# Nikon d300 vs. Nikon d7000  HELP!



## picturephotos (Jan 9, 2012)

I currently have the Nikon D300, (not D300s).  I am wanting to upgrade but really am unsure which camera would benefit me the best.  I am an event sports photographer and also shoot portrait.  But mostly if it moves I shoot it.  My husband was thinking about the d300s but I, again, don't know if it's the way to go.  He wants us to shoot video.  I am a stickler for quality but can't afford the d3 range cameras.  And would not like to go to full frame.  Any help would be very welcomed.


----------



## CImages (Jan 9, 2012)

picturephotos said:
			
		

> I currently have the Nikon D300, (not D300s).  I am wanting to upgrade but really am unsure which camera would benefit me the best.  I am an event sports photographer and also shoot portrait.  But mostly if it moves I shoot it.  My husband was thinking about the d300s but I, again, don't know if it's the way to go.  He wants us to shoot video.  I am a stickler for quality but can't afford the d3 range cameras.  And would not like to go to full frame.  Any help would be very welcomed.



Check out www.dpreview.com and you can do side by side comparisons which might help you decide.


----------



## ratssass (Jan 9, 2012)

i do drag racing locally,and while i love my 7000 for stills,it is not a video camera...........review it...


----------



## MLeeK (Jan 9, 2012)

I'd probably go the way of the D3s, personally-but I am not a nikon shooter. I am a sports shooter.
As Canon shooter I am really liking my new crop sensor body for the extra reach over my 1D3. I would be looking at the same two you are. Isn't it looking like the D400 will be releases sometime this spring? I think I remember March for some reason. If it were that close, that's where my money would be going.


----------



## KmH (Jan 9, 2012)

No doubt the D7000 has a better image sensor, and excluding the just announced D4, has the best video cpability of any other Nikon, but the D7000 is still an entry-level grade camera that lacks many of the other Nikon prosumer camera features and functions that the D300 and D300s have.

But frankly, if you know so little about cameras that you have to ask, the change would likely be very close to transparent.

I agree with MLeek that waiting for the D400(?) is also an option. it would be very foolish of Nikon if the Prosumer grade D400 was not siginificantly more capable than the entry-level D7000.

The announcement of the D4 tells us some of the features the D800 and D400 will have;

I expect the D400 will have -
16.2 MP image sensor
EXPEED 3 image processor
91,000 pixel RGB metering sensor
Video capabilities very similar to the D4
etc.


----------



## cnutco (Jan 9, 2012)

Have you went to a store and put the D7000 in your hands?  It is smaller than the D300 and the controls are slightly different.


----------



## greybeard (Jan 9, 2012)

Entry level slr?  Magnesium body, Weather sealed.  Those arn't features I relate to entry level.


----------



## picturephotos (Jan 9, 2012)

I always research all the equipment I bring into my business.  Hence the D2H I choose in 2002 along with the 70-200mm 2.8.  For my 1st printer I choose the Canon 9000 series.  My choices have always been perfect but when I saw that the d7000 has video and the pixels are larger? I wondered if it would be worth my time inregards to offering video.  I apologize for asking for your research opinion.  I know it's up to me to make the right decision.  Thank you all so much,  Rita


----------



## MLeeK (Jan 10, 2012)

greybeard said:


> Entry level slr?  Magnesium body, Weather sealed.  Those arn't features I relate to entry level.


Yes, it really is "entry level" even though it's got more than the D5100/D3100 series. If you read and look at Nikon's alignment of cameras-straight from Nikon.
 Even though many many professionals are using them and the bigger professionals are taking them on as backup cameras. 
They're built as  mass appeal camera-the family shooter with money to spend will buy it as well as the semi-pro or avid hobbyist AND the pro who needs budget or good lower budget back up. It's pushing the D3100 to be a borderline bridge, the D5100 a family DSLR and the D7000 is an entry level, full function DSLR.


