Korean Job Discussion Forums

[riverboy]

Hey folks. It seems that there are quite a few folks on Dave's that really know their cameras.

I have been doing the point and shoot thing since my first born came along in 2005. Sometimes I get good pics, sometimes I don't, but I really do enjoy taking photo's of the family. Also, I do a fair amount of hiking and like to take nature pics.

One of the things I relise is how many potential good shots a lad misses with a simple point and shoot. I am ready to take the step up.

Now, from all of my research, I seem to have come to the conclusion that the Nikon d 300 is the camera for me. I have looked at others, but it seems that in that particular price range the d 300 is the camera to get.

I'm not buying for a month or two, as I am settling a bit of finances up and I want to make sure I get the best camera for me. I want something that is easy to use and lear from, versatile, tough and will not be obsolete in a year or two. I also chose Nikon because I hear their lenses are top quality, so if and when I do upgrade, I will be able to increase my collection of lenses over the years.

So, question is: What other options or suggestions do you camera enthusiasts have as opposed to the d300?

Thanks to all those who take the time to reply.

[Golem]

For the price of a new d300 you could buy a full frame Canon 5d (Classic not MK II) used and in excellent condition. The d300 is a nice camera, I especially like the autofocus, but I think given that a full frame's are getting so cheap that if you buy one of those you might never have to buy again (until it breaks). Alternatively the d700 is nicer than they Canon 5D but much more expensive. I am thinking of buying a d700 two or three years down the road when they become available at a decent price used.
Basically though, if I had the cash to buy a D300 today I would probably buy a 5D instead. If you buy used lenses as well you will likely be able to sell everything at a respectable portion of what you paid for in when you decide to upgrade (or switch to Nikon).

[riverboy]

How about warranty? Isn't it safer to go with a little less than the better camera? Especially when buying electronics...

What to you mean by

[Golem]

The sensor, full frame means the sensor is as big as 35mm film would be.
The d300 has a smaller sensor. Due to physics the quality is different and there is also a crop factor to take into consideration. A 50mm lens is really a 75mm lens on a D300. The quality of a full frame is much better.

[nosmallplans]

These two guys are correct. The outright image quality of the 5d outdoes the of the D300.

Outside of simple image quality, the D300 handily defeats the 5d on all accounts. With the D200 (not D300) I could easily print 13x19's at max resolution and get really nice looking prints.

With a D300 the size of your prints would be slightly larger - assuming you ever get to that kind of work. If you need to have the best possible looking pictures in the largest possible size - that's all 5d territory. If you need some of the industry's best autofocus, rugged build, complete backwards compatibility of all Nikon lenses and a host of user-friendly features, then like I said, the D300 wins hands down.

[nosmallplans]

[riverboy]

Damn! Thanks Golem. At the same time, i don't really want to buy used.

How about lenses? I hear Nikkon makes the best. Which is kind of why I am leaning toward the Nikon brand.

[Ji]

Aside from achieving shallower depth of field, the major difference between full frame and crop are lenses. Full frame demands better lenses as it uses the glass edge to edge while a crop sensor normally just uses the sweet spot of the lense (assuming a full frame lense).

If you want a good rugged body then the D300 is a great weather sealed body with a 100% coverage viewfinder. Image quality is very good and autofocus system is excellent.

The 5DMI has great image quality up to ISO 400 and pretty good quality at ISO 800. It isn't a very rugged camera though and is known for its ability to attract dust on the sensor. But if you want superb image quality at a budget up to ISO 400, you can't beat the Canon 5D.

If you're looking for a good entry level camera I'd recommend the Canon XSI, as it has image quality on par with at least the Canon 40D for a fraction of the price.

On the Nikon side I'd actually look at the Nikon D90. The Live View/Movie ability is surprisingly usable and improved upon from the D300's still Live View mode.

As to lenses, Canon has more lenses then Nikon. Image quality between the two is about the same though one does things better then the other at certain focal lengths and vice versa. If anything I'd make the argument that if you are into heavy flash photography Nikon's TTL system is better then Canon. And if you want the widest selection of lenses, you go Canon as Canon bodies have the ability to use Nikon lenses in manual mode with a simply adapter.

[Golem]

I dont think Nikon has better lenses. They have much better autofocus though. I also like that many nikonws have autoiso and wheels to control other functions that I need to use menus to get to in Canon. Honestly though, I dont think Nikon is all that much better than Canon. If I found a good deal one one camera, that would determine what I purchased.

[riverboy]

This is great advice guys! Thanks again for taing the time.

I am indeed a beginner. I want to have good resolution and I want something good quality. As for warranty, I will be in Korea for a few more years, so I certainly want to buy brand new. Not to mention the wife will not let me buy used either. It is the safest bet.

Point and shoot is certainly the best option at this point and the main reason I am interested in the d 300 is the durability and all weather feature. I am an out doors kind of guy and play a fair amount of sports as well. Rugged is what I need.