Nikon D7000 or D300 or D300s???

[smallfooties]

Hi all,
Just wondering, what's the natural progression from the D200?
I shoot mainly street, abstract, macro and some landscapes. Would like to be able to produce clear images in low light or night time. And i think being able to produce good low light images are a necessity for me now that i only have the evenings to do photography.
Yet, i don't want something with the video fxn or something with the flip screen...
Any recommendations will be appreciated. Thank yous!
PS: i'm not thinking of upgrading anytime soon... but would like to have the suggestions when i do want to upgrade.

[smallfooties]

oh i also hardly hear about the d2x... does anybody know much about this model? Thanks.

[I @ M]

The D2x is not the answer to your prayers.

As a natural progression from your current body, the only real benefits that you will see for the type of work that you want to do is the ability of current models to have superior low light / high ISO capabilities.
Whether you want it or not, video has become an integral part of the modern DSLR it seems so you will more than likely be stuck with it. Simple answer, don't use it and you will never know it is there.
Save as many dollars as you can on buying a new body to put towards better quality lenses to suit your needs.
Learn everything you can about photography and truly know that the D200 is holding you back, that part will probably take a while yet.
If you aren't thinking about upgrading any time soon, there is no clear answer to which current camera will do the job for you as that will change in the near future.

[kiwi]

I'd actually consider the d7000 or even the d700. Both have 2 stops better iso performance than the d300 and d300s and another two stops over any d2 series body

[Wayne]

You probably want something with good Hi-ISO ability, and the D7000 is the best of your noted bodies. I would further suggest the D700 which is better again, but given you have probably only got DX lenses, it adds cost to change over to FX glass.

If you are not upgrading anytime soon, then by the time you do, bodies like the D300/s will probably be obsolete and the D700 will be significantly cheaper. The D2x is a great body, but it doesn't have the ISO capability of the others mentioned.

[arthurking83]

Hi all,
Just wondering, what's the natural progression from the D200?
I shoot mainly street, abstract, macro and some landscapes. Would like to be able to produce clear images in low light or night time. .....

Definitely D7000.
As none of your requirements are speed related, then the better ISO ability of the D7000 is your best option.

Note tho; I've held the D7000 for long enough to know that with extended shooting, the lack space and comfort in the grip would drive me bonkers. The Dxxx series are far more comfy for handholding(D200 and D300's basically fare the same for me, both being a perfect fit for my hand size(not too large either). I found the D7000 physically too small for my taste.
If you have largish hands(would look weird on a person with small footies! :p) ... it may pay to go to a store and hold one far as long as the sales peeps will allow you too. Coming from a D200, you may find it small and uncomfortable.

As urgency is not an important factor for you, you may want to wait a few more months then for the D400. I can't imagine Nikon holding that model off too much longer, as the D7000 is going to be killing D300s sales for sure.. a far better camera in every respect save for one or two physical limitations.. such as speed of operation or memory banks or whatever other insignificant feature there may happen to be. D400 is sure to be released approximately mid this year I reckon. D300s is probably only a stopgap model, and may not live out it's full two year life cycle :confused013

[smallfooties]

Thanks guys for the replies...
yeah i was seriously considering the D7000... but since i'm not in a hurry... i'll wait for the next nikon installment!
D400 you say... hmm i'll wait for it to come out and see what it can offer...
and you're right, if i still wanted the D7000, the price would have dropped by then!
Patience is the key i think... lol
As for my lenses... i'm very happy with them...but that's maybe cos i don't know any better....
I have the sigma 10 - 20, sigma 105mm, sigma 18-50 and nikkor 28mm... Am i missing something here? Are there better lenses out there?

[peterb666]

The D7000 is probably the one to go for. It has dropped a little since being introduced. Your lenses are fine for what you want.

[RRRoger]

Thanks guys for the replies...
yeah i was seriously considering the D7000... but since i'm not in a hurry... i'll wait for the next nikon installment!
D400 you say... hmm i'll wait for it to come out and see what it can offer...
and you're right, if i still wanted the D7000, the price would have dropped by then!
Patience is the key i think... lol
As for my lenses... i'm very happy with them...but that's maybe cos i don't know any better....
I have the sigma 10 - 20, sigma 105mm, sigma 18-50 and nikkor 28mm... Am i missing something here? Are there better lenses out there?

