Storing D300

[al_mar]

<p>I have been amazed how helpful everyone is in this Forum: Matt, Elliot, Shun, Kent, Lex, I could go on and on. Your knowledge and , most importantly, your patience in helping us is incredible.<br>

I have had a D300 for about six years or so and like many others forever waiting for the D400. I thought the wait would be easier by purchasing a D7100 with the discounts that were recently available on them. I wish I had done it sooner. I think I can very easily wait all the way to the D500 now!<br>

My question is how best to store the D300. I don't want to sell it-too good a friend these many years. I never needed a back up body with it. I am hopeful for the same with the D7100. Should I wrap it up in a pillow case and put it on a shelf? Should it be "fired" a few times every month? Should it have a lens attached to it or a body cap is enough? Keep a battery in the camera? Etc?<br>

Thank you for your advice.</p>

[howard_m]

<p>double ziplock bag w/ desiccant pod, no battery, body cap. Exercise it every while and generally leave the battery 1/2 full (do not store it full or empty)</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Like Howard said, best to put it in the plastic bags on a low-humidity day (but, do put a dessicant in there). Don't store the battery in the camera, put it in it's own bag. I'd run the camera a couple times a year.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>The electronics inside your D300 is not going to get any newer. If you are not using it, the best way to "store" it is to turn it into cash while it is still worth something. Should you want another D300 a few years down the road (not sure why), you can always buy another one at some dirt cheap price.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Shun is famous for his sentimentality. :-)<br /><br />That said, I tend to agree. My D300 has been largely put out to pasture. It was a true workhorse for me for a long time, but I'm shooting almost all FX now, and when I want a second body along I prefer something that can also do some video if it needs to. Believe it or not, the modest little D3200 has been a better fall-back body in that sense. It's small, can grab some pretty tolerable video if I need it, and its little sensor actually is better than the D300's. Of course it has a tiny viewfinder, a dim penta-mirror, and an autofocus system that's roughly as good as a potato ... but it's small, cheap to the point of being almost disposable if I get caught out in the rain, and except for a couple of screw-driven lenses I've still got (which still work, with manual focus), can use all my glass.<br /><br />Point is, keeping the ol' D300 around (and that D200 ... really, Matt?) is pretty questionable at this point. I'd be better off with another second FX body (which I can always use in DX mode if I'm feeling nostalgic!), and let that D300 keep someone else company. It still makes good images. But I can make better ones, more easily, with other equipment these days. I'm trying not to be a big softy about it, like Shun.</p>

[User_6502147]

<p>Unless you wish to collect this rig, I'd just sell it and go on to more advanced cameras. You could be needing assistance to get across the street by the time you see the D400...and speculating about it is similar to expecting Nikon to update/advance on D700...it went on for years - not wishing to start war. Just saying...</p>

<p>You can install it in a glass case w/desiccants...take out the battery and look at it daily....but is this what you really want ?</p>

<p>Les</p>

[SCL]

<p>Send it to me - I'll make sure it gets lots of exercise :)</p>

[Two23]

<p>I agree with the idea of selling. Otherwise, it's just sitting there further losing value. I've been selling off tons of photo gear I don't use, for the past month or so. It's just money tied up, depreciating. Most of the money was put into the very best lenses available that I now use constantly.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[Rick Helmke]

<p>Don't feel too bad, I'm still rocking along with a couple of D200's. They still do everything I want them to do. I just can't get interested in the 4 digit series of cameras, I guess it will be full frame for me next.<br>

<br />Rick H.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Don't feel too bad, I'm still rocking along with a couple of D200's. They still do everything I want them to do.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Until you get your first E lens.</p>

<p>I still recall that at the end of the 1990's, AF-S used to mean expensive super-telephoto lenses; at the time AF-S was almost a status symbol. The affordable first version 24-85mm/f3.5-4.5 AF-S in the beginning of this century changed that almost overnight. All of a sudden every new lens is AF-S G. I would imagine that in a few years, every new Nikon F-mount lens is going to be E.</p>

[User_5050610]

