Nikon D300 vs D300s

Nikon has just announced the new Nikon D300s, so I decided to post a quick comparison between the old Nikon D300 and the new Nikon D300s.

Nikon D300s

Basically, the new D300s is exactly the same camera as the D300 in terms of features, except for the following:

  1. D300s shoots HD movies at 720p resolution, 24 FPS with stereo audio. Maximum length is 5 minutes for 720p and 20 mins for lower video resolutions.
  2. D300s is slightly faster than the D300, shooting 7 FPS in Ch mode (Nikon D300 is 6 FPS). With MB-D10 battery pack, it will shoot 8 FPS.
  3. A new release mode “Q” (quiet shutter-release) is added to the dial right after Ch (continuous high speed).
  4. Dual card slots – the Nikon D300s features dual card slots to work with both CompactFlash and SD (SDHC-compliant) cards. Either card can be used as the primary card. Secondary card can be used for overflow or backup storage, or for separate storage of NEF (RAW) and JPEG images and images can be copied between cards.
  5. Active D-Lighting now has “Auto” and “Extra High” added. “Auto” is something expected, as both D700 and D90 have this mode. The “Extra High” is something new though.
  6. Nikon D300s is slightly heavier than the D300, adding 15 more grams of weight, weighing total 840g total.
  7. Nikon D300s has a dedicated “Lv” (LiveView) and “Info” buttons on the back of the camera.
  8. Nikon D300s has a virtual horizon now (D300 did not).

Nikon D300s Back

Along with the new Nikon D300s, Nikon released an entry-level Nikon D3000 (which replaces D60) and two updated lenses – Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 DX and Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II. I really don’t care about the 18-200mm lens update, since I sold mine and I’d rather be shooting with quality primes instead, but the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II is definitely a worthy update that everyone has been waiting for. However, the 70-200mm price point left me scratching my head…$2,400 is too darn expensive! That’s $500 over what the current version of 70-200mm f/2.8 is selling for.

Is D300s worth the upgrade? If you already have a D300 and do not care about the video feature (which kind of sucks, since I was expecting full HD at 1080p), it is not worth the upgrade. The sensor of the new D300s is basically identical to the older D300. It is nice that the D300s has dual slots and faster frame rate, but it is nothing extraordinary.


  1. 1) WebMonster
    July 28, 2009 at 4:33 am

    How about the price?

  2. July 28, 2009 at 9:19 am

    WebMonster: I believe the price will be the same as when D300 was announced, which is $1,800 for camera body only.

  3. 3) myke
    August 15, 2009 at 9:08 am

    when will Nikon announce the prince in Malaysia?

  4. 4) Dee
    August 22, 2009 at 7:49 am

    Will the D300 price drop at all with the arrival of the new D300s?

  5. 5) saqib
    August 25, 2009 at 1:59 pm

    what about the differene between the older Nikkor 18-200 mm VR lense vs 18-200 VRII lense. what is the difference between the two? thanks

  6. August 26, 2009 at 1:36 am

    myke: I have no idea, please check with your local Nikon rep.

    Dee: Absolutely, it already has!

    saqib: My understanding is that the only thing that got added to the new 18-200mm VR is the lock on the lens barrel to prevent lens “creep”. The older 18-200mm would creep when extended beyond 35-50mm both upwards and downwards, so the new update addresses this issue.

  7. 7) chy
    September 4, 2009 at 11:18 pm

    I’m considering an upgrade for my D40. Would you recommend a D300 or a D300s?

    • September 7, 2009 at 6:21 am

      chy: I would recommend a D300s, since it is a newer/faster camera with more features.

    • 7.2) Beezer
      November 23, 2009 at 1:13 pm

      hi there,
      I do have a D40 and have been thinking about upgrading. i’m curious as to which nikon you ended up getting?

      • 7.2.1) chy
        November 23, 2009 at 1:50 pm

        i ended up getting a D300 from cameta camera because it’s 400 dollars cheaper and i don’t really need the movie feature on the D300s. I’m loving the D300 now! :)


        • Nasim Mansurov
          November 23, 2009 at 2:06 pm

          Chy, congratulations with the purchase! :) D300 is definitely a great camera and I’m sure it will serve you well!

