D80 vs D300?

[Flyboy172]

Hello Everyone,
I am ready to upgrade my D100 and am trying to decide what options are best. I currently have, obviously, a D100, Sigma 70-200 F2.8, Sigma 24-80 F2.8, and a Sigma APO 2x teleconverter. My original plan was to buy a D80 and a Sigma 100-300 F4, but now I am considering sacrificing the lens in favor of the D300. I shoot a lot of Air Shows and other aviation activities.

In addition to airshows, I like to shoot landscapes and nature. I live on the water, so the weather resistance is attractive. I also seem to do a fair amount low light photography, so that also makes the D300 more attractive.

I have read lots of reviews online, but I would love to hear from the folks on this forum. Aviation photography is one of me true passions.

Thank you all for taking the time to respond!
Warmest regards,
Steve

[rylan]

im not a nikon guy, ive played with a D80 at future shot and i must say nice camera!
it takes great pictures. i find its heavy but i like the d80 from playing with it

[Frog]

you may want the frames per second the d300 offers plus the less noise at highe iso.
If the d80 is good enough at that end get the glass.

[freygr]

I would purchase the D300, because it used CF cards unlike the D80 which uses SD cards. The D300 also has a higher res sensor in it. But the cost of changing memory cards is not an real issue now days. I remember my first memory card an $100.00 Smart Card of only 32 mega byte.

[Photo-John]

Lots of differening opinions here. You need to ask yourself what your top priorities are and what you really need. The D300 is a sweet camera. But if you're main subject is airshows, I think you need a better lens more than you need the D300. The D300 isn't really going to improve your airshow photos. If I were you, I'd be looking into image-stabilized telephoto lenses.

[WCpilot]

I agree with John on this one. I'm a pilot and very much into aviation photography. The D300 won't do nearly as much for you as a nice piece of telephoto glass. With that said, I'm also a D300 owner, and I love the camera. For some of the other things you mentioned, it is fantastic. But there is still no real difference in shooting aircraft as compared to my D50. If aviation is really a major focus for you, I'd go with glass.

[racedraper]

buy a used d200. I ve had mine for 2 months now and love it. I find more cool stuff on it plus its still a great camera. I kinda wish I bought the 300 cause of live view and HD settings.
Im saving up for a D3 thought I was thinking about upgrading to a 300 but Im keeping my 200 for my wife and kids to use

[Len J]

Do you use scene modes? If so, D80, D300 has no scene modes.

D300 has better autofocus engine
D300 has better JPG engine
D300 has better perfomance at High ISO
D300 has more bells & whistles, will you use them?
D300 is about $800 more expensive than D80
D80 will probably be replaced by Nikon in the next 6 months

Unless some of the advantages matter to your shooting, I'd get good glass before I replaced the D100. Good Glass outlasts constantly updating electronics.

Len

[MDPortrait]

Not to be too critical, but I was talking to a Nikon Dealer this past week. Nikon still has the D80 as the main DSLR in production and sale come Christmas of 2008. My dad has a D80 and I use it all the time, it is a great camera. It's fast, relatively small and has great images.

I am in the market for a D300 though to expand with in my business.

[another view]

I'm going to vote for spending the money on glass as well. If you do end up with a camera, I'd also recommend checking out a used D200 (from a reputable source with a short warranty, KEH, B&H, etc). I doubt you'd need the high ISO performance of the D300 in most of your situations, and you'd be paying a lot of money for it. Also, the D200 is a huge upgrade over the D100. I replaced my Fuji S2 with a D200 a few months ago and it's a totally different world...

[bliddel]

Well, I'm about to splurge on a D200 myself, because it will use all my old Nikon AI lenses. I imagine that my 80-205mm Quantaray zoom will suit me for airshows more so than my 500mm mirror lens. Of course, as I'm sure you know, if you want spinning propellers in your shots, you have to have really small f-stops or set the ISO to 25 or less, or both.

Then again, if you try taking in the entire squadron of Canadian Snowbirds, you'll need a wide angle!

In your shoes, I think I would go for the D200 first, and then start saving for a more suitable tele-zoom, but it is only my hunch, and your decision. Having two bodies at the same time means being able to get those canopy closeup shots one second, and those formation shots just seconds later. I missed a B-52 flyby with bomb bay doors open while I was changing lenses. You know the drill.

Bruce

[LDB415]

I'd give serious thought to a D200 and glass rather than just a D300. Does your screen name mean you are a Cessna 172 pilot?

[fx101]

Get a used D200 (picked one up from Adorama in impeccable condition) and that's probably the biggest bang for your buck. 5fps is enough to shoot aircraft. You will probably shoot aircraft in daylight so high iso performance is not important to you. You just eliminated the major advantages of the D300. IF you shoot at dusk or in darker conditions then I would without hesitation recommend the D300, but for your purposes the D200 will give you the same image quality at low isos that are used in daylight. Buy some good Nikon glass to go with it (a nice 300mm for example) and you're set.

[9mot]

D80 or used D200 + new glass

[shootme]

You live once. Get the D300 and a lens with VR you won't be sorry you did. Sacrifice a couple of dinners and eat at home a few times, pasta and meat sauce with some bread and water. Good luck with your choice be happy with your decision..

[Kajuah]

Get the d300; don't waste time with the d200 it's no competitor whatsoever and basically the same price now that the d700 is out. D300 where I live is 1700 $ with 70-200mm lens and a kit bag

[deckcadet]

I have to disagree with kajuah, in this case, the D300 is still more expensive than the D200 (which has fallen further still in price) and the D200 is most certainly still a competitor. While it lacks some of the niceties of the current generation of body, it's not like it suddenly started taking worse pictures. I was using mine just the other day and got some great results. If I had a choice between a D200 or D80 with better glass or a D300 with a mediocre lens, i'd pick the D200 and glass.

