D300 worth the upgrade from the D200

I have a D200, with a wonderful set of lenses including the 18 - 200
mm lens. The D3 is not worth upgrading my d200 body but the D300
looks like it might be.

In your opinions is the D300 worth $1700 to upgrade ?

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:24:17 -0500, LuvLatins wrote:

I have a D200, with a wonderful set of lenses including the 18 - 200
mm lens. The D3 is not worth upgrading my d200 body but the D300
looks like it might be.

In your opinions is the D300 worth $1700 to upgrade ?

Monetarily? Probably not, considering your past messages. If you
highly value having the latest and greatest (within reason), then
perhaps it might be worth the expense. Look at it from a
hypothetical vantage point a number of years down the road. Might
you then say that having purchased a D200, D300, D400, D500, etc.,
shortly after each model's release were good decisions? Will you
keep each of the older models or sell some or all of them
(eventually)? As I said, probably not (if you're like me), since
whatever image quality improvements you get will probably be very
slight. If you get pleasure or satisfaction from continually
learning and experimenting with new features and the monetary hit
isn't really too painful, then perhaps frequent upgrades would be
justified. My own preference is to skip at least every other model
upgrade, so if I owned a D200, I'd consider a D400, D600, etc. As I
recently said about my D50, I still haven't felt constrained by it
nor have I fully mastered it. If I reach that point though,
upgrading to a newer model would be somewhat like the photographic
version of the Peter Principle, upgrading when using the old camera
has become so natural that little conscious thought is needed, as if
it were appendage. Sometimes "good enough" is good enough, and most
photographers agree that the D200 is a very good camera. If you
find it hard resisting the urge to spend, maybe consider a very good
little P&S that you can tote to places that you wouldn't want to
bring the bigger kit?

Consider the D70 vs D80 upgrade:
The larger sensor of the D80 really makes no practical difference for the
vast majority of users who rarely print greater than letter size images. The
internal electronics and processing algorithms are not significantly
different to the end user. I still use both cameras and I cannot tell which
camera made which image by looking at the finished print.
However the viewfinder of the D80 compared to the D70 alone was worth the
upgrade to me.
Again the larger sensor of the D300 will make no difference in the final
print to the vast majority of non-professional users. I also seriously doubt
that the lower noise at higher ISOs is the deal maker except in the head of
those who are more technically obsessed than aesthetically gifted.
In any event within 6 months there will be the usual minimally dumbed down
version of the D300 just as the D80 stands in relation to the D200. Nikon
will keep the D40x and axe the D200/80. That only makes sense from a
marketing stand point.
The biggest unknown is whether Nikon will go to in-camera stabilization.
That would be a much more worthwhile upgrade than live preview, an utterly
useless gee gaw.
I would like to see Nikon, or anyone, come out with an EVF camera based on
an APS sized sensor.

flambe wrote:
[]
I would like to see Nikon, or anyone, come out with an EVF camera
based on an APS sized sensor.

You missed the Sony DSC-R1?

David

Thanks everyone for your valuable input. Its true, I am a little
early and the price is a bit high for the features. Its about 25%
more features than my current D200. Others say its a totally
different camera. Im not sure I agree. But I am so happy with my
D200 that I was thinking of giving my D200 to my son and getting
myself the D300. My son has had his eye on my D200 ever since it came
through the door. (grin)

I think I am going to treat myself since the experince with my D200
was so good. The D300 is clearly a step up, but not a huge one and
clealry not worth $1800 dollars and the battary back will also need to
be upgraded since the battary pack from the D200 does not fit the D300

All in all, I cant afford the jump to the D3 so this shoulld hold me
and keep me happy for the next 2 or 3 years (wink)

I will let you know what I think after I get my hands on it.

Thanks again Love this group.



On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:13:05 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

flambe wrote:
[]
I would like to see Nikon, or anyone, come out with an EVF camera
based on an APS sized sensor.

You missed the Sony DSC-R1?

