I own both of the cameras and here are my observations. I see a lot of hype going around with D7000 and people are selling their D300/D300s for so cheap. I have decided to throw some insight from the perspective of different kinds of photography. I am just going to talk about differences because that only makes some sense.
Body Type:
D7000 has a half mag alloy body and it feels much better than my (sold) d90. Though it feels very very cheap before D300 body. You dont have focus button which is very useful for macro photography. I did not like the command dial too because it is uncomfortable unlike that of D300's. But this is not a deal breaker. D7000 does not have a flash sync port too. Adversely, d300 does not have the one touch raw option and the info button like in D7000 which is very useful for me.
Dynamic Range:
This is going to be very interesting. Here are the ISO 200 images from both of the cameras. I have used D7000's kit lens 18-105mm.
D7000:
D300:
Let us check everything at 100%:
Dark Areas:
Nikon D7000:
Nikon D300:
D7000 retains little bit more saturation in the darker areas and D300 looks little desaturated. But I have a question for you, can't we tweak the D300 images in PS up to D7000 levels? I think we can.
Highlighted Areas:
Nikon D7000:
D300:
Here, it is a completely different story. D7000 shows little less details in the white areas than the D300. I have tried my best to bring the details back in the D7000 images but it took me a lot of time and I could not make it so apparent. I was very concerned about this and I have sent an email to Thom Hogan and here is his reply:
"Well, first you need to learn some things. You’re not seeing fewer details, you’re seeing less contrast in the highlights. Exactly as you’d expect when you cram more dynamic range into the same space.
--
Thom Hogan, writer/photographer
Author, 21 books on Nikon cameras and photography
http://www.bythom.com/"
Please check my 14-bit RAW comparison below. What Thom says is absolutely correct with 14-bit RAWs.
Sharpness issue:
Nikon users have exaggerated D7000 sharpness issue so much that I think I should also give my comments on this. Personally, I feel D7000 images are little softer than D300 images on the same sharpness setting ( I used 2 in SD colors). But D300 images are little grainy too. What I observe Nikon got it very professional in the D7000. If you read about D3x images, those are also little softer than lower end cameras because Nikon does not apply much in camera sharpening by default as Nikon knows pros will find their sweet spot by themselves. Same is the case with D7000. I have tried increasing the sharpness and I have to say I could easily achieve very well sharpened images without any visible grains (at least as good as D300 images). So for me this is not an issue at all. Please ignore reading those sharpness-issue threads.
High ISO:
This is much more interesting than I thought. Here are the ISO 3200 images. I did not bother with other ISOs because you can do your own calculations. I have set noise reduction off on both of the cameras and all were shot in JPGs.
D7000 at ISO 3200:
Now at 100%:
D300 at ISO 3200:
Now at 100%:
So do you see some difference at ISO 3200? D7000 just blew D300 away.
At ISO 800 I dont see any difference but at ISO 1600 I see little. So my conclusion is D300 is usable until ISO 1600 and D7000 is usable until ISO 3200. You get 1 stop advantage with D7000. D7000 at ISO 6400 is not that great so I did not bother to put the samples. Here you need to remember one thing, Nikon applies less sharpening in D7000 so ISO 3200 may look more cleaner but may not be so clean when you sharpen the images. But yes I have to agree that D7000 shows better colors at higher ISOs.
Focus:
I have read review from Ken Rockwell and he says D7000 is as good as D3 with the focus. But I am NOT fully satisfied with his thoughts.
My Observations:
with 18-105mm lens:
D7000 and D300 both are equally quick in grabbing the focus in good light. Focus is dead on the subject. Though in low light both cameras are slow in grabbing the focus but D300 gets it just dead on the subject and D7000 misses the focus most of the time in the low light with 18-105mm.
with 50mm f1.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 VR I:
D7000 is little faster in grabbing the focus in low light and in good light. In good light difference is just not worth considering. But in low light you can observe some lag with D300 focus (but still very respectable and not worth considering if you are not a low light sports photographer, and yes I said only grabbing the focus for the first time). Focus is very accurate with both of the cameras. 3D focus tracking is also amazing with both of the cameras. What I think D300(s) always tries to give very accurate focus lock that is why it may get little slower, You need to test this by yourself too.
