mirror chamber, raise the

mirror, but not open the shutter and blow out the back. The theory is to get any accumulated dust out before it gets

to the sensor. So far I have only gotten two pieces to the sensor which I blew right off. I think precaution is worth

everything. My cameras have never been wet cleaned. Store everything in a clean dust free place.

 

My d700 is but a few weeks oldand there are no dust problems so far. I ran auto clean once or twice, but generally i

try to keep things clean and pretend it is not there.

[gman]

I did some research for my wife on digital cameras. Specifically Nikons. The D300 and D700 are great cameras and have earned all the praise people have poured on them. But…if money is of some concern, you can get a used D200 for a great price. That is what my wife finally decided on. She paid 700 bucks for a demo model at Adorama. With the savings, you can get a lens and needed accessories…like a sturdy tripod, or whatever else you may need. She went with the 18-135 lens…it was a good choice. The 18-200 is probably the better lens but it was more expensive.

 

Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there as an idea.

[bwcombs]

My two cents as well: Wayne's idea of a used or demo D200 is a great idea. I've got the D200 and use some of my older lenses, including a few I used to shoot on the EM and FG. The D200 is a good value at those prices. And you can add some new glass, etc., with the difference.

[hutchinson]

Looking at the D90, I noticed it can only shoot Jpeg and Compressed RAW. The D300 can do Uncompressed RAW and TIFF also. Is there a huge difference between compressed and uncompressed RAW as far as image quality goes? The D90 also has 11 autofocus points compared to the 300's 51, but I'm also wondering if 51 is really necessary.

[eric_arnold]

no and no. you don't lose all that much with the d90, especially if you're not a sports shooter, but that said, if you can afford it the d300 is simply a better camera. for one thing the Af module is better -- the same in the d3 while the d90 has the d80's module -- not just the fact that it can go to 51 (which is often overkill), and there is reportedly less pixel-smearing at high ISOs.

[robert_hohlfelder]

I really enjoy my D300. I'm sure the D90 would be great, too, but I really like the solid feel and simple user

interface of the D300 (by "simple", I'm talking about things like dedicated buttons for white balance & ISO, and

no silly special modes). Before I had the camera, I assumed that the 51 autofocus sensors would be overkill, but

actually I find them to be useful: you've got an AF sensor pretty much anywhere you would want to place your

subject. I haven't had any issues with dust.

[rick_helmke1]

You have a ton of good affordable options here. What a great problem to have. After working with several at the same time I can say the D200 has it all over the D2H. Frankly I've often wondered why Nikon made it at all. The H has a faster frame rate but image quality on the D200 is better all around becoming very noticeable above iso 800.The D2X and Xs are excellent pro level bodies. Depends on your budget but a D200, D300 or D2X are all good choices. Strictly my opinion but N80/90 are more amateur oriented and I would not be as happy with them.

 

Rick H.

[dcraton]

Mark, this may sound a bit on the odd side, but having come up in the PJ world initially with Nikon film cameras then to sport and event photography in the 80's and now doing all of the above. . .besides being a great camera, I love how the D300 feels. It's almost like I have a Nikon F in my hands.

 

As to the NEF Compression, it works great if you need CF space or want to conserve HD space. I use it often.

 

The overall IQ and noise levels are superior straight out of cam on the D300. However, with good post a D200 can also be an excellent choice.

 

If you have the money, and certainly love a great image, the D300 will not only produce great images, but is built like a tank and is environmentally sealed (not waterproof) and works with virtually all Nikon glass which for me over years of collection, is a must.

 

And it just "feels" good in my hands.

 

Question for you, can you rent cam bods in your area for a day to try whatever you like? I am fortunate in that our local pro shop lets me take a lens or cam bod out on Sunday's as they are closed for trial and for testing for the store. It's a nice trade off. Just would be nice for you to get one of the many good suggestions in your hands.

 

Good luck.

[hutchinson]

I wish I had a place where I live to test out bodies, but the only camera shop/lab hasn't been very good to me the past few times I've gone there. The past two rolls of TMax 400 I got developed had chemical spots all over them and the second roll was overdeveloped (so contrasty it lost almost all detail). I also bought an FE-2 from there and it had problems from the start (I know it's an old camera, but still). I'm very attracted to the D300's Magnesium alloy body compared to the 90's polycarbonate, though, and the weathersealing is a huge plus.

 

I have a few old Nikkors I want to use with it too because they've been dear to me, especially my 100mm f2.8.

 

I'm leaning toward the D300 because of the build, speed, and high ISO cleanliness, I think. Looks like it's the best prosumer model out there right now. Thanks.