      • November 23, 2009 at 2:08 pm

        Beezer, if money is not an issue, get a D300s. Otherwise, get a D300 and invest the difference in quality professional glass instead! :)

  8. 8) Wincent
    September 27, 2009 at 10:03 am

    I’m considering an upgrade for my D80. Would you recommend a D300 or a D300s?

    • September 27, 2009 at 11:13 am

      Wincent, get the D300s, as it has a much better frame rate and many other advantages over the D300.

  9. 9) Cherrera
    October 12, 2009 at 11:37 am

    I am upgrading from D80 to D300 or D300s. D300s will cost 1750 the body. I can buy a friend D300 almost new with 3 batteries for USD 1000.00. Does 750.00 really worth the diference in get and shooting a really good picture? What will you do?

    • October 12, 2009 at 6:04 pm

      Cherrerra: If you are comfortable with buying a used body, then you are better off with a D300 and more money towards buying pro-level glass (lenses). And the $750 difference is really not worth the difference, unless you are shooting sports and need the speed and/or movies.

  10. 10) Brendan
    October 13, 2009 at 11:01 am

    For a first time user/buyer, but highly dedicated learner,who is interested in a D300S, is this the camera for me? I have been learning a lot about DSLR’s and I have been researching the right camera for me. What do you think?

    • October 13, 2009 at 11:06 am

      Brendan, if you have never owned a DSLR, I highly recommend to start with a lower-end DSLR such as the Nikon D5000, simply because the D300s might be too much to get started. I also highly recommend reading my “DSLR Purchase Guide” here:

      Instead of wasting your money on a high-end DSLR, I recommend investing in professional-grade lenses, unless you have some specific needs such as shooting sports, birding, etc.

      • 10.1.1) Brendan
        October 13, 2009 at 1:03 pm

        Thanks for replying, and I did read that article; very informative! Thank you. However, I am very serious about photography (more than I have ever been) and look to it as a very new hobby of my. I will not feed around the bush, and so I will be frank in saying I still want the 300s, even though you say go lower. Lol, And here is why. I hope to get a lot of use out of this, and quite frankly I am not satisfied with all of the specs and features in less expensive models. I also hope for this to be my main camera for a long long time. Also this one shoots in HD Video, which is astounding next to its photography features. Frankly, the D5000 did not satisfy me with it’s far less unsuperior modes, specs, “max’s and mim’s”, etc. as compared to a camera such as the D300s.

        • Brendan
          October 13, 2009 at 1:05 pm

          Along with that I want to take a far leap into my new hobby and to blow people away with all that I already know and hope to know later on.

          • Nasim Mansurov
            October 13, 2009 at 2:32 pm

            Brendan, seems like you are getting into serious photography, which is great! But keep something in mind – when you say that you want to use the D300s for a “long time”, you probably mean 3-4 years max, since cameras get updated every 2 years. If this is your first DSLR, I would seriously suggest to either borrow a similar camera or rent it for a couple of days, before you make the final decision. Again, it is totally up to you and I am not trying to push you for a lower-end camera. I have just seen too many people that buy a professional-grade DSLR and then complain that the camera is “too much” for them.

            You can blow people away with any camera – remember, it is not about the camera, but about what you can see as a photographer.

            Just my 2 cents.

            • Brendan
              October 13, 2009 at 3:47 pm

              thank you for your insite. My last question is if you were going to be serious and actually go out and learn all about photography, is this a good camera to have? That might be a stupid question, its just that I want to get serious so is this a “serious” camera?

  11. October 18, 2009 at 2:43 pm

    Hi, I m making an upgrade from a d90 to D300s i am still little confused that should I go with d700 as i know its alot better in ISO than d300s . I also came to know that Nikon is launching d700s in some timeso i didnt want to buy a high end d700 and then feel bad when they launch d700s. so what you guys suggest? I m doing most of my shoots for either Fashion/portraits and weddings.

    • 11.1) Chester
      October 19, 2009 at 8:01 am

      If I were in you place, I’d ask myself first why do I need to upgrade from a D90 to a D300s. A follow up question to that is what is it that I can NOT do / capture with my D90 that I’d be able to with a D300s, moreover, a D700 (…then a D700s). This would put things in better perspective.
      Eventually, and I think the others would agree, spending your hard earned money on quality glass would be the better choice rather than getting a new camera body.
      At the end of the day, it’s how you deal with your upgrade itch…you don’t really need it, you just want it. :) Whatever the case may be, good luck with your decision!