If focus accuracy is the concern I would prefer Nikon D300 any day.
14 bit RAW to JPEG (SECOND DAY):
This is going to be very interesting as I have found few hidden facts about both of the cameras with 14 bit RAW shooting. I have never observed this difference before because I never shoot JPEG and RAW together.
D7000 at ISO 200:
In camera JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
If you click on the 100% images you can see that the 14-bit RAW_2_JPEG is much much sharper than the in camera JPEG. Color saturation is just the same.
D300 at ISO 200:
In camera JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
Click on the 100% images. I observe that in D300 the difference is very much visible. 14-bit RAW_2_JPEG shows much more better details, colors and dynamic range than the in camera JPEG.
if you observe 14-bit RAW_2_JPEGs, you can see that Nikon D300 shows a better colors as well as the dynamic range (may be because of it selected little warmer auto white balance).
HIGH ISO (14-bit RAW to JPEG):
Images are shot at the same setting in both of the cameras and noise reduction is kept off all the time.
D7000 at ISO 3200:
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
D300 at ISO 3200:
In my observations, at ISO 3200 D300 tends to underexpose the images with the same settings, so I tweaked the exposure on D300 to match the D7000 exposure. And here is the tweaked image.
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
So at ISO 3200 D7000 shows a cleaner image. 14-bit RAW on D7000 seems have an advantage of 2/3rd of an ISO-stop than that of D300. Though this difference was almost 1 stop with the in Camera JPEGs.
My main observation here has been that there is NO SHARPNESS ISSUE WITH D7000 with the 14-bit RAWs. As well as Nikon D300 has as good as dynamic range as D7000 does at ISO 200 levels. D7000 has really very good dynamic range at higher ISOs. And Nikon did a very bad job with the in-camera JPEGs (8-bit data) on both of the cameras. Images look so softer than the RAWs. If you just check the JPEGs, D7000 wins with a big margin but when you compare both of the cameras with their sheer 14-bit RAW performances, there are not enough reasons to take side with D7000. It is just a little bit better at higher ISOs (3200 and up).
My final thoughts:
I am a serious amateur turned semi pro photographer. Whatever I am going to write are just my personal thoughts and you may or may not agree with them.
a. Nature Photographers:
Nature photographers can consider D7000 as it has little better dynamic range. But dont consider it for better ISO because I know you guys don't shoot that higher ISOs. Though it is good to have a better ISO camera for few shots.
b. Wedding and Event photographers:
You should go for D7000 as it is really good until ISO 3200, and remember to use better glass and less f number for focus accuracy. Kit lens it not a great option in low light because it fails to focus accurately most of the time in low light. Daylight is just fine with that lens.
c. Sports photographers:
You guys always use great and fast glasses. I think you are better off with D300 and up only. Do not bother yourselves with D7000.
d. Casual photographers:
You guys must buy D7000 because it comes with so many in built scene options that will help you until you turn yourselves into serious photographers.
e. Photojournalists and Candid Photographers:
You can use any of these. Both are as good as the other.
f. Bird Shooters:
If you shoot in low light with better glass go for D7000 and I hope 6fps should be fine for you.
g. Macro photographers:
I think you should stick to D300 because of its very good live view zoom which goes up to 10x zoom and its focus accuracy in live view. D7000 did not seem like zooming in that far.
Before closing my review I would like to ask a question, is that really worth selling D300 for $850 on www.ebay.com and getting D7000 for $1200? I would not do that at least for D7000. Full frame may be a different story.
Please let me know your thoughts too. So that I learn little more about these cameras.
thanks and regards
DeepC
Body Type:
D7000 has a half mag alloy body and it feels much better than my (sold) d90. Though it feels very very cheap before D300 body. You dont have focus button which is very useful for macro photography. I did not like the command dial too because it is uncomfortable unlike that of D300's. But this is not a deal breaker. D7000 does not have a flash sync port too. Adversely, d300 does not have the one touch raw option and the info button like in D7000 which is very useful for me.
Dynamic Range:
This is going to be very interesting. Here are the ISO 200 images from both of the cameras. I have used D7000's kit lens 18-105mm.