Of course, the used price of the D300 is not awful right now, so a used D300 plus a good lens would be the ideal next step, rather than entering the game behind by a generation in either the lens or the body department. Same argument goes against the D80- with a likely successor waiting in the wings for release in the next months, I'd hold off on that body.

[Kajuah]

I have to disagree with you on that one, deckcadet. The d200 is most certainly not an incapable camera, I did not mean to suggest that but the d300 certainly does a world and a half of difference in comparison for a mere 700 $ more and that's brand new.

I would NEVER buy used lenses ...that said it's hard to tell which is and isn't really used when buying discontinued brands (not these cameras in question of course, just noting that in general)...or camera bodies, had a very bad experience with that before. On the topic of the d80 vs d300; the d300 is far superior. That said half the battle is the technology and the other 10 % is the knowledge while the remainder is the photographer (not always necessarily in that order of course). Depend on what you're looking to shoot and where you'd like to take your photography; the d300 is superior to almost any situation.

That said, the d300 is a semi-pro cam (a step above the adv. beginner cam of the d80) so unless you want to make a career of photographing then it's probably overkill. If you do want to make a career of it - get the d300

If you don't - invest on lenses and go for the d80.

The d300 would be prime for fast moving sports photography, which I'm sure air shows demand. With its 8 fps with the battery grip you won't miss a thing. You can have all the zoom potential in the world, the best glass that yields the best and most accurate colors..but unless you have good focus and timing, you'll end up with nothing but blurred shots! It's up to you but if it were my choice i'd choose the d300. Those 40 additional AF points are another reason it'd be perfect for air shows.

[deckcadet]

Kajuah, as you can see I did say that the ideal would be a D300 and a good lens... but I don't see why you would suggest the D300 if you had to get a significantly less capable lens.
The D300 offers plenty of additional features, but in the image quality department, most of the improvements come in the areas of dynamic range and lower noise at high ISO. This won't suddenly make a bad lens look good. Although the D300's ability to compensate for lens aberrations in camera is good, it can't do much when dealing with a poor lens.

The 11-point CAM-1000 system in the D200 is quite capable of good tracking, and offers many more options for tracking than the version in the D80. Additionally, the CAM-3500 AF system requires (IMHO) a lot of learning and a pretty solid understanding on the part of the operator to get the most out of it. I say this coming off as much experience with the D200, D300, and D3 as you can get short of being one of the preproduction prototype testers or designers.

I have no doubts that the D300 is a superior camera to the D200. You only need to look at my D300 pro review right here on this site to see that I feel it is a compelling offering that is much better than the D200 if you have the money. I would never, however, sacrifice having an adequate lens for a slightly better body. Especially not one that I have found is one of the most demanding of good glass. The D300 will expose the flaws in cheap or unsuited glass- period. And when you're shooting air shows, a short lens isn't an option...particularly not one that won't take well to a 2x TC that you need to use to get adequate reach. The 100-300 f/4 mentioned above is really one of the best telephoto lenses available from *any* manufacturer. It will also take better to a 1.4 TC than the 70-200 would a 2x TC. The lens will *always* be the original limiting factor in the equation. It's first in the capture path. From there you have to decide what body is adequate to capture what you need.

Now keep in mind that an f/5.6 effective aperture (70-200+2x or 100-300 +1.4x) will benefit from as good an AF system as you can afford, so really, if you can find a recent-model 100-300 or D300 (I'd look for the body first) used at a good discount, I'd seriously consider that option if it makes getting both feasible. If you can afford both new, so much the better, but don't let it stop you if you're a few hundred short. I can't begin to tell you how much money I've saved over the years buying used lenses. I've only ever bought one of my main digital bodies used, and I'm currently on my 7th and 8th, but as far as lenses go, I was easily able to afford a full quality level more than I would have by buying used. So really keep this in mind.

[fx101]

"The 11-point CAM-1000 system in the D200 is quite capable of good tracking, and offers many more options for tracking than the version in the D80. Additionally, the CAM-3500 AF system requires (IMHO) a lot of learning and a pretty solid understanding on the part of the operator to get the most out of it. I say this coming off as much experience with the D200, D300, and D3 as you can get short of being one of the preproduction prototype testers or designers."

Well put. Just remember that the extra AF sensors are going to be of more use in low light or in very complex scenes (there you can see the D300 really take off). Shooting planes in the sky is a piece of cake for the D200. What you want is a good 300+mm VR lens. I have the f/2.8 300mm ED-IF VRII and it is a fantastic lens for shooting airshows even with a teleconverter. Deckadet is also right that you want the best AF system you can get. That being said, you will not really notice the difference in the types of usage you're giving it since the lens itself allows for savagely fast AF. A good prime 300mm with a teleconverter will let you shoot almost any plane you want (trust me, even the blue angels breaking the sound barrier over the puget sound is capturable with the 300mm w/ TC and a D200). So why a prime 300? Because it is barbarically fast. I can tell you that shooting your first airshow you'll realize that everything is much faster than you would imagine. That means zooming in and out can be too much of a hassle. The AF speed on the supertele 300 is also about as fast as you can get, and that actually matters. The VR is also among the best I've seen, allowing perfect panning. Pick out a spot on the field, and depending how far you are decide whether or not to use the 300 with or without TC. I find that 300mm alone lets me get some great high speed shots. The D200 also has 1/8000s shutter speed which is perfect for capturing planes going supersonic (although there are only a few airshows where this is allowed, as typically breaking the sound barrier over the continental US if forbidden by federal law). At 800mph, the plane will only move 4cm during the exposure at this shutter speed. For prop aircraft, however, you want slower shutter speeds (max is around 1/350) so you can get prop trails. Again, the 300mm lets enough light in for you to do that.