Yes, they say "ignorance is bliss". :)

I really like my D7000 a lot more than a D200 or D300.
It fits my large hands and weighs less too.

However, If what you have is good enough, why upgrade?

You will probably not see a D400 in the store until Dec 2011.

[smallfooties]

The D7000 is probably the one to go for. It has dropped a little since being introduced. Your lenses are fine for what you want.

Just Fine? Not Great? Not Excellent?
LOL....
hmmm it has got me thinking now.... if there are better lenses out there! Please enlighten me!

[smallfooties]

Yes, they say "ignorance is bliss". :)

I really like my D7000 a lot more than a D200 or D300.
It fits my large hands and weighs less too.

However, If what you have is good enough, why upgrade?

You will probably not see a D400 in the store until Dec 2011.

Just wondering, does the d7000 top screen thingo have light? you know the one that shows you your exposure settings and mode? Words are failing me... tired from work so brain not working... I just realised today while shooting in the dark that the top screen doesn't light up... makes it quite difficult to see... but then i could always look through the view finder.. but old habits die hard... kekeke

[RRRoger]

Turn the on-off dial all the way to the right, it will light up the top screen.

There are lots of excellent DX lens e.g. 35mm f/1.8
The "Pro" FX lens are generally better but also bigger, heavier, and more expensive.
However, glass can be a good investment.
Most of my best lens are now worth more used than I paid for them new.

[lousha]

just a quick one there's a talk of the d800 if your not in a harry I'm waiting for it to arrive

[swifty]

I think if u stick with DX, going by the 'skip a generation rule' then the natural progression hasn't arrived yet. But since the D7000 up the ante so much you could consider that your upgrade if you're itching to buy (which you've said you're not).
If u consider FX then any FX offering will be an upgrade, especially low light.
Whilst I don't think your current gear is limiting at all, imagine what a D700 and 35mm/50mm f1.4 can do for you re: low light/street. But for landscapes u'll probably need to sell some gear and buy wider.

[RRRoger]

just a quick one there's a talk of the d800 if your not in a harry I'm waiting for it to arrive

So am I, but there is no promise from Nikon about if or when.

[smallfooties]

I think if u stick with DX, going by the 'skip a generation rule' then the natural progression hasn't arrived yet. But since the D7000 up the ante so much you could consider that your upgrade if you're itching to buy (which you've said you're not).
If u consider FX then any FX offering will be an upgrade, especially low light.
Whilst I don't think your current gear is limiting at all, imagine what a D700 and 35mm/50mm f1.4 can do for you re: low light/street. But for landscapes u'll probably need to sell some gear and buy wider.

I don't think i wanna upgrade to full frame...
I read somewhere that one can use a 35mm film camera if wanting full frame?
How wide do i need to go for landscapes?

[RRRoger]

[QUOTE How wide do i need to go for landscapes?[/QUOTE]

Depends on whether you want to stitch a Panorama.

On my D7000 I use an AF-S Nikkor 10-24 DX.
It is lite and compact for travel and hiking.
You will have to pay a lot more for better glass.

[quangsta]

patience is key but i think you'll b waiting awhile if you dont jump in and i think now isn't too bad of a time for the d7000. its new, price has come down abit and even if the d300 replacement comes out your not sure if the d700 will drop much cause the replacement is for a different camera in a different price range.

either way you always going to be playing catch up, especially with camera bodies even more so in the consumer range so dont worry too much. (so long as you can justify the purchase and still enjoy it or even more).

general pros for each
d7000-compact,lighter,2 sd slots, iso performance
d300s-ergonomics(size, handling, button location etc), af performance, fps, uncompressed raw( if you heavily photoshop will make a difference )

im missing alot of points but generally in my personal opinion d7000 for the hobbyist, d300/s for the enthusiast.

i would still prefer FX though :P

[swifty]

I don't think i wanna upgrade to full frame...
I read somewhere that one can use a 35mm film camera if wanting full frame?
How wide do i need to go for landscapes?
In terms of field of view and dof for a given lens, then yes FX essentially equals 35mm film. And 35mm film cameras are dirt cheap.
But of course you're loosing the convenience of digital and high iso capabilities and most importantly IMO the 'feel' of images recorded on film.
For myself, the 35mm film format doesn't justify the inconvenience of film. I tried for a while but it wasn't satisfying to me. Medium format on the other hand is immensely satisfying and the images then justify the inconvenience of film IMO.