# D90 > D300s -  Worth the upgrade ?



## F1RacerRR (Apr 13, 2010)

Hi  I currently own a D90 and am enjoying it.  However recently I have had a small windfall and am going to get myself the lens I always wanted (Nikkor 105mm 2.8 macro VR2) as I like macro stuff.  I also may get myself a wide angle lens like a 10-20 or 12-24 too.     But here's the thing.   Part of me really would like to take the next step up in camera too.  I don't really want to go as far as the D700 because its full frame and thats a whole new deal with lenses etc..    So the D300s is the one to fit the bill.   But my question is, does the D300s offer enough over the D90 to be worth the upgrade ?  Bearing in mind that I bought my D90 in a kit with the 18-105mm lens, if I were to sell it, I would have to do so with the lens.  So that means on top of the D300s body I would also have to get an all-rounder lens like the 18-200mm.  I could save the cost of that 18-200mm lens by keeping the D90 and using the 18-105mm on both.    My other lenses are the Sigma 70-300mm and Nikkor 50mm 1.8.  So what do you guys think ?  Is the 300s worth the extra ?


----------



## Newcastle Shooter (Apr 13, 2010)

The D90 is a blistering work horse of a camera. I have used it for a long time and love all the reasons I bought it for. Used a D300 - not D300s although both vsimilar - and found not a lot of (if anything) to upgrade for. Both camera at their ISO peak for DX bodies, they look perfect to around iso1000 then quite good to 1600. I simply couldnt see the benefit in extra money. So gave borrowed D300 back and waited and bought D700. 

The D90 is a great camera. I dont feel there is enough to justify an upgrade. If i were you I would sell the kit lens and invest in new lens - or wait and by D700 for full frame. I swayed between D90 and D300 for ages because of weather proofing on D300. Couldnt justify the price. Hope this helps.


----------



## Formatted (Apr 13, 2010)

Simply no its not! I would go straight to the D700.

The D90 has the same sensor as the D300 so not worth it!


----------



## Josh220 (Apr 13, 2010)

I came from a D60 to a D300 so the difference was IMMENSE. If I had gone with the D90 initially, I may not have upgraded quite as fast (I think I had my D60 for 2 or 3 months). Size, weight, build, etc are all much different, however as far as what you will get out of it, I don't think the difference is worth it for most people. You won't notice as much of a difference as you would with a new lens. I might put the money towards new glass and let the D90 wear out a bit more before you upgrade. Prices may come down in that time as well.

My D300 dwarfs my step-dad's D90 though. Really feels like a serious piece of equipment. 

So, do I think it's worth it? Probably not to the average user. Would I do it?- Yes.


----------



## IgsEMT (Apr 13, 2010)

D90 to D300s isn't much of an upgrade. IF you're looking for a 2nd Dx body to put D90 as a backup, then D300s is a way to go, if not, then go, if you can to D700.
My self, I have no need for Fx thus didn't go that way. I have both cameras and use them both extensively. D90, actually, my  wife uses b/c of its size (smaller and lighter) while I'm more on D300s.  IQ is both amazing in both high and low ISOs.
Good luck with your decision process.


----------



## KmH (Apr 13, 2010)

The big difference between the D90 and the D300/D300s is the auto focus module.

The D90 has 11 focus points but only the center one is a cross-type point.
(Multi-CAM 1000 AF module)

The D300/D300s has the Multi-CAM 3500DX AF that isthen DX half in the top-of-the-line D3S and D3X. It has 51 focus points of which 15 are cross-type points.

That alone is worth the upgrade.


Add 

14 bit uncompressed *or* 12 bit compressed RAW (D90 is 12 bit compressed RAW only)
9 auto brackets (D90 is only 3 auto brackets)
1/8000 shutter (D90 is only 1/4000)
Metal body (D90 is all plastic, don't drop it or hang heavy lens es on it (AF 80-200 f/2.8D), they rip the screws right out of the plastic: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...views/195718-broken-nikon-d90-lens-mount.html)
Weather sealing (None in the D90)
and many other bells and whistles.