<p>Al--I say keep it. You've taken a lot of good pix with it and it means something to you. Take out the battery and put it in the drawer in your air conditioned home. What's it worth? 300 dollars? That's what they're going for down here. Not really worth the effort to sell it. Take it out occasionally and marvel at the build quality and take some more pix. Keep it--you can't go wrong. Just my view...<br>

Paul</p>

[michael_bradtke]

<p>I still have my D300 and D300s. For that matter I still have my D2h. I use the D300s when I need a second shooter and the camera they have will not keep up with the action. I use the D2h when I am placing a remote camera in harms way. </p>

<p>If you are going to keep it and not use it bag it with desiccant and no battery. Pull it out stick a lens on it and a battery in it and shoot it once in a while.</p>

[pcnilssen]

<p>I kept my D70 for sentimental reasons when I bought my D300 ages ago. I thought I could use it as backup, but also because I wanted to place it on the shelf, look at it, and let the thoughts flow...<br>

Have I needed it for backup? No.<br>

Have I really looked at it, and been sentimental? Well... Maybe...<br>

I tried to sell it dirt cheap this fall. No one wanted it...<br>

I sold the D300 when I bought a D700 a year ago. I still got some money for that, and I have not regretted one minute for selling it.<br>

Lesson learned. Take a photo of your D300, and look at that image if you want to be sentimental. You will probably not need your D300 as a backup, and as Shun and others say, get some money for it while you still can. </p>

[jose_angel]

<p>I`m not so sentimental, too (specially with electronics!). I cannot use two cameras at a time, and while it is a good idea to have a backup camera, if you`re not planning to use it, I`d just get rid of it. If you don`t mind to have an expensive paperweight (I don`t know how much a D300 is this days), just keep it around to exercise the shutter and charge the battery from time to time.<br /> <br />I`m not so nostalgic with electronics. There will be always better choices on the market. My extremely expensive Hi-Fi system has been crushed with a relatively cheap iPad and a quite simple speaker system. Same with TV screens. Same with video cameras. Same with anything based on electronics. And for the same image quality, technology will be always cheaper. Unless you were a collector, a digital camera carefully buried on the closet is just space and money wasted. I consider myself very nostalgic for some topics, but I must admit that in my experience, (almost all) latest technology has always been much better... (If we need it or not, is another topic! :).</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Actually I am quite sentimental. I hung on to my D300 for quite some time, but in the first year after getting my D700, it came out of the bag once. It makes no sense to just have it somewhere doing nothing. Friends were looking for a camera, so I lent it to them "on trial"; they've been using it since, and recently given a right opportunity, I gave it to them finally (as long as they share the results with me every now and then). And I feel happier than ever with my D300, because I know it's being used by people that appreciate and enjoy it as I did, and I get to see their photos which I always appreciate.</p>

<p>The D300 is still a top APS-C camera, and it should be out doing what it does so well: making pictures. It's not a collector's camera (nor will it ever be, I think), even if you are into collecting cameras. So, make sure it finds a good new home, and keep it going.</p>

[Richard Williams]

<p>The D300 has already lost around 75% of its original value, so it'll probably depreciate a bit more gently over the next couple of years. The thing about backups is you never know when you'll need one, so it comes down to how much having one around is worth to you. If you have the grip (they're cheap if you don't) you also have a camera that can do 8fps, significantly higher than anything short of a D700 or a single digit body can manage even today (and possibly why the D300s is still a current model in some markets). Combine that with image quality that is still excellent at middle ISOs (if you're not cropping too hard), and it's still a very capable body.</p>

<p>As for storage, be careful with plastic bags and dessicants - only use a dessicant with indicator so it can be replaced or baked when exhausted. I suspect some types of polymer may react with the rubber grip material over time (I got 'sticky' grips after prolonged storage of a couple of Nikon bodies in a closed camera bag over time). In fact Nikon cautions against storing 'camera cases' in plastic bags in its own recommendations, which are worth a look:</p>

<p>http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/16567/~/caring-for-your-camera-equipment---part-i---proper-care-and-storage</p>