D7000:
D300:
Let us check everything at 100%:
Dark Areas:
Nikon D7000:
Nikon D300:
D7000 retains little bit more saturation in the darker areas and D300 looks little desaturated. But I have a question for you, can't we tweak the D300 images in PS up to D7000 levels? I think we can.
Highlighted Areas:
Nikon D7000:
D300:
Here, it is a completely different story. D7000 shows little less details in the white areas than the D300. I have tried my best to bring the details back in the D7000 images but it took me a lot of time and I could not make it so apparent. I was very concerned about this and I have sent an email to Thom Hogan and here is his reply:
"Well, first you need to learn some things. You’re not seeing fewer details, you’re seeing less contrast in the highlights. Exactly as you’d expect when you cram more dynamic range into the same space.
--
Thom Hogan, writer/photographer
Author, 21 books on Nikon cameras and photography
http://www.bythom.com/"
Please check my 14-bit RAW comparison below. What Thom says is absolutely correct with 14-bit RAWs.
Sharpness issue:
Nikon users have exaggerated D7000 sharpness issue so much that I think I should also give my comments on this. Personally, I feel D7000 images are little softer than D300 images on the same sharpness setting ( I used 2 in SD colors). But D300 images are little grainy too. What I observe Nikon got it very professional in the D7000. If you read about D3x images, those are also little softer than lower end cameras because Nikon does not apply much in camera sharpening by default as Nikon knows pros will find their sweet spot by themselves. Same is the case with D7000. I have tried increasing the sharpness and I have to say I could easily achieve very well sharpened images without any visible grains (at least as good as D300 images). So for me this is not an issue at all. Please ignore reading those sharpness-issue threads.
High ISO:
This is much more interesting than I thought. Here are the ISO 3200 images. I did not bother with other ISOs because you can do your own calculations. I have set noise reduction off on both of the cameras and all were shot in JPGs.
D7000 at ISO 3200:
Now at 100%:
D300 at ISO 3200:
Now at 100%:
So do you see some difference at ISO 3200? D7000 just blew D300 away.
At ISO 800 I dont see any difference but at ISO 1600 I see little. So my conclusion is D300 is usable until ISO 1600 and D7000 is usable until ISO 3200. You get 1 stop advantage with D7000. D7000 at ISO 6400 is not that great so I did not bother to put the samples. Here you need to remember one thing, Nikon applies less sharpening in D7000 so ISO 3200 may look more cleaner but may not be so clean when you sharpen the images. But yes I have to agree that D7000 shows better colors at higher ISOs.
Focus:
I have read review from Ken Rockwell and he says D7000 is as good as D3 with the focus. But I am NOT fully satisfied with his thoughts.
My Observations:
with 18-105mm lens:
D7000 and D300 both are equally quick in grabbing the focus in good light. Focus is dead on the subject. Though in low light both cameras are slow in grabbing the focus but D300 gets it just dead on the subject and D7000 misses the focus most of the time in the low light with 18-105mm.
with 50mm f1.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 VR I:
D7000 is little faster in grabbing the focus in low light and in good light. In good light difference is just not worth considering. But in low light you can observe some lag with D300 focus (but still very respectable and not worth considering if you are not a low light sports photographer, and yes I said only grabbing the focus for the first time). Focus is very accurate with both of the cameras. 3D focus tracking is also amazing with both of the cameras. What I think D300(s) always tries to give very accurate focus lock that is why it may get little slower, You need to test this by yourself too.
If focus accuracy is the concern I would prefer Nikon D300 any day.
14 bit RAW to JPEG (SECOND DAY):
This is going to be very interesting as I have found few hidden facts about both of the cameras with 14 bit RAW shooting. I have never observed this difference before because I never shoot JPEG and RAW together.
D7000 at ISO 200:
In camera JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
If you click on the 100% images you can see that the 14-bit RAW_2_JPEG is much much sharper than the in camera JPEG. Color saturation is just the same.
D300 at ISO 200:
In camera JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
Click on the 100% images. I observe that in D300 the difference is very much visible. 14-bit RAW_2_JPEG shows much more better details, colors and dynamic range than the in camera JPEG.
if you observe 14-bit RAW_2_JPEGs, you can see that Nikon D300 shows a better colors as well as the dynamic range (may be because of it selected little warmer auto white balance).