----------



## IgsEMT (Apr 14, 2010)

I love discussions as such, definitely beats Nikon vs Canon 

KmH, I agree with everything you said on technical bases (can't fight that one  ) but one thing I'll disagree with you is the reasoning to upgrade & thats where I feel F1 is partially at fault  - he didn't say what he is shooting or wants to shoot.
If you're a sport shooter, then having a faster AF is definitely a plus. My self, I shoot weddings, I lock and recompose my shot and b/n D70, D200, D300, D90, D300s, (on Canons: 20D, 30D, 5D, 5DM2, 1dM2), never really shot using more then one centered AF point only b/c I lock the focus and recompose. 
So, F1R, goes really back to the point what you want to shoot. Here's a crazy example: _A body of mine, nut-case hobbyist, will argue till he turns blue that Nikon is best for sports thus he's been jumping from D100 to 200, 300 and now 300s AND Canon is best for in-studio portraits and been going from 40D to 50D and so far stayed on 5D. _I'm not telling you to go buy one brand for ONE thing and another for another, but keep in mind your cost & your purpose.


----------



## F1RacerRR (Apr 14, 2010)

Thanks for the replies people.

I suppose the common sense is to save the money that the D300s body would cost and buy a nice lens instead.   But when has common sense ever prevailed where hobbies are concerned 

KmH: Some good points there and sure makes the case.  If anything it would really be worth keeping the D90 if I choose to get the D300s. 

I'm not really up to getting the D700.  I have this sneaking feeling that Nikon are going to replace this very soon, maybe even before the end of the year.  The D700 is an oldie compared to the D90/D300s and some stockists even have it deleted off their lists now.   I know that means nothing, but I`d hate for fork out for the D700 and then Nikon announce a D700s or D800.   

IgsEMT:  This isn't really a Nikon vs Canon thing.  I'm sticking with Nikon and only focusing on (no pun intended) whether to bother with the D300s or not.
But I shoot pretty much everything.  People, landscapes, Close-ups/Macro which I like in particular.   I don't limit myself to a particular area.
Besides Im sure both Nikon and Canon are seriously good in all areas.
I dunno what made me go with Nikon in the first place.  Probably the yellow stitched strap .  

I think what I`ll do is visit the shop with all options open.  See what it all amounts to and if I want to give up the D90 to recoup some money back.  Then decide if to forego the D300s at the expense of a lens or not.  
But if I do buy a few lenses it makes it harder for me to upgrade to full frame in the future.  But I think I wont be doing that until or unless I start making money from photography.


----------



## Newcastle Shooter (Apr 14, 2010)

As a few have said - a really good debate  with some really interesting points. 

In as few words as possible - I would rather have a D90 with 3 good varied lenses than a D700 with the kit lens. I found the fun in the lenses! 

I started out with a D90 and 2 yrs on I still have it - and a growing wedding and event photography business too. I invested in a couple more lenses over the years and now have a D700 - simply because I needed the full frame for better ISO performance (now regularly shoot to 3200+ instead of 1600). But i only just bought that in the last month - so if you look at my site you will see every shot taken on my D90 with different lenses. Although KMH stated all the benefits to the D300s over the D90 - I dont feel they would have benefited me any way near as much as buying more lenses - which I did. 

I realise Nikon may stop the D700 soon - this also doesnt bother me in the slightest. Especially as i am on a budget and buy most things 2nd hand - D90, D700, 85mm 1.8, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, -> all used equipment - but all great equipment. As most/all hear agree, the D700 is really something and has new brought a lease of life to my passion for getting out and shooting. I realise some feel it neccesary to keep bang up to date, but not me. 

Oh, and the lens I went for knowing I would sometime go fullframe was the nikon 50mm 1.4 which was amazing on the D90, but blew me away on the full frame. 