----------



## MLeeK (Jan 10, 2012)

picturephotos said:


> I always research all the equipment I bring into my business.  Hence the D2H I choose in 2002 along with the 70-200mm 2.8.  For my 1st printer I choose the Canon 9000 series.  My choices have always been perfect but when I saw that the d7000 has video and the pixels are larger? I wondered if it would be worth my time inregards to offering video.  I apologize for asking for your research opinion.  I know it's up to me to make the right decision.  Thank you all so much,  Rita



Don't defend asking. I am definitely asking opinions and having a hell of a time with my upcoming upgrade and I know equipment WELL. I have a 1d3 that I rarely use anymore. I have a 5d2 that I really love to hate. You are absolutely right to take a look at EVERY aspect and get opinions on it other than the technical specs. Specs are specs. Real life use is really different than what it "looks like" in specs. 
As a matter of fact I was dead set against the 7D which is now the camera I use most often. Why? The specs. Until I got one in my hands and discovered the abilities on it. I have cameras that are worlds better in specs than the 7D. I probably use it more than my 1d3. 
Rent the D7000 and see for yourself. My opinion still remains with the upcoming D400 in your situation, but that is ONLY based on the specs. If I had to actually  make the decision I now know (after MANY years) that I have to actually use a camera before making a judgement on it.

I actually had some of the much more advanced and big time pro shooters push me to use the 7D INSTEAD of my 1d3. We're talking the guys I get to shoot NFL with here. Not piddly little me shooting high school and college sports.



KmH said:


> No doubt the D7000 has a better image sensor, and  excluding the just announced D4, has the best video cpability of any  other Nikon, but the D7000 is still an entry-level grade camera that  lacks many of the other Nikon prosumer camera features and functions  that the D300 and D300s have.
> 
> But frankly, if you know so little about cameras that you have to ask, the change would likely be very close to transparent.
> 
> ...


Keith, I always respect your opinion and knowledge  because it is far more vast than mine and incredibly detailed. However, I  have to disagree with this one. 
As you see in my response above,  knowing the specs and what is appropriate on paper was everything I had  always based my own opinion on. 
It was in black and white right before my eyes and didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out, right? 
I  discovered that it was black and white in technicality, but in reality  there was a big difference. It took a good HARD push from someone who  knew the practical use better than I to change my mind.


----------



## matthewo (Jan 10, 2012)

Try both at a store and see which one suits you best.  Also price range.  I just ordered a d7000, in a year or so it can be my backup camera when every the d400 or d800 come out,  and cool off a bit in price

But then again i was a happy d5100 user that wanted a bit more features right now at an afordable body only price as i have a few nice lens already


----------



## KmH (Jan 10, 2012)

greybeard said:


> Entry level slr?  Magnesium body, Weather sealed.  Those arn't features I relate to entry level.


Nikon does! 

All Dxx and Dxxxx model numbers designate entry-level models. The D7000 _does not _have a magnesium body, it only has magnesium top and back panels. However, the D7000 is at the top of the entry-level lineup and has changed some of the expectations for an entry-level model.

Dxxx are prosumer models.

Dx are pro models.


----------



## cannpope (Jan 10, 2012)

The D7000 is a GREAT camera.  Can't compare it to the D300 because I've never used one.  Entry-level or not, it's still a good camera


----------



## Destin (Jan 10, 2012)

greybeard said:


> Entry level slr?  Magnesium body, Weather sealed.  Those arn't features I relate to entry level.



The D7000 is indeed nikons top of the line entry level dslr. Hence the Dxxxx designation rather then the Dxxx (semi-pro) or Dx/Dxx (pro).


----------



## Destin (Jan 10, 2012)

cannpope said:


> The D7000 is a GREAT camera.  Can't compare it to the D300 because I've never used one.  Entry-level or not, it's still a good camera




Thing is, once you pick up a D300 and spend a few minutes playing with it, the D7000 will feel like a toy afterwards. If I was accustomed to shooting with a D300, stepping down to the lighter, smaller, more plastic D7000 would be a VERY tough move. 