    • October 19, 2009 at 11:52 am

      I totally agree with Chester. The first thing I would do is find out what your D90 cannot do that a D300s/D700 can for your needs.

      On D700s – where did you hear that Nikon is releasing one? Wherever you read it from, it is a wild guess and we might or might not see a D700s. Sure, it makes sense for a D700s after D3s was released, but there is no guarantee that it will actually happen.

      • 11.2.1) Specialist.
        October 19, 2009 at 12:00 pm

        Thanks MegaZ :)

        I understand I dont see any much difference between d90 and d300s except some fency features. but I know with d700 its alot better on ISO than d300s and d90 and its a full frame. Amazon is selling it for $2450 it was $2700 few days back. About d700s its posted on almost every website that Nikon is launching it in October.
        thats what is making me confused .. need a good help :)

        • Nasim Mansurov
          October 19, 2009 at 12:11 pm

          You are welcome! Well, one thing for sure, Nikon will NOT announce a D700s this month, since they already announced the D3s and Nikon never announces two different cameras in two separate announcements…

          Like I stated above, I would not expect anything to be released at least until December. If you look at the release dates of Nikon D3 and D700, there was a 6 month wait until D700 came out. I expect the same thing for D700s, so probably another 6 months before it is released.

  12. October 19, 2009 at 8:23 am

    Thanks :)

    My only reason at this point to upgrade is to get a better camera body than the d90 as some one is buying my d90 in a very good price i m only loosing $100 on it. i want to go with a full frame and a high ISO as i face some issues with low light on weddings and enets i shoot. the only thing which is making me confused is the “so called” launching of new version of d700 so i dont want to buy a new d700 and feel bad in a month or so when Nikon launches the newer version of d700. I have noney to spare for a full frame at this point but not for a D3 series

    • October 19, 2009 at 12:03 pm

      If you can wait for 3-6 months to see a D700s or a similar announcement, then go ahead and wait. If you need to sell your camera now and need another camera, get a D700 now and don’t look back.

      I am not expecting anything from Nikon this year, but there might be a small announcement right before the holiday season. If it doesn’t happen, then the next announcement would be late Q1 of 2010.

      • 12.1.1) Specialist.
        October 19, 2009 at 12:09 pm

        MagZ.. what you said makes alot of sense.
        I guess i ll see for a week or so and then will go for a d700 as i need a full frame with high iso. if Nikon is going to take months before they can launch a new d700 then i guess i cant wait that long

        Thankyou :)

        • Nasim Mansurov
          October 19, 2009 at 12:14 pm

          Yes, D700 is at least twice better than D300s in terms of noise. If you shoot in low light environments, you will be amazed by what D700 can give you. I never raise my ISO higher than 800 on my D300 and even ISO 800 is kind of pushing it, whereas on my D700 I can shoot ISO 1600 and sometimes even ISO 3200 and still like the results.

          D700 is a steal at $2450 – I bought mine for $2999 right after it was announced.

          • Specialist.
            October 19, 2009 at 12:17 pm

            I guess then d700 it is :)

            • Nasim Mansurov
              October 19, 2009 at 12:30 pm

              You will not regret it! I absolutely love my D700.

  13. 13) Milan
    October 23, 2009 at 9:14 am

    Hi, why are you not considering the D800?! (battery-pack attached to the body and of course the HD-film option)

  14. 14) carl
    October 24, 2009 at 8:39 am

    Here’s my two cents:

    The “worth” or “value” of a camera — particularly for a novice — depends on where you start. I’m new to the SLR/DSLR world (July 2009). I purchased a d90 b/c I didn’t want to buy a d40 and, in six or eight months, be thinking that I should have bought a d90. For the past month, however, I’ve been looking at the D300 and D700. Why? I was taking photos at a family event and got a very practical appreciation for my camera’s ISO capability. The room wasn’t “dark” for human vision purposes; but it was dark for photography purposes (I didn’t want to use the on-camera flash due to the look it creates). “Dark” means that many of my shutter speeds were 1/30 and, for me, that is slow enough that many of the photos had too much movement (I had no tripod, either). Anyway, enough photos came out good (or good enough) because the ISO was around 800-1600; but I could notice the noise (now, you have to realize that for those of us who aren’t into photography and are at an event where they’re not expecting crystal clear photos, the noise in my photos wouldn’t even register as a complaint). But I’ve been thinking how much better most of my photos would have been had a camera with the capability of a d700. Now, why am I looking at a d300 if its ISO is equal (or a little less so) to my d90? Because I can look around and find a d300 (not a 300s) at a price much closer to that which I paid for my d90; by my reasoning, I get “another” d90 which can do a little more in some areas. Anyway, at the moment, I would say start with a d90; because if you get very comfortable with it (and I’m not talking about using Program or Automatic or other point-and-shoot modes) then you’ll really see/understand what the more advanced cameras can do for YOU. When you’re comfortable with it, you’ll better understand the various comments around the Internet about what the camera can or can not do. Let’s face it: most of the Internet commentary is rather cryptic and stated in absolutes; without being solidly grounded yourself, it’s hard to put a value on these comments. I would say I’ve been on a fairly fast learning curve (considering photography is not my day job, not do I intend it to be) because I’m very motivated

    • November 23, 2009 at 1:59 pm


      Thank you for sharing your story! I, too, started with a Nikon D80 (back then there was no D90) and then eventually got myself a D300, then a D700, which I’m using mostly today.

      There are many things to consider when purchasing a brand new DSLR. I always recommend getting the most basic DSLR, because most people who never used a DSLR find it hard already to switch from an automatic point and shoot to a “serious” DSLR. Adding heavy price on top of that adds to the weight and some people might even get discouraged, thinking that photography is all about the best camera. As I have pointed out in several of my articles, a camera is just a tool – it’s the photographer that makes great pictures. That’s why I recommend to go with the most basic camera and rather invest in a quality lens instead. Glass is to keep, while a camera body is updated every two years.

      In your situation in a dim environment, if you were prohibited from using flash, then yes, a Nikon D700 might have produced better-looking images. But remember, it’s all about your technique and light. You could always tell your subjects to freeze, you could try to stabilize your camera by leaning against the wall or holding the camera properly, etc. If flash was allowed, you could create some amazing pictures that would look tons better than an image without a flash – by simply bouncing the light off the ceiling. So if I were given a choice of only owning a single D700 versus a D90/D300 with a flash unit such as SB-800/SB-900, I would definitely pick the latter with a flash.

      Here are some of my articles that I recommend:

      Hope this helps.


  15. January 27, 2010 at 9:32 am

    Short of the Video, D300s kind of reminds me of D70s where there was hardly any upgrade from the non-‘s’ version. I had a D70 and upgrading to D300 has been worth the effort. Maybe, sometime in 2011, when they have a D400, I may get tempted. For the moment I’d love to pick up a few lenses. I wish Nikon introduced a F/4 series of Nikkors, a la Canon.

    • January 27, 2010 at 5:42 pm

      uspandey, I totally agree with you! I’m not upgrading my D300 to D300s either and I too wish Nikon had a bigger selection of affordable lenses :)

  16. 16) JIM
    February 3, 2010 at 2:46 pm

    Which camera manufacturer HAS the largest selection of affordable lenses?

    • February 5, 2010 at 2:39 am

      Without a doubt, it would be Canon. That’s the biggest weakness of Nikon at the moment…

  17. 17) liz
    February 13, 2010 at 6:43 pm

    thanks for the explanation, I really don”t care about the video. So I will buy the d300.

    I have a canon ,but I love the nikon colors, could you help me with lenses, I need for portrait I’m so confuse with the nikon series and my budget is limited, but I really want a very quality lens .

    ps: I’m a photographer student and English isn’t my frist language! sorry my poor grammatical Thank you again.

  18. 18) Liz
    February 14, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    Thank you for your quick response! I’ll definitely check those lenses.

  19. February 17, 2010 at 1:44 am

    right now im using d40x…bt now i wanna upgrade it… now im confused wat to buy….is it d300,d300s or d700….im not dat much interested in vdo….n ofcoz i want a cam dat is defintly better in noise reduction for lowlight photography…as d700 is better in dat case,bt its more expensive dan d300… is it worth buying?