Whatever you choose though, hope you enjoy it


----------



## IgsEMT (Apr 14, 2010)

F1, the only reason why I mentioned Nikon and Canon is to emphasize that some ppl might say that shooting something specific requires specific gear (like my body who shoots portraits only with Canon while sports with Nikon). I think Newcastle said it well regarding specific models.


----------



## F1RacerRR (Apr 14, 2010)

IgsEMT:  What you said about the Canon and Nikons and their use in Portraits and Sports respectively.   
Weird that you say that because I notice at all the F1 events that pretty much all of the photographers are using Canon's and it doesn't get much quicker than F1.

In fact it irks me a little to see so many Canon's everywhere when you see journalists and photographers on TV.   Its like Nikon is the photographic equivalent of Betamax


----------



## IgsEMT (Apr 14, 2010)

I'm just paraphrasing my nutty buddy. Advantage that I have is that I can dip into his lens collection (thats probably larger then B&H) and not worry that he won't be w/o specific lens. I'm a Nikonian, been that way since went digital and have *no regrets*. I can't comment on specific reasons why you see more Canons then Nikons, maybe they get better price from Canon rather then Nikon. As for IQ, if you send it to print to a REAL LAB and not your local pharmacy, you won't tell the difference b/n the two brands.


----------



## itznfb (Apr 14, 2010)

If the D90 is limiting you then yes the D300s is an amazing upgrade and 100% worth every penny. If the D90 currently fulfills your needs then no it's not worth the upgrade.


----------



## KmH (Apr 14, 2010)

F1RacerRR said:


> IgsEMT: What you said about the Canon and Nikons and their use in Portraits and Sports respectively.
> Weird that you say that because I notice at all the F1 events that pretty much all of the photographers are using Canon's and it doesn't get much quicker than F1.
> 
> In fact it irks me a little to see so many Canon's everywhere when you see journalists and photographers on TV. Its like Nikon is the photographic equivalent of Betamax


Someone made an image of all the area where all the photographers were stationed for one of the Superbowls, and it looked like it was just a sea of big, long, white Canon lenses.

They blew up the image and went back and counted all the white and black (Nikon) lenses.

There were more black ones than white ones in the image, they just weren't as noticable. :thumbup:

Sports shooters made a mass exodus from Canon here a couple of years back when Canon was shipping flagship, top-of-the-line, bodies with an AF system that didn't work.


----------



## IgsEMT (Apr 14, 2010)

> Someone made an image of all the area where all the photographers were  stationed for one of the Superbowls, and it looked like it was just a  sea of big, long, white Canon lenses.
> 
> They blew up the image and went back and counted all the white and black  (Nikon) lenses.
> 
> ...



thats funny
+1 for Nikon


----------



## ironsidephoto (Apr 14, 2010)

I have a D300s. Love it. (I also have the 105mm 2.8)

That said, spend your money on lenses.

Lens or Camera: A Guide for the Budget Minded


----------



## F1RacerRR (Apr 15, 2010)

So unless I throw caution to the wind it looks like I'll forego the D300s and invest in the lenses I want.

I have also looked at it this way...   If I sell my D90 at a decent price with its kit lens (18-105mm), then I have no camera.   So what is a great DX camera to buy?...hmmm  D300s looks tasty.  
Thats just my weird logic to justify it, hehe.    It will only end up costing me another £500 extra if I sell my D90 at what I want for it as I would be buying a new all rounder lens like the 18-200 anyway.

My idea was to sell the D90 with the kit lens and then get:-

D300s + 18-200mmVR 
105mm macro VR2
12-24mm  or 10-20mm wide-angle lens.

Also as I want to do macro a lot, a ring flash might be an idea also.


Anyway, at least now I know which way is the sensible way to go.  I'm not so much on a budget though but I don't want to go nuts at the same time.
A D3x would be nuts for example (for me anyway)


----------



## D-B-J (Apr 15, 2010)

Another thing to think of is secondhand equip.  I picked up my first dslr, a nikon d200, with an 18-135mm lens about 6 months ago.  Before, i was looking at getting the d5000, which is not half the camera of the D200.  And i am lovin it.  I also got a used 105m 2.8D micro and i love that lens too.  Definately can't complain about used camera gear.  Just make sure you know where it is coming from.