<p>As Nikon notes, take out the battery for storage, but fire up the camera every month or so and excercise the shutter a few times.</p>

[john_harper9]

<p>With all that can go wrong with electronic+mechanical wonder DSLRs, a backup body on hand is a good thing. My D800 is off for repair and I'm using my D300. I still use the D300 for stitching and 360 degree pano work where huge image files slow the post processing.</p>

[arthur_smith1]

<p>Forgive me if this sounds rude, but, "store" a D300? DSLR bodies, even the most expensive ones, will not become collectible, like an F, F2, F3, FE/2, etc. I'd say just shoot it until it shoots no more. It will not be a sought after shelf display piece, neither will any DSLR. <br>

In my eye, Nikon DSLR's really have not changed in appearance in years- they all look the same. If you want to collect, start buying some of their vintage film bodies. I love them.</p>

 

[arthur_smith1]

<p>PS- I disagree with the suggestion of putting it in a plastic bag with desiccant. White it is an electromechanical camera, there are oils and lubricants that will indeed dry up over time, faster when stored this way. I would say that if you store it in your bag, and fire it occasionally, you should be fine. Really no need to overengineer a solution here.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>+1 to the advice to "use it or lose it". But as a back up it's probably worth more than what you'll get for it in cash.</p>

<p>Sentimental attachment? That's what the pictures you've taken with it are for surely?</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>If I'm not using something, I sell it.</p>

<p>It's not a backup if you're asking the questions you are, at least it's not a backup "on the job".<br>

<br /><br />Digital SLRs are not collectible. When it starts to fail to work, it'll be unrepairable at some point and then just trash. And if it sits unused, one day it just won't work anymore.</p>

<p>Better to sell it to someone who will use it NOW.</p>

<p>Sentimental attachment to a camera? Not here.</p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>I second the idea of selling, especially when it looks like you have everything together now. I would sell all my unneeded equipment as soon as I have the time to get them all together (hopefully within this year), such as identifying and assembling the attachments and accessories (manuals, software, boxes, etc.) together. I still have F100s and F6, other cameras and equipment to sell, not to mention the D300 bodies with extra chargers, batteries, ... </p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Not ready to sell my D300 bodies quite yet (I did sell off the battery grips) - even though for my shooting, they are largely replaced by a D7100, D700, and Sony A7. My lower-mileage one has been handed down to my wife - which is essentially the same as putting it in storage as she is a very infrequent shooter. My higher mileage one will serve as a backup for the time being - I don't expect it'll fetch more than $250 if I sold it now - and it might join my F3 and her F100 on the cabinet shelf one day.</p>

<p>It has been tempting to sell the two D300 bodies and pick up a second D7100, especially with the prices dropping in November and December 2014 (not even considering a D7000). Right now I am more inclined of waiting for the D7200 and perhaps then let the two D300 go (though I won't be purchasing a new Nikon body for at least 6 months after the release date) - probably the last instance to do so. So here is to Nikon presenting a convincing D7200 that's worth upgrading from a D7100 to.</p>

[sebastianmoran]

<p>Shun, pardon my ignorance, but your comment on "E" lens? Assume you are talking about the new 300mm f/4E. Is your high expectation for E for Electronic Diaphram? Or for the Fresnel Lens?</p>

<p>OP, I keep my old cameras, probably for far too long. My D70 came out of the drawer last year when I attended a wedding and didn't have a better camera around. Made good images. My D300 comes out now for use with AF long lenses for shooting birds. I think the AF is still better than my D600.</p>

<p>Keep old digital cameras? Their value is so low. Their value to me as a sometimes shooter is more than what I get from selling.</p>

<p>On the other hand, selling early, after just a year or two, will get you reasonable money. My best was buying a used D200 for $650 and selling it after a year of good use for $500, net cost $150. I say, either sell early or keep forever.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>E lens: Electromagnetic diaphragm mechanism - currently only the PC-E lenses, 800/5.6E, 400/2.8E, and 300/4E PF.</p>