HIGH ISO (14-bit RAW to JPEG):
Images are shot at the same setting in both of the cameras and noise reduction is kept off all the time.
D7000 at ISO 3200:
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
D300 at ISO 3200:
In my observations, at ISO 3200 D300 tends to underexpose the images with the same settings, so I tweaked the exposure on D300 to match the D7000 exposure. And here is the tweaked image.
14-bit RAW to JPEG:
at 100% zoom:
So at ISO 3200 D7000 shows a cleaner image. 14-bit RAW on D7000 seems have an advantage of 2/3rd of an ISO-stop than that of D300. Though this difference was almost 1 stop with the in Camera JPEGs.
My main observation here has been that there is NO SHARPNESS ISSUE WITH D7000 with the 14-bit RAWs. As well as Nikon D300 has as good as dynamic range as D7000 does at ISO 200 levels. D7000 has really very good dynamic range at higher ISOs. And Nikon did a very bad job with the in-camera JPEGs (8-bit data) on both of the cameras. Images look so softer than the RAWs. If you just check the JPEGs, D7000 wins with a big margin but when you compare both of the cameras with their sheer 14-bit RAW performances, there are not enough reasons to take side with D7000. It is just a little bit better at higher ISOs (3200 and up).
My final thoughts:
I am a serious amateur turned semi pro photographer. Whatever I am going to write are just my personal thoughts and you may or may not agree with them.
a. Nature Photographers:
Nature photographers can consider D7000 as it has little better dynamic range. But dont consider it for better ISO because I know you guys don't shoot that higher ISOs. Though it is good to have a better ISO camera for few shots.
b. Wedding and Event photographers:
You should go for D7000 as it is really good until ISO 3200, and remember to use better glass and less f number for focus accuracy. Kit lens it not a great option in low light because it fails to focus accurately most of the time in low light. Daylight is just fine with that lens.
c. Sports photographers:
You guys always use great and fast glasses. I think you are better off with D300 and up only. Do not bother yourselves with D7000.
d. Casual photographers:
You guys must buy D7000 because it comes with so many in built scene options that will help you until you turn yourselves into serious photographers.
e. Photojournalists and Candid Photographers:
You can use any of these. Both are as good as the other.
f. Bird Shooters:
If you shoot in low light with better glass go for D7000 and I hope 6fps should be fine for you.
g. Macro photographers:
I think you should stick to D300 because of its very good live view zoom which goes up to 10x zoom and its focus accuracy in live view. D7000 did not seem like zooming in that far.
Before closing my review I would like to ask a question, is that really worth selling D300 for $850 on www.ebay.com and getting D7000 for $1200? I would not do that at least for D7000. Full frame may be a different story.
Please let me know your thoughts too. So that I learn little more about these cameras.
thanks and regards
DeepC
in my understaning of the two cameras the issue is not that the d300 is sharper but the d7000 has maybe a half a stop brighter sensor which gives the high lighted areas the soft texture maybe you sould have stoped down on the d7000 to see if that improved anything ... also ive heard alot about the 18-105 lens doesnt really compliment the d7000 you need better glass it will show any flaws in a crappy lens ... we are entering a new era in photography just wait until the new lenses come out i have a good feeling about the d7000 and all up and coming nikon dslr's
ReplyDeleteYou are right we are entering a new era of photography. But 18-105mm is not worse on nikon d7000. I know it does not capture as good as shadow details as my 70-200mm f2.8 but it is the same on d300 and d7000. The only issue you may be seeing it is not adding more details to images that is because it is a consumer grade slow lens. But good enough to be a kit lens with the price tag. As far as sharpness is concerned many of nikon d7000s have issues with correct focusing. Try correcting with af fine tune. It may give sharper results. And yes d7000 is brighter than d300.