OP, I say wait a bit longer, I have a feeling the D400 is going to be an amazing camera. I also have a bad feeling it's going to cost somewhere around $2,200-2,600, because of the predicted $4k cost of the D800. 

Even though I know it won't happen, I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to see the D400 come out as a pro body style with the built in grip (ala D3 series), just with a DX sensor. There really is a need for a camera like that in the sports world, but I don't see it happening unless they release an additional DX model above the D400.


----------



## D-B-J (Jan 10, 2012)

Destin said:


> cannpope said:
> 
> 
> > The D7000 is a GREAT camera.  Can't compare it to the D300 because I've never used one.  Entry-level or not, it's still a good camera
> ...



I disagree.  I shot with a D200 for about two years, then upgraded to the D7000.  I can't complain.  Sure, without the grip, it was a "toy" compared to my D200.  However, with the grip on, and a 80-200 mounted, it's a great camera.  It performs well, has much better ISO capability, etc.  Granted, it's not a full magnesium-alloy body, as well weather sealed, and a few other minor things. But to be honest, I am glad i chose the D7000 over the D300s (that's what i was comparing initially).


----------



## Destin (Jan 10, 2012)

D-B-J said:


> Destin said:
> 
> 
> > cannpope said:
> ...



Performance wise it's an amazing camera. I personally could upgrade to it with no issues, because I shoot with a D80. However, I've used a D300s a few times, and shot all day with a friend's D700 once, and it was VERY hard to go back to my tiny D80 after that. If I shot every day with a larger camera, I wouldn't be able to make the switch comfortably I don't think. It's like going from a suburban to a prius.


----------



## iNNo (Jan 13, 2012)

Destin said:


> D-B-J said:
> 
> 
> > Destin said:
> ...



I just had to agree.


----------



## manaheim (Jan 14, 2012)

D-B-J said:


> Destin said:
> 
> 
> > cannpope said:
> ...



D7000 is like two generations newer than the D200, so it's almost unavoidably going to be a better performer in a lot of ways, but the D200 is going to be more rugged from the start and will likely have a few more features and physical capabilities.  Mind you, I'm talking partially out of my butt here because I haven't done a direct comparison because I am not in the D7000 market, but this is generally how it goes. 

I've played with a D7000 a bit and I was VERY impressed with the camera, the optical quality out of it, etc.  It's a REALLY nice camera.  I have to say that I was kinda floored by how comparable it was to my D300, and how in some cases it excelled over it.

That said, going from a D300 to a D7000 is kinda crazy.  Overall I'd consider it a lateral move.  Wait for the D400.  I expect it will be within the next 12-18 months.


----------



## Patrice (Jan 14, 2012)

Rita,

You say you photograph sports events and that you are not interested in full frame, so with that in mind I would humbly suggest you stay with your D300 for bit. The D7000, great camera that it is, is not designed to be a fast sport photographer's tool. Your D300 likely has better autofocus, a deeper buffer and after frame rate. Don't forget the better weather sealing if you work outside in unpredictable conditions as well as the stronger body and better button layout. The Nikon D220 - D300 - D700 series cameras are joys to work with for a working photographer.


----------



## Raphie (Jun 20, 2012)

"My choices have always been perfect but when I saw that the d7000 has  video and the pixels are larger? I wondered if it would be worth my time  inregards to offering video".


Remember that these two cameras are not really video cameras. Video is just one feature in them, and you don't need this feature quite as important as the camera's performance will offer you. You have no problem whichever of these cameras you choose because both can take better pictures at their respective top capacities. The issue is not which of the two can perform better. It is a matter of preference and personal choice, however, if you're really serious about photography and will dedicate yourself to the ways of how to take great photographs, you don't have to worry about your D7000 or your D300s. Comparing the two cameras on the other hand will not fare with your needs. Both cameras can give you great results for your job.


----------