----------



## D-B-J (Apr 15, 2010)

Also, i have read from kenrockwell and other reviewers that the tokina 11-16mm is one of the BEST wide-angle lenses you can get for a nikon body. Even better than some of nikons for dx bodies.


----------



## F1RacerRR (Apr 16, 2010)

OK so I went shopping today and bought a couple of things.

Of course I was very tempted to go the 'Holy Trinity' route and just grab the 14-24mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm VR2 lenses along with my 105mm macro.

But I think I would have questioned my own sanity and common sense if I'd jumped in that far.   

So I settled on the 105mm f2.8/G IF-ED VR II macro and the 70-200mm f2.8/G ED VR II.

That set me back the price of a 2nd hand car but I know that lenses hold their value well should I ever decided to sell them on.   Needless to say, both lenses are super impressive and the 70-200 isn't one you carry around on your camera all day, thats a fairly heavy one!

I was almost going to grab the 16-35mm wide angle lens too but at the last moment decided not to as I didn't want to go too nuts in one day.

Anyway I guess I'm good to go for now so thanks to everyone who helped out and I guess I saved a bit too for not getting the D300s body and get the lenses instead.
Good thing is if I ever do move up to full frame, these lenses will all fully function there too.

Now lets see if I can enjoy these enough to justify the price tags


----------



## ghache (Apr 16, 2010)

F1RacerRR said:


> OK so I went shopping today and bought a couple of things.
> 
> Of course I was very tempted to go the 'Holy Trinity' route and just grab the 14-24mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm VR2 lenses along with my 105mm macro.
> 
> ...


 

omg, i wish i had the money to do that. oh well,


----------



## IgsEMT (Apr 16, 2010)

Enjoy the gear


----------



## Josh220 (Apr 16, 2010)

You are brave to go pay full retail at a store. I'm guilty of going to stores to feel the lens in person, then going home and buying from Amazon and B&H. It saves a few hundred dollars per lens; after a couple lenses you can buy another one with the money you saved.

How do you like the 70-200? I will be getting mine in the next few weeks hopefully. The 105 is on my list after the 70-200 and 24-70. I look forward to hearing your impressions!


----------



## F1RacerRR (Apr 16, 2010)

Josh,  actually I got the lens from the shop cheaper than it was on Amazon and I got a decent discount as I shop there for all my camera gear.

As soon as I get some good use out of it I`ll let you know how I get on.


----------



## Josh220 (Apr 16, 2010)

F1RacerRR said:


> Josh,  actually I got the lens from the shop cheaper than it was on Amazon and I got a decent discount as I shop there for all my camera gear.
> 
> As soon as I get some good use out of it I`ll let you know how I get on.



I wish the places near me would do that. They have a "Buy it at full retail or get out" attitude about their prices.

I'll be in one of them tomorrow comparing the 70-200 and 24-70 so maybe I will have better luck with the economy. Let's hope they're desperate


----------



## flea77 (Apr 16, 2010)

KmH said:


> Metal body (D90 is all plastic, don't drop it or hang heavy lens es on it (AF 80-200 f/2.8D), they rip the screws right out of the plastic: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...views/195718-broken-nikon-d90-lens-mount.html)



Hmmm, done both of those (dropped it, lug it around all the time with an 80-200 2.8D two ring or a 24-70 2.8) and never had a problem. Ditto with my D80. Bet that guy in your link dropped, tossed or did something with his backpack (he is a college student you know) with the camera in it, but that is just my guess. Wasn't he the guy who blamed his mother or something like that?

Allan


----------



## jeff000 (Apr 16, 2010)

My post is kinda moot at this point but I still want to add my 2 bits, lol. 



F1RacerRR said:


> So unless I throw caution to the wind it looks like I'll forego the D300s and invest in the lenses I want.
> 
> D300s + 18-200mmVR
> 
> Also as I want to do macro a lot, a ring flash might be an idea also.



