D300 or D3?

[olrac]

I had my heart set on getting a D3 around about mid this year, it seemed like the next step from the D200 I currently have. But the D300 is proving to be that next step and the D3 a step up from that.

I have been disappointed with the noise levels from the D200 (probably a combination of user error and pixel peeping) so I thought get the best available - D3.

I can afford a d300 now(ish) or a d3 mid to late this year.

I mainly take urban landscape photos with some travel photography and I would like to get more into sports photography.

So what do I get from the D3 at more than 2 times the price of the d300?

I have my own thoughts on the matter but I would like to hear other opinions especially from those that have chosen either way.

[gstark]

Carlo,

Several have purchased one of each.

[ATJ]

Carlo,

I got the D300 because I could never justify the cost of a D3. The D300 will do most things I want.

You might find this of value: http://www.bythom.com/d3ord300.htm

[olrac]

Gary,

Both for me would be overkill I belive one can dream though.

ATJ,

I have read that before but I re-read it just now with a different mindset.
Still no closer to a decision though.

[methd]

i think they serve very different purposes, although many choose the d300 just for the price factor.

[gstark]

Carlo,

Both for me would be overkill

Of course it would. But what's your point?

[radar]

Carlo,

this new article may be of use to you:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/revie ... d300.shtml

HTH and good luck in your decision.

André

[shutterbug]

Get the D3

If you get the D300...there will always be a little bird in your mind saying "what if what if"

Vince

[methd]

i'm already drooling over the d3x.... i hope it's announced soon.

[Alpha_7]

Andre that was a very engrossing read, and something I shouldn't of read at work, but thanks for sharing.

[Nnnnsic]

Unless you have an arsenal of full-frame lenses AND see yourself making the money that 2-3 times the cost of a D300 warrants, get the D300 over the D3.

And then get the D3 when you've made enough money to be able to say "a D3 and a D300 is the best kit at the moment".

[jamesw]

IMHO, I would not purchase a D3 unless:

- You are in a situation where you recieve money for your work AND expect this money to pay the camera off within at least one year

or

- Money is simply no object.

At the moment I get paid for my work, but it's pretty sporadic and really can only be considered as 'money on the side'. I'd really only consider lashing out 6k on a camera if I was making 10 times that shooting photos... but that is just me.

[Oneputt]

I bought the D3 because I wanted to. What more is there to say?

[blacknstormy]

But it is the photographer that makes the shot - not the camera, right?
Having the best camera just makes it a little easier
But what do I know, I've still got the original d70  LOL

[Oneputt]

So true Rel so true, but I like my toys

[gstark]

I bought the D3 because I wanted to. What more is there to say?

Should I now lock this thread?

That is simply the best reason, and it's why I bought my D300.

[petermmc]

Its hard to buy into these discussions when need and desire clash.

Having said that, get a D300 and then a D400 in less than 2 yrs time and you will still be in front in terms of cost savings over a D3.

The D3 is a pro camera. If you are a pro or an aspiring pro or want to look like a pro then get one. Personally, I would wait for a while as they too will become cheaper and a higher megapixel model will also appear this year or next year.

Alternatively, stop taking photos in low light with your D200 and half your problems are solved. Daylight saving surely counts for a few f stops and it is free. Between December and March, the D200 becomes a D265 anyway

I am sure this all helps.

Other thought. Get a D300 and the money you save, go on a world tour and take some decent photos.

[sirhc55]

Its hard to buy into these discussions when need and desire clash.

Having said that, get a D300 and then a D400 in less than 2 yrs time and you will still be in front in terms of cost savings over a D3.

The D3 is a pro camera. If you are a pro or an aspiring pro or want to look like a pro then get one. Personally, I would wait for a while as they too will become cheaper and a higher megapixel model will also appear this year or next year.

Alternatively, stop taking photos in low light with your D200 and half your problems are solved. Daylight saving surely counts for a few f stops and it is free. Between December and March, the D200 becomes a D265 anyway

I am sure this all helps.

Other thought. Get a D300 and the money you save, go on a world tour and take some decent photos.

I totally agree. I still use a D2Hs professionally because it does the job I require of it and I can afford the D3

[ATJ]

As I said previously, the D3 was never really an option for me as I couldn't justify the cost and I didn't even consider it. Even if I had the money, I probably wouldn't buy the D3 for the following reasons:

* If I had that amount of spare cash, I'd rather invest in lenses, especially long lenses as I don't currently have any
* If I got a D3, my DX lenses would limit it's value (see below) and I'd probably have to buy new FF lenses
* Ikelite don't make a housing for the D3 so instead of getting away with a US$1350 housing, I'd be spending more than US$3000 for a housing and all the accessories (lens ports, etc.) that I already have for Ikelite

The FF versus DX issue causes me some limitations.

The D3 at FF has a sensor that is 36 x 24mm and produces an image at 4,256 x 2,832 pixels. But when in DX format, it is 24 x 16mm and 2,784 x 1,848 pixels.
The D300 has a sensor that is ~24 x 16mm and produces and image at 4,288 x 2,848 pixels.
My old D70 has a sensor that is ~24 x 16mm and produces and image at 3,008 x 2,000 pixels.

Now I know pixels aren't everything, but the more you start with, the more options you have for printing and cropping.

If I had a D3 and I used a DX lens on it, the resulting image would actually be smaller than what I used to get with my D70. Yes, the image quality will be better, but if I want to sell images (and I do), I would have to do even more interpolation that I had to do with the D70. The same lens on the D300 gives me a much bigger image than the D70 and with better IQ.

Even with my best FF lens (the Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D), I would lose out. The lens is capable of a reproduction at 1:1 (which really only has true meaning on a film camera, but is still useful for the discussion). If I was to take a photograph of a caterpillar that was 20mm long at the closest distance for the lens, it would nearly fill the frame on the D300 and the resulting image would be around 3,550 pixels long. Doing the same thing with the D3 would result in filling only around 2/3 of the frame and the resulting image would be less than 2,400 pixels long.

The same sorts of calculations will play out for just about any lens. I guess the only real value would be in wide angle and ultra-wide angle - which I don't use much.

So for me, and the sorts of photographs I take, I don't see a lot of value in a full frame camera. In fact, it would actually be a disadvantage from the D300.

[methd]

looks like u 'need' a d3x

[olrac]

The only DX lenses I have are the 18 -200 and the 10.5 fisheye.
I sold my 17-55 just prior to the release of the 14-24.

I am almost leaning towards just getting a D300 and a 14-24

It will certainly make a nice light travel kit (with the aforementioned dx lenses)

Thanks everyone for the comments.
While I probably can afford to wait and get the D3 it makes more fiscal sense to get a d300 and perhaps later a second hand d3 sometime in the future.

[Yi-P]

IMHO if you are earning your breads through a camera, you should get a D3. If you are earning so much that you wouldnt care if you spend $6k+ on a toy, go for the D3. Else, stick with the D300 and buy new FF glasses with the left-over.

FX sensors will be coming more available and cheaper over the time. By the time you saved up for a D3, there might be a D400 announcement that it will have a FX sensor inside with the small-ish body.

Its about buy it now, or get the newer one. Once you wait, you hear something new, you'd be craving for the newer one again. Then, when should you buy? NOW