D3 or D300 + MB-D10?

majiktripp

Howya,
Here in New Zealand now and hankering for a new camera...whether I should be or not is another story but been searching and researching hard on ebay and the internet about both models.
I currently have a D40x, Sigma 30mm f/1.4 , 18-135 3.5-5.6, 70-300mm vr. DX lenses so with a D3 I'd be shooting at 5mp's until upgrading to a better lens which would be more money. I know the D300 has the 1.5 crop factor so zoom lenses benefit from that little bit extra but its mostly landscape shots that I'll be doing along with the usual "Holiday" photos although I try not to take a photo unless it's actually worth taking. I could go for the D300 but I can't help but feeling if I'm spending the money and can afford to get a D3 , should I settle for the D300 with the battery grip? Looking for any input and advice!

conkeroo

majiktripp wrote: »

...but its mostly landscape shots that I'll be doing along with the usual "Holiday" photos although I try not to take a photo unless it's actually worth taking... ...can afford to get a D3...

If you can afford to get the D3 you're doin well mate. Id love one but the 4 and a half grand price tag is just way too much. How much can you get one for? Seeing its a pro body and the D300 is a quality camera in itself, I would say get the D300 and a couple of decent lenses.

Im quite jealous now... :pac:

quilmore

a new camera is going to be announced next week, wait and see, usually rebates and special offers come after a new camera is out

don't stick to a DX camera because you now have a 18-135 lens, you can get a good enough lens for a 1/10th of what you will spend on a D3 and start saving for really good lenses after
70-300 vr is a full frame lens, will do well on a D3 at full res

I found that most of my holiday pictures are wide angle (buildings, landscapes, etc) so not only you won't miss the 1.5x crop factor but you will enjoy the full frame and what wide angle lenses can do with it

thebaz

for your requirements , the D300 should be fine , i recently got one and am happy with it, spend any extra money on better lenses .

P.S. did you win the lotto

leohoju

It really it depends on what type of shooting you'd like to do and whether you want to move over to full-frame. Both cameras are fantastic, but one is a lot more expensive than the other.

If you go down the FX route, you'll probably have to save a little more before being able to buy the glass the D3 deserves. If you stick with DX, you'll have quite a few shillings left over to buy some good quality lenses for the D300.

As quilmore says, there is an imminent announcement of a new Nikon camera or two due very soon. That doesn't mean it'll be in the shops that quickly though.

So really, it's up to you. Which camera do you feel more comfortable with? Would you be happy only using the 70-300 on a D3 until you can get some more lenses or would you rather have a D300 with the lenses already in your bag, plus maybe one or two high quality ones more?

SOL

Youwould be so much better off not buying a new camera and instead buying a 14-24 2.8 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 which would fill your D3 Budget nicely,

You would get FAR SUPERIOR photographs with those than with a D3 and poor lenses,

SOL

Infact I feel the need to post twice just to emphasize this, the benefit of going D40x to D3 will be marginal in many cases since you say you don't need the FPS and are doing landscapes, the extra 2MP means SFA and since it is landscapes, you have no requirement for the High ISO.


BUY BETTER LENSES AND DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY ON A CAMERA THAT WILL BE WORTH BUTTONS IN A FEW YEARS TIME

CabanSail

majiktripp wrote: »

Howya,
mostly landscape shots that I'll be doing along with the usual "Holiday" photos although I try not to take a photo unless it's actually worth taking.

It would seem that the D300 way more than you need for those requirements.

I do not agree with everything Ken Rockwell has to say, but he makes some good points in this article

If you do go for the D300 (though it sounds like the D40X is great for your needs) then there is not much advantage to getting the MB-D10 Grip. The D300 will take about 1000 images on a single battery charge. It will happily shoot at 6FPS with the inbuilt battery, which is way fast enough unless you are doing some serious action photography.

Can I ask what does the D40X doesn't do that you require for what you are shooting now?

Then again, if you have so much money, can I be your bestest friend?

Dundhoone

A big eye opener for me were a few photographers on flick using D40 + pro glass and taking images that look (to my eye! ) top end.

for example http://www.flickr.com/photos/8450532@N04/1268052094/in/set-72157601743956150/

D40 + 200mm F2

I'd say D300 and spend the rest on 14-28, 28-70 and 70-200 f2.8 glass.

quilmore

great glass is always best
I agree on the 70-200vr
but the 14-24 is not as wide, muuuuuch more expensive and only a tad better than the wider 11-16 2.8 tokina DX
a 17-55 2.8 DX also may cost half of what a 24-70 may cost and on a crop camera it will give you excelent results

I just don't get why to pay premium on a full frame lens like the 14-24 or 24-70 when they are to be used on a crop camera (having other DX lenses that do more o less the same)

again, if money no object get the whole thing, a D3 and those 3 lenses

majiktripp

The D3 I was thinking of getting was from this guy, pretty good price indeed, and I wouldn't get charged import duty because I'm not a Kiwi citizen so it's not applied to me as I'm a tourist technically.
http://cgi.ebay.ie/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=170232310653&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=007
So the concensus is get the D300 if I'm going for it...I like landscape and wildlife , mainly birds to be honest but the 3 point autofocus on the D40x is very annoying at times, its a grand camera but sometimes I wish it was capable of more hence why the interest in these 2 cameras. Would the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens not be full frame? What determines a full frame lens exactly (like the 70-300 VR as mentioned earlier)?
Thanks for the help, the other D300 auction I was looking at was
http://cgi.ebay.ie/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=350073144680&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=022
They're both pretty good prices for the hardware your getting.As for the money , well I have plenty of NZDollars, (still looking for a job though), the limit on my credit card was upped, aswell as me pre-emptively loading a lot of cash onto the card already but I can afford to spend it as it doesn't effect my kiwi accounts, so happy out! Still wish I did win the lotto!
http://markattwooll.wordpress.com/

Borderfox

In Nikon terms the difference between the D3 and the D300 are not as much as between the 40d and the 1dmk3 so imo I would be going for the D300 and the grip.

jubi lee

Doesn't sound like you need the D3. get the D300.

on a side note, D3 is on a whole different level. You'd never pick up a D40/D80 again!:p

snellers

Landscape shooting primarily - why bother with the grip at all? IMO get a couple of extra batteries, invest in some decent Lee or preferred brand filters and a quality, light tripod to put the new camera on (that will comfortably help support your shiny new, big lens'!)