D300 or D300s?

[adam_jackson1]

<p>My D80 is dying, too many stuck pixels to count so I've decided to upgrade. The problem is I cannot decide whether or not the s is worth the extra $350 (average used) than the D300.</p>

<p>I shoot mainly events and general campus and nature photography (birds, landscapes, macro), backpacking/hiking. I like the idea of video but i think the novelty would wear off and i would be too busy to use it anyway, it also seems kinda gimmicky at this point? </p>

<p>From what i can see the only thing going for it is the quiet mode, slightly improved ISO performance, and an extra Sd card slot.<br>

Is it worth it? For me it would mean waiting longer and an extra $350 - 400 off of a 70-200 VR2.<br>

All input i can get is appreciated! </p>

<p>Adam</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Adam -</p>

<p>Only you can answer if the extra $350 is worth it...</p>

<p>For me - the idea of shooting video is something that I'm toying with, but not ready to make that leap yet. </p>

<p>The extra 1 or 2 stops doesn't paralyze me - D300 works fine.</p>

<p>The Extra slot would be nice, but only if it were another CF slot - I don't what to be carrying 2 different card types around in my pockets.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[ShunCheung]

<p>The fact that the D300S takes SD cards also means you can continue to use whatever cards you have for the D80. If you get the D300, do you need to buy new CF memory cards? If so, how much will you spend? That may narrow the price difference.</p>

<p>I think having video is a pretty big plus, especially if you shoot birds, etc. I very much would like to use that feature occasionally.</p>

<p>IMO there is no ISO performance improvement from the D300 to the D300S. There is a lot of myth floating in forums such as this one. Some people read sites such as DXO Mark and base their comments on their results. My own test results indicate that there is essentially no difference among high ISO results from the D300, D300S and D5000. I have never tested the D90, but since it uses practically the same electronics as the D5000, its high-ISO performance should be similar. My test results between the D300 and D300S is consistent with Thom Hogan's.</p>

[adam_jackson1]

<p>Thanks guys, that's helpful. Any comment on the quiet mode? is it really quiet?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>The quiet mode is fairly quiet, but it also slows down your frame rate.</p>

<p>I only tried the quiet mode on the D300S briefly, but I used that on the D3S to shoot my company event when our CEO was giving a talk, and it was very nice to have. If you shoot weddings, speeches, etc., that is a nice feature, not so useful at campus parties, rock music concerts ....</p>

[adam_jackson1]

<p>Hmm ok. Hard decision. </p>

[steven_p]

<p>D300 Nikon recon's were $1199. at Adorama a day or so ago. That was the price a year ago before the hike.</p>

[adam_jackson1]

<p>Brand new or used?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Recon means reconditioned. Some of those are returned and repaired while some are demos. You should be able to get a new D300S for about $1500. Then factor in whether you need to spend money on new memory cards or not. If the real difference is like $200 or so, you might as well get a new D300S.</p>

[photo5]

<p>D300 will shoot as good of photos as the D300s, but having that SD card slot may save your bacon one day. I'd buy the new D300s if you can afford it. It's a camera that is well worth the money in my opinion.</p>

[adam_jackson1]

<p>Thanks guys, I was looking at a review of the D300s and the videos of the wildlife were just too tempting for me. I think i'm going to go with the new one!</p>

[richard_reeve3]

<p>It's interesting to see the prices being mentioned. Here in Australia a D300s is now selling for less than what the D300 was 12 months ago.</p>

[anatole]

<p>The added SD slot is the best advantage. The video is not very worthwhile - I have a D300, but have used the D90 a lot, and I have to say the video quality is really quite poor (because of the "jello" effect and poor compression). The difference isn't like between the D3 and D3s - it is <em>very</em> small, to say the least.</p>

[adam_jackson1]

<p>The video may be poor, but for an amateur who wants to know if video is really something he's interested in, it should be good enough quality to play around with right? I've seen some pretty nice stuff with it, especially if it's locked down on a tripod most of the time...<br>

Richard, I feel sorrow for you down there, i lived there for 12 years and gear is soo expensive! Have to say though, some nice birds to shoot there.</p>

[matroskin]

<p>i got d300s about two months ago and have to say that the image and video quality are outstanding. here is just one example - <a href="

(watch it in HD) - all the night clips were taken at iso 1600 - HI. if you have too much jello in your videos you can pan slower to eliminate the effect. if you're at all interested in video i'd strongly recommend this camera. </p>

[adam_jackson1]

<p>Hey nice video, does anybody have any experience with vr lenses? does it improve it at all?</p>