I'm currently using D90 mist of my lens are FX, im having a hard time deciding on weather should i upgrade to a D300s or D700, im into nature photography and also i do alot of indoor shoots where there are very low lights, the D90 im using is kinda grainy when i set my iso 500 and above, therefore prompted to upgrade. pls advice.
D300s or D700
- Thread starter blackchua
- Start date
- Status
Since you already have FX lens, I would suggest D700. You can see from the threads that guys that bought D700 are loving it to bits.
Some more you shoot in low light, D700 will definitely do a better job.
Upgrading from D90 to D300s for ISO performance improvements makes no sense, the ISO performance for both cameras is on par. ISO-wise, your choice is clear, it is D700
D90 to D300s only makes sense if you are going to do a fair bit of outdoor rough weather shooting or if you are going to use a lot of legacy lenses. Or if you need the fast fps or very fast on-you-toes shooting.
Apart from that, there are no differences in IQ or ISO performance whatsoever.
Apart from that, there are no differences in IQ or ISO performance whatsoever.
Dude, people have given you all right choices related to High ISO / Lowlight performance etc. There's one important thing that you've to consider, since you mentioned that you're into nature photography, can you elaborate a little more? If it's more of landscapes, you'll definitely enjoy the full frame option. However, if you're into wildlife or birdwatching, you will miss the extra reach available on APS-C.
Get the D700 when you're ready to buy. Not worth believing rumours and waste time waiting...
If is not too heavy for you, D700 (or any FX model) is a better choice, but if is not in the hurry, I would suggest wait and see, Nikon should be announcing the Replacement model for D700 soon, after comparing than deciding what to buy.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kskong/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kskong/
D700 can easily shoot at iso800 with no penalty of noise what so ever....
plus it is full frame, you can't go wrong with this camera
plus it is full frame, you can't go wrong with this camera
If you have issues with noise on the D90, then I do not think you'll fancy the D300s either. Consider the D700 if you have the cash.
I 'upgraded' from a D80 to a D300 then to a D700.
After using the D700 for 6 months shooting what I am shooting with the D300... no significance difference.
I am paying for what I would say... a misconception in my ego where I see 'injustice' in many people upgrading to FX just to shoot XMM in cosplays and carshows. ;p
However, an FX camera will give an added advantage amongst your peers when you shot indoors.
My Wedding and Event shots have changed since.
One change to my shooting of nature is that I am dead confident to shoot at ISO 1600 on my MF 500mm without tripod at shady forest daytime without the fear of getting a blur image.
I am sure you will hear more good stuffs of the D700.
Cheers!
After using the D700 for 6 months shooting what I am shooting with the D300... no significance difference.
I am paying for what I would say... a misconception in my ego where I see 'injustice' in many people upgrading to FX just to shoot XMM in cosplays and carshows. ;p
However, an FX camera will give an added advantage amongst your peers when you shot indoors.
My Wedding and Event shots have changed since.
One change to my shooting of nature is that I am dead confident to shoot at ISO 1600 on my MF 500mm without tripod at shady forest daytime without the fear of getting a blur image.
I am sure you will hear more good stuffs of the D700.
Cheers!
Own both of these bodies now and having used a D90 previously, my suggestion is to keep the D90 and get a 2nd hand D700 for that super duper high ISO performance. IMO D90 is slightly better than D300s in ISO performance.
This way you can still enjoy the nature shoots during the day and indoor /low light shoots after dark.:lovegrin:
D700 is the one to go since you already have FX lenses. Unless you want to have the video feature of the D300s.
there are still reasons to stay on crop body, you need much lesser light to get more depth, basically you can shoot at f8 to get the same depth as f11 or so, save a lot of batteries on lighting, also can reduce carry load by renting or buying smaller powered strobes if you are on location.
you could do this on FX body as well, but then unless you are using d3x, you will lose a lot of megapixel which is a problem when you are doing stocks.
you could do this on FX body as well, but then unless you are using d3x, you will lose a lot of megapixel which is a problem when you are doing stocks.
as what others had mentioned, the D90 to D300s will not see you any valuable improvement on ISO peformance.
for nature photography, the crop factor on the D300s will be good to have
for ISO performance, the FF sensor on D700 helps alot (the D700 is one hell of a high iso performer)
weigh those 2 factors and see which is more important to you
do not bother with the D700 replacement rumors, it started since last year nov when i bought mine!
for nature photography, the crop factor on the D300s will be good to have
for ISO performance, the FF sensor on D700 helps alot (the D700 is one hell of a high iso performer)
weigh those 2 factors and see which is more important to you
do not bother with the D700 replacement rumors, it started since last year nov when i bought mine!
- Status
Similar threads
