D300/D700 Updates?

[Wodge]

Hi there,

I know that this is something of a rumour shot in the dark, but wondered if the Nikon experts here might have some inside info!

I am considering an upgrade to my current camera, and the two contenders are the D300 and D700 (and yes, I am still balancing the needs and wants!). However, I don't want to make a call and find out the model is due to be replaced in short order. For example, I seem to think that I have heard something about a D300 update.

Any opinions most welcome (including those who believe I should just go with what is available, whichever one I choose). Honestly, this is getting as complicated as the PC upgrades!

Thanks,

Paul

[IvorETower]

There have been rumours of a D300 replacement for some time. Originally from what I have read on the internet, it should have been announced about 6 weeks back however it hasn't been, and we have had the D5000 announced instead.
I am hoping to treat myself to a new "Big Nikon" later this year as a landmark birthday present, but the way that prices are going, I am having serious doubts. The D300 replacement could be priced almost as high as the D700 in which case it will have to offer something really special if it is just a DX sensor, or I may just go for a D700 even if at current prices it is way above what I want to spend. I may settle for buying nothing and just winge at the way we are being ripped off in Britain.

[Wodge]

I couldn't agree with you more! I honestly think that without the price rises I may well have bought by now, but, like you, I have my doubts about any photo related purchases at the moment.

I think it may just be a case of hanging on, and trying not to be tempted into a rash purchase!

[Learning]

I don't understand your problem. I can understand someone dithering between a D90 or D300. I can understand someone dithering between a D700 or D3 (or even D3x if they don't understand to whom the D3 variants are targeted).
Do you want the portability of C size or quality of full frame? It's as easy as that. As for updates the D300 may be soon and the D700 is nearly new.

[AndyTake2]

The two cameras are of course like chalk and cheese in many ways.
The obvious difference is the sensor size, and (more importantly to me) the low light capabilities of the 700.

The 700 is less than a year old, so will not be replaced any time soon.
I do think that the 300 will be replaced shortly - I recall seeing some comments from Nikon's reps earlier this year regarding new cameras being delivered this year.

I'd hang fire a while if I were you.
If the 300's replacement is a DX sensor, then you'll need to weigh up whether it significantly outperforms the 300 - I'd expect better low light capabilities, but I doubt that they'd increase the pixel count much (what's the point?)

If the '400' is significantly more expensive, and not a huge leap forward, then you will be in a better position regarding your choice. Either the 700 with it's known capabilities, or a cheaper 300 as the '400' takes it's place.

[Mark_Norton]

There's currently always a trade-off between noise and resolution but what I can tell you is that the ability of the D3/D700 to suck light out of the shadows is a wondrous thing. I have a D3x as well and its high resolution is great but much less accessible. With the D3/D700, it's much easier to realise the benefits of high ISO shooting than it is to realise the benefits of higher resolution with the D3x where a less-than-stellar lens, camera shake or the slightest misfocus wipe out the theoretical benefit.

Translate that to the higher resolution of the D300 (and presumed D400) or chunky pixels of the D700 and it's the D700 which is the compelling choice, in my view, especially if your photography is printing only to A3, maybe A2 on a good day. It may lack the 100% finder of the D3 but I'm sure you'd like it. You'll need one good FF lens to get you started (especially if you're a DX ship now) and you could go a lot further and fare a lot worse than replace the body cap with an AF-S 24-70 f2.8.

[Wodge]

Hi there,

Many thanks for the comments here, which I would have replied to earlier if Virgin Media had been playing ball with the Internet.

I can understand Learning's point - and certainly it would be more logical to be weighing up the D700 v a D3. I guess that it is that usual caution of caveat emptor, and wondering what a D300 upgrade would bring to the party and whether that would override my current opinions. I don't think I made that clear in my OP, so apologies for any confusion that it may have caused!

Thanks again for all the advice though.

Paul