I went from a D90 to D300s, and for me it was perfect, the weather seal alone was worth it really, but for what I do the D300 is a better camera. 

Don't go the 18-200 road though, its a nice tourist lens, but after using the lenses you bought the 18-200 would be a real let down. Its a great carry lens, and I thought it was a great all around lens, then I got my nikon 17-55 f2.8 and all of a sudden the 18-200 seemed to only produce images akin to my cell phone. My mom now uses that lens on my D90 body and loves it, but she uses it as a point and shoot for the most part. 


For macro I wouldn't go ring flash, ring flash is more suited to model/studio type work imo. 
The nikon R1C1 system is unbelievable for macro work, and even for product photography as long as its not to big. I used to use a 3 head system. I am almost all model shooting now and use a ring flash a lot in the studio for them. 
I like my SB-900 with 5 SB-600's for macro too, and for on location shoots. But the price is up there a fair amount more then the R1C1 system.


----------



## F1RacerRR (Apr 17, 2010)

jef000,  Yeah I read about the 18-200mm not being all that which is why I settled on the 70-200mm instead as I read nothing but good things about it.

Maybe today or tomorrow I will get a chance to go out and try this lens out proper.  I have messed around with the macro already with my SB-600 and its fine, although that R1C1 is the thing to have.  It's something I need to justify first though.   
Last night, indoors with my 105mm macro, I shot some grains of sugar, salt, did a coin etc.   Probably the usual stuff      Hard to nail that spot on focus though and even once when I use F/45 and F/57 the entire shot was not in focus.   Practice practice.    The coin came out well as did a Dremel wire brush that I had a go at.
Gotta get me some bugs now    I've seen some stacked macro shots on here that just blew my mind.   I know I need a rail system for that though.  Maybe later 

D300s isn't off the cards totally but I want to recoup some of the money I spent yesterday before thinking about that.   It just seemed that if big money was going to be spent, it was wiser to do it on value-holding lenses rather than another camera body.   As someone said, its the lenses that make the photo way more than the body does and that's the advice I went with.


----------



## jeff000 (Apr 17, 2010)

You are going to be very happy with your lenses. I only have the 80-200 f2.8 ED, but love the lens, I only ever use it in studio or outside in the sun at pretty fast shutter speeds so the VR wouldn't have been much use. But thats just my justification to myself to make myself feel like the $800 CDN I saved was a good choice, lol. And I really do know that for me the money was better spend on other things, but still can't help but admire the 70-200 VR. 

I found that used deals on the D300 can be had all over the place. Around here anyways the used D300's seem to all be under 5000 shutter actuations. So really still brand new. 
But half the retail cost. The poor economy has forced some great deals to be had by people that need to move their stuff fast. 


PS. for bugs try putting them in the freezer first, this depends on the bug but most look the same after freezing but won't run away on you while you take 50 different shots to figure things out. lol. 

Post up some of your favorites though as you learn.


----------



## F1RacerRR (Apr 27, 2010)

OK guys here are a selection from the first batch of shots that I took with my Nikon 105mm vr2 macro and a couple with the Nikon 70-200mm vr2.

DavidJW's photosets on Flickr

On this day I did use the macro lens far more I have to say    The 70-200mm is not the lightest thing in the world to be lugging around on your camera.

I did not have my tripod with me and with most of these shots I probably would have missed the opportunities by the time I had set it up.

So I shot handheld (resulting in many retakes to nail that focus point which is so narrow on the macro lens), using narrow apertures (one time at F57 !) and relying on the VR which I know doesn't kick in that much on macro stuff.

Ok so its all in my 'macro' set on Flickr plus the 2 bird shots in the Nature (Animal or Insect) set.

C+C welcome (or even leave a comment on my flickr if you are so inclined) but not too harsh eh ?  :hug::

Again, thanks to all for the invaluable feedback on this thread.


----------

