Nikon D90 or D300 ??

[boyboy]

Because of its resolution and sharpness, slight handshake ruins the entire pic.

ditto for d90 :think:

 

[Anson]

ditto for d90 :think:

As he is comparing between D90 & D300.... D90 have more features suitable for beginner than D300....

 

[boyboy]

As he is comparing between D90 & D300.... D90 have more features suitable for beginner than D300....

no dispute there. just that i wonder in what way can D300 have "higher res" than d90. both shd be equally sharp. or maybe d90 would appear "sharper" cos d300 has less sharpening by default (as compared with D200)

sharpness would be more of the lens and in-camera sharpening settings la.

and yes, d90 will be much better for beginners. in fact, unless one is siao about sports, d90 is more than good enuff for the DX range

 

[SabaDen]

Definately the D90.
The D300 has only 4 options while the D90 has lots more..
HAhaha...

To this, from experience, go for the D300 ... I'm using D80 and later on D300. IMHO, the D300 with the lesser options, it gives me no choice but to learn to make MY own options for diff pics ... this helps me to leap further faster in my learning curb in this lovely hobby.

 

[brenton]

Am using a D70s now...

wanna upgrade my body for better IQ at higher ISO,

Tempted to go D90 but some recommend D300...

Other than being faster and having 51 focus pt,
Do i really need the extra features of D300 if i plan to use it to taking wedding photos/events?

Considering if i am using it as my main body for wedding photography, is it really better to go "Pro"?

I dun consider myself a beginner, but yet i am not a pro....
so it's a very hard choice for me...plus the 600 bucks difference can get me another decent lens.....

Help anyone?

 

[David Kwok]

Am using a D70s now...

wanna upgrade my body for better IQ at higher ISO,

Tempted to go D90 but some recommend D300...

Other than being faster and having 51 focus pt,
Do i really need the extra features of D300 if i plan to use it to taking wedding photos/events?

Considering if i am using it as my main body for wedding photography, is it really better to go "Pro"?

I dun consider myself a beginner, but yet i am not a pro....
so it's a very hard choice for me...plus the 600 bucks difference can get me another decent lens.....

Help anyone?

The more $ u spend, the more features and better quality system you get. That's a hard fact that will never change. Of course, there are time where GOOD is subjective and GOOD is dependent on your photography characteristics.

No one can tell you whether you should go PRO or not. Seriously PRO has different definition for individuals too. For me, PRO is someone who treat photography has a rice bowl, he/she lives and die with it. That's PRO.

Having a good equipment doesn't makes you a PRO. It just means you are willing to part with your $ to equip with better grade equipment that enable you to function at more critical environment with better performance and better image quality that entry consumer grade equipment will not be able to accomplish.

That 51pt focus point is not a winning citerion to good wedding photos. First and foremost, the eye behind the lens make it so. Secondly wedding photography falls under slow action characteristic and therefore having alot of focus points doesn't make it a winner.

D300 is definitely of higher class than D90, given that it is easily identified based on the price range and the built and features of the body. I pointed this out mainly based on the equipment features. I don't comment on who is using it. If anyone here can make better pictures using D90, I comment on his/her skill, not the equipment.

What we often see in wedding photography is about composition, low light at some moments and good DOF control using good lenses. So in my humble opinion, which camera used really makes little differences. DX has been around for quite awhile and alot of works are done based on it, so going full frame really ain't going to make alot of differences except for better IQ. Higher pixels ain't going to impress most because of the output being merely on screen or 4R pictures.

But perhaps you wanna ask deeper, are you only going to use your gear for wedding and nothing else ? If not, what percentage of usage do you forsee ? 80% wedding + 20% something else ?

If you feel you are doing it as a hobby, wedding as a supplement to your pocket $ and nothing really surviving on it, then perhaps you might wanna consider enjoying the moments behind the lens with satisfaction rather than aiming for wedding purpose. I will say both can function just nicely for wedding. Having a full frame or better equipped gear is a bonus, not a factor in your wedding photography purpose.

My 2 cents worth.

 

[brenton]

The more $ u spend, the more features and better quality system you get. That's a hard fact that will never change. Of course, there are time where GOOD is subjective and GOOD is dependent on your photography characteristics.

No one can tell you whether you should go PRO or not. Seriously PRO has different definition for individuals too. For me, PRO is someone who treat photography has a rice bowl, he/she lives and die with it. That's PRO.

Having a good equipment doesn't makes you a PRO. It just means you are willing to part with your $ to equip with better grade equipment that enable you to function at more critical environment with better performance and better image quality that entry consumer grade equipment will not be able to accomplish.

That 51pt focus point is not a winning citerion to good wedding photos. First and foremost, the eye behind the lens make it so. Secondly wedding photography falls under slow action characteristic and therefore having alot of focus points doesn't make it a winner.

D300 is definitely of higher class than D90, given that it is easily identified based on the price range and the built and features of the body. I pointed this out mainly based on the equipment features. I don't comment on who is using it. If anyone here can make better pictures using D90, I comment on his/her skill, not the equipment.

What we often see in wedding photography is about composition, low light at some moments and good DOF control using good lenses. So in my humble opinion, which camera used really makes little differences. DX has been around for quite awhile and alot of works are done based on it, so going full frame really ain't going to make alot of differences except for better IQ. Higher pixels ain't going to impress most because of the output being merely on screen or 4R pictures.

But perhaps you wanna ask deeper, are you only going to use your gear for wedding and nothing else ? If not, what percentage of usage do you forsee ? 80% wedding + 20% something else ?

If you feel you are doing it as a hobby, wedding as a supplement to your pocket $ and nothing really surviving on it, then perhaps you might wanna consider enjoying the moments behind the lens with satisfaction rather than aiming for wedding purpose. I will say both can function just nicely for wedding. Having a full frame or better equipped gear is a bonus, not a factor in your wedding photography purpose.

My 2 cents worth.

Hi David,

Thanks for your advice. Really appreciate you writing such a long comment. Since i am not relying on it as an income, i should just push my d70s to its limit and enjoy the moments shooting the couples.

Of course i also take my camera out for casual shooting too. Guess i shall wait for d90 to drop further in price before upgrading my body. The money saved on the body would allow me to purchase more lens for all kinds of shooting.

Thanks a lot again

Brenton