d300s or d7000

[gregA]

hi all
whats the main difference between these 2 simarily priced nikons

[The_Moaner]

D7000 is lower speck than the D300s.

If I was to buy Nikon, out of them two it would deffinatly be the D300s.

I'm sure you'll find a review of both via google.

[Endrick]

Nikon D7000

worth a read

[nigel_b]

I think its a no-brainer, 7000 all the way.

[stephen p]

Originally Posted by The_Moaner

D7000 is lower speck than the D300s.

If I was to buy Nikon, out of them two it would deffinatly be the D300s.

I'm sure you'll find a review of both via google.

Are you sure you have read the spec of a D7000??

It's a fantastic camera and i honestly can't see how a D300s is better. It's sensor is brand new, high sensitivity, super sharp, new AF setup and so much lighter.

Don't get me wrong the D300s is a great camera but if you want you want a new top spec Nikon without paying £4k then the D7000 is spot on for virtually everything.

Use one and you will love it.

[Stevio125]

I had the same choice a few months ago and in the end went for the D300s, the headline stats make the 7000 look like a better camera but for me its not all about megapixels, digital cameras are turning into a numbers game.
The 300s felt better in my hands and is by far and away a more capable camera, much more customisable and every button where I need it,
so it depends on what you want from YOUR camera as to which one to choose.
At the time the 7000 wasnt road tested fully and the 300 did everything I could ever ask of it, its a great camera and I'm well chuffed with mine but then I dont own a 7000 so I would say that!

[The_Moaner]

The 7000 is an entry camera. The Nikon D90 is the next step up. The Nikon D300s is just below the FF D3.

So No way can the 7000 be better than the D300s.

If the 7000 has a few new things added to it, then expect a NEW Nikon soon to take over from the D300s. D400 maybe????

In the end you buy what you can afford.
Good Luck.

[marvin]

Originally Posted by The_Moaner

The 7000 is an entry camera. The Nikon D90 is the next step up. The Nikon D300s is just below the FF D3.

So No way can the 7000 be better than the D300s.

If the 7000 has a few new things added to it, then expect a NEW Nikon soon to take over from the D300s. D400 maybe????

In the end you buy what you can afford.
Good Luck.

the d7000 is sort of pitched between the d90 and d300s but in some ways is more advanced than both. you are right about the replacement for the d300s though...probably this year.

tim

[squishy]

Originally Posted by The_Moaner

The 7000 is an entry camera. The Nikon D90 is the next step up. The Nikon D300s is just below the FF D3.

So No way can the 7000 be better than the D300s.

If the 7000 has a few new things added to it, then expect a NEW Nikon soon to take over from the D300s. D400 maybe????

In the end you buy what you can afford.
Good Luck.

The D7000 replaced the D90, and stepped that line up a bit.
Certainly not an entry camera.

[Jim Ford]

Dpreview says:

"When it was announced in September the D7000 took a lot of people by surprise. Although a D90 successor had been on the horizon for some time, what wasn't expected was how close in specification terms the new camera would turn out to be to the D300S. In some respects, in fact, the D7000 actually outguns its (supposedly) semi-pro cousin, and offers a compelling upgrade option to both D90 and D300S owners, whilst nominally sitting between the two in Nikon's current lineup"

Full review here:

Nikon D7000 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

Jim