744flyer From United States, joined Mar 2007, 46 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 month 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2615 times:
Hey guys,
For the past couple of years I've been using a Nikon D70, and I've decided that it's time I get myself a new camera. Since I already have a collection of Nikon lenses, I'd like to stay with the Nikon cameras.
So, I know that the two best (in my range) options for Nikon cameras are the D300 and D90. I've been looking at some reviews, and can't really find anything that makes one far superior to the other. So I was hoping you guys would be able to enlighten me on the differences and which one would best suit me (I go out to the local international airport a couple times a month).
Thanks for you help and input,
Cheers ,
Luke
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 245 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (1 month 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2615 times:
The D300 is the higher end camera - it has a lot more features. 51 point AF is one of those. Better quality construction as well. Just a better camera.
Damien846 From United Kingdom (England), joined Dec 2006, 250 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (1 month 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2578 times:
Quoting Cpd (Reply 1): The D300 is the higher end camera - it has a lot more features. 51 point AF is one of those. Better quality construction as well. Just a better camera.
Would have to agree totally the better choice, i have one, (moved up from a D50) and am very happy I did.
Viv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2358 posts, RR: 20 Reply 3, posted (1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2556 times:
As has been said, the D300 is the better camera - you get what you pay for.
Nevertheless, a D90 would be fine for aviation photography - using a D300 for that sole purpose is overkill. If you do other more demanding types of photography also - go for it.
744flyer From United States, joined Mar 2007, 46 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (1 month 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2490 times:
Ok, thanks guys.
I guess my question was, 'is the difference in camera quality worth the difference in price', and I'm pretty sure the answer is yes; the increased price of the D300 is worth it, right?
Thanks for your help.
Luke
DABZF From Finland, joined Mar 2004, 1147 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2389 times:
If your main usage is couple times a month for aviation photography I would not see the need for D300 - D90 will do the job as well. In addition you get the video capability as well.
Quoting Kereru (Reply 7): This might be worth reading before you commit?
SFO2SVO From United States, joined Jan 2004, 297 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2362 times:
I went from D70s to D90.
The two features which make D90 and D300 different for me is plastic body on D90 and ability to do exposure metering with manual lens on D300.
None of these 2 are worth extra $700 to me - so my vote goes to D90.
BTW, D90 is the only DSLR today which does movies. I personally think it is a joke but know people who made their call (ok, between Canon and Nikon) based on that.
Damien, I have D-300 and the D2x...My D-300 seems to have more contrast to it and I can't seem to find a contrast setting in the menu..my D2x has a dedicated setting option just for this...any help would be appreciated...Jerry
Lexy From United States, joined Jun 2006, 1389 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1969 times:
Quoting Viv (Reply 3): As has been said, the D300 is the better camera - you get what you pay for.
Nevertheless, a D90 would be fine for aviation photography - using a D300 for that sole purpose is overkill. If you do other more demanding types of photography also - go for it.
Right on!
I have a D80 and D300 and love both! The D300 has proven to be a very capable camera in just about every way and the D80 is perfect for other things too! It's always good to have a couple cameras if you can. I do like the fact that the D300 has more pixels and more "room" for error. Still, it's the one to get if you plan on doing aviation and "other" photography. If it's just aviation, then the D90 is your choice.
Dvincent From United States, joined Jan 2007, 799 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1959 times:
Something to consider is that the D300 has a much larger frame buffer, enabling vastly superior continuous shooting performance. Its autofocus system is also much better at tracking moving subjects across parts of the frame.
It also has a digital level in the viewfinder, which many users in this forum would probably find very useful.
New England Airports! Sony Alpha a700, Sigma 50-500, Minolta 70-210 f/4, Tamron 17-50.
Flying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 1850 posts, RR: 11 Reply 17, posted (1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
I bought my own D90 yesterday in the UK (the £ is so low + decreased VAT ---> 250€ cheaper there than in Belgium !!!!).
The seller was a also a Nikon freak who owned a D300, he told me that the D300 was a superb camera but the value for money factor was playing in favour of the D90.
My opinion is that the D90 suits most of the demands, but the D300 remains a semi-pro body.
But DO bear in mind that the D300 is weighing more and takes a lot more space than a D90.
I used a D70, undoubtedly the D90 is a giant leap.
If you too used a D70 I think a D90 will make you more than a happy man. I would spend the difference on something else.
Kereru From New Zealand, joined Jun 2003, 848 posts, RR: 37 Reply 18, posted (1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1648 times:
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 15): It also has a digital level in the viewfinder, which many users in this forum would probably find very useful. Wink
Do you mean "Virtual horizon indicates if camera is level (like an aircraft cockpit display) " like the D700?
or
Optional grid lines which can be turned on or off in most Nikon cameras from D70 onwards?
Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 17): f you too used a D70 I think a D90 will make you more than a happy man. I would spend the difference on something else.
Agree unless you need superior continuous shooting performance as mentioned above?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Mar 2007, 46 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 245 posts, .gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Dec 2006, 250 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2358 posts, 
From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1432 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jun 2003, 848 posts, 
From Finland, joined Mar 2004, 1147 posts, 
From Norway, joined Nov 2006, 712 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 3425 posts, 
From Gibraltar, joined Aug 2004, 341 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 1850 posts, 
Printer friendly format