David

In article ,
Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote:

my stinken D3 arrives.

IF you feel that way about the D3 why did you buy it?

--
With or without religion, you would have good people doing
good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good
people to do evil things, that takes religion.

Steven Weinberg

On Dec 22, 8:27 pm, LuvLatins wrote:
Thanks everyone for your valuable input. Its true, I am a little
early and the price is a bit high for the features. Its about 25%
more features than my current D200. Others say its a totally
different camera. Im not sure I agree. But I am so happy with my
D200 that I was thinking of giving my D200 to my son and getting
myself the D300. My son has had his eye on my D200 ever since it came
through the door. (grin)

I think I am going to treat myself since the experince with my D200
was so good. The D300 is clearly a step up, but not a huge one and
clealry not worth $1800 dollars and the battary back will also need to
be upgraded since the battary pack from the D200 does not fit the D300

All in all, I cant afford the jump to the D3 so this shoulld hold me
and keep me happy for the next 2 or 3 years (wink)

I will let you know what I think after I get my hands on it.

Thanks again Love this group.

Well if you've got $1800 burning a hole in your pocket, why not get a
nice lens? That's what I'd do. The only things I'd consider as serious
upgrades in the d300 (vs the d200) would be the af (more points for
more flexibility), live view which would be useful for macro etc and
maybe also the AF tuning. No way they're worth more than 200 euro to
me, though!

The 14-24 f/2.8, on the other hand...

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 12:27:35 -0500, LuvLatins wrote:

But I am so happy with my
D200 that I was thinking of giving my D200 to my son and getting
myself the D300. My son has had his eye on my D200 ever since it came
through the door. (grin)

Giving it to him is a nice gesture. It adds logic to the upgrade. Were you
to instead sell the D200 it would come down to is it worth $800 to upgrade.

I think I am going to treat myself since the experince with my D200
was so good. The D300 is clearly a step up, but not a huge one and
clealry not worth $1800 dollars and the battary back will also need to
be upgraded since the battary pack from the D200 does not fit the D300

Why a battery pack? The internal battery is good for hundreds and hundreds
of shots. I never ran one down on my D200 in a day of shooting. And the
D300 should be better (if you don't use Liveview).

Don www.donwiss.com/pictures/ (e-mail link at page bottoms).

"LuvLatins" wrote in message
...

Thanks everyone for your valuable input. Its true, I am a little
early and the price is a bit high for the features. Its about 25%
more features than my current D200. Others say its a totally
different camera. Im not sure I agree. But I am so happy with my
D200 that I was thinking of giving my D200 to my son and getting
myself the D300. My son has had his eye on my D200 ever since it came
through the door. (grin)

I think I am going to treat myself since the experince with my D200
was so good. The D300 is clearly a step up, but not a huge one and
clealry not worth $1800 dollars and the battary back will also need to
be upgraded since the battary pack from the D200 does not fit the D300

All in all, I cant afford the jump to the D3 so this shoulld hold me
and keep me happy for the next 2 or 3 years (wink)

I will let you know what I think after I get my hands on it.

Thanks again Love this group.

Although I never owned the D200, I do have the D300 and I'm very, very happy
with it. I put some pics here and there in
rec.photo.digital.slr-system not the best, but more or less straight out of
the camera.
I talked to a guy who sold Nikon stuff like lenses and a wireless remote for
the D300 (I bought that) and he did have the D200. He said that people who
say it's just a small upgrade, don't know what they are talking about.
He praised the much better light metering system and the fantastic screen as
just a few of the upgrades.

I agree for the grip with another poster here. I easily get over 500 shots,
even with part Liveview. However, if you plan to do more than average
portrait pictures, it might be worth it anyway.


--
Sosumi

Ockham's Razor wrote:
Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote:

my stinken D3 arrives.

IF you feel that way about the D3 why did you buy it?

Everyone who knew what they were doing had their D3 in a
week or less.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)