ReplyDeletehey mate cheers for this just browsing ebay deciding on what to spend up on, now that Nikon Japan is in limbo after those quakes. D300 or D300s/D7000. I have a D7000 already that initially was back-focusing and had issues with the buffer but had it fixed by Nikon and now it is all good. Using it for club photography. But need a decent 2nd body for sports/outdoor music events. I already have pro glass...hmmmm
ReplyDeleteAviator, my friend... now it has been a long time using D7000 and I have use so many pro and consumer lenses on this. And I have a good and bad news for D7000 owners. It does not resolve more details with consumer grade lenses. So you use D7000 or D300 or D5000, all are same with 18-105mm kind of lenses. But yes the good news is, with the pro-grade lenses it is matches a full frame performance concerning the details. You wont believe it matched canon 5d mark I (12.8mp full frame camera). Next I am going to do a comparison with Canon 5d mark II. Stay tuned.
ReplyDeleteI like Black Friday Nikon D7000 Digital SLR Camera great. Thanks
ReplyDeleteMy D90 died, so I have to choose between the D7000 and a D300s for a replacement. While I do have the D7000 now, I have a few weeks return time, and am strongly considering returning it and buying the 300s. I shoot nighttime highschool football/BB/VB, and the D7000 just doesn't seem like it can grab focus very well. Maybe 3 of 10 are usuable. Im taking time to learn all I can about set up, to make sure it isn't user error b4 I exchange. I also am planning on starting senior portraits next year, and know the D7000 can take excellents shots.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I have heard great things about the D300s. That AF system is better and ISO is fairly compariable for my needs. Plus greater fps and semi pro build. One basic principle that I am concerned about is moving up to the 16.9 mp. Is it best for lowlight sports to stay at the lower 12.9?
Also Ive read that as you increase mpixels, then at the same time, it starts to come close to out-resolving? your lenses. For instance, I have a 18-200 VR, and have heard several say that this lens on a D7000 has become soft with increased megapixels, while considered sharp at 12.9 mgp.
I also have a 70-200 VRI and 17-55 DX both Nikon, I'm not so concerned about the first, will the 17-55 be a good fit anymore? I had been waiting for the D300s replacement but unless we are talking months, I don't know if I can wait that long. Regardless, I wanted to ask, if your camera died and you had to stay DX...shooting the sports in lowlight plus portraits, which body would you buy? So much conflicting info, I am asking some pros what they would do.
Thanks a ton!
Nicole
Hi Nicole,
ReplyDeleteI do agree that D300s has better focus system but D7000 is not bad either. I feel D7000 has a faster autofocus but little less accurate. My d7000 was little off focus so I sent it to Nikon and they fixed it under warranty. The best thing I can get out of D7000 is the image quality and it is much better than D300 at ISO 100 through ISO6400. At lower ISOs it has better dynamic range and at higher ISO it has better ISO performance which I did not find in D300. I really do not miss my D300 anymore (I sold it for getting a lens). But D300 is much better camera for sports, it definitely is. D7000 jpegs are little softer because of the cleaner ISO and the dyanamic range. But if you shoot raw you will see some ISO noise at even lower ISOs in black area, and very good dynamic range with a very sharp image. D7000 definitely needs a better glass, but 18-200mm is not worse that d300, if you reduce the resolution to 12mp, it will be even better. Shoot raw and you will love D7000 for sure. Make sure you choose standard colors for your shots and post process them to your likings. Please let me know if you have any question.
thanks
DeepC
Thanks a ton. After shooting another game last friday, I agree with you...the IQ of the D7K is great in good light. But if it can't get/hold focus in low light then it really doesn't make much difference that the IQ is better than the D300 if it's out of focus.
ReplyDeleteNicole
If I were choosing between the D300s and the d7000. I would go for the D300s even though everything I have read places the advantage on the d7000. My primary reason for this would be the file storage. I have owned several Nikon Pro and semi pro-bodies and have found the CF cards used in the D300s to be much more durable and reliable VS. the SD cards used in the D7000. To me there is nothing worse then removing a SD card from the camera after putting 300+ images on it during a paid shoot and it falls apart in your hand. I have had this happen more then once with Sd cards. both cameras have dual slots. If you go with or have gone with the d7000, I would suggest that you use both slots with one designated as a back up.
ReplyDeleteWhereas I have had two CF cards go through the washer and dryer and they still function perfectly.