    • February 17, 2010 at 12:40 pm

      Chupachup, the Nikon D700 is a full-frame camera, which means that it will have much lower noise in high ISOs than D300 or D300s. It is a superb camera and I use it for all of my landscape and lifestyle photography needs.

      And yes, it is definitely worth buying!

  20. 20) maria
    March 22, 2010 at 7:46 pm

    My fiance was a photography major in school and knows all of the ins and outs of what I call the “fancy cameras” meaning he knows what all of the features do. He has a Nikon film camera and several lenses so I know they can be used on the Nikon digital bodies. I am wanting to purchase him a Nikon as a wedding present but am not sure which one I should buy? He has mentioned to other friends who ask him that he would love the D300 but I have heard that the D700 is better. Which would you recommend?

    • March 24, 2010 at 11:42 pm

      Maria, if you can get him the Nikon D700, I would buy that camera instead of the D300. If he knows cameras, he will absolutely love the D700!

      Make sure to use the current rebates that are available for the Nikon D700, because they are ending this weekend. I would get one of the lenses such as Nikon 70-300mm VR even if you do not need any, because you can always sell it at a good price.

      Hope this helps.

  21. 21) amit
    March 24, 2010 at 5:42 am

    hi Dear ,
    I am using d300s camera from last four monthes.i am fashion photographer usually i shoot on ambience light (with 80-200mm 1:2.8 lens) I got problem such as noice and wb. Noice reduction option is also on. Can I use D – Light on shoot ? plz suggest what can i do……….

    • March 24, 2010 at 11:44 pm

      Amit, did you try lowering the ISO to 200? Where are you getting noise?

      In terms of white balance, do you shoot RAW or JPEG? If you shoot RAW, your white balance does not matter.

      Active D-Lighting does not do anything if you shoot RAW either.

      • 21.1.1) Amit
        March 25, 2010 at 11:17 am

        As I tell u earlier that i shoot on embiance light,such as fashion shows, candid shoot on wedding where i can’t shoot on lower ISO.I tried so many times on lower ISO the camera shutter speed was only 1/15 where i got shaky pics. On ISO 800 I got noise

        • Profile photo of Nasim Mansurov Nasim Mansurov
          March 26, 2010 at 6:26 pm

          Amit, if you cannot add more light to the environment, there is really nothing else you can do besides getting a more capable camera such as Nikon D700 or D3s that can handle low-light environments better.

  22. 22) Saken
    April 23, 2010 at 10:58 am

    Hello mr. Mansurov, my name is Saken. I am from Kazakhstan, i recently bought Nikon D300S (body) and now i am choosing beetwen Nikon 16-36 vr and Carl zeiss distagon.
    I like Nikon 16-36 f4 vr but also want to try Carl-Zeiss distagon 28 f2 zf. ( the prices are almost similar) To buy both of these lenses at once a quite expensive for me.
    Please could you recomend me which one is give more better result?
    Thank you very much !

    • April 23, 2010 at 11:29 pm

      Saken, I am assuming that you will be shooting landscapes with the lens? I hope you know that the Distagon 28 f/2 is a manual focus lens…

      In terms of sharpness, the Distagon is probably going to be better in the corners, however, you should also consider the fact that the 16-35mm is a versatile lens and you have the zoom capability, while you are stuck @ 28mm with the Zeiss… In addition, the Zeiss has a fair amount of vignetting and distortion, while the 16-35mm has very limited amount of distortion between 24-35mm, especially on DX.

      I would personally choose the Nikon 16-36 over Zeiss 28 f/2 for the following reasons:
      1) 16-35 is equivalent of 24-52mm on DX, giving a good range to work with.
      2) 16-35 can autofocus.
      3) 16-35 can be used hand-held even at low shutter speeds thanks to VR.

      Carl Zeiss lenses have some of the best optics when it comes to landscape photography, but the 28 f/2 is not that impressive.

      • 22.1.1) Saken
        April 24, 2010 at 2:45 am

        Thanks a lot for answear. According to your advice now i am more lean to buy Nikon 16-36 :))

        By the way i am going to shoot various scens, especialy my family and my future baby .

        • Profile photo of Nasim Mansurov Nasim Mansurov
          April 26, 2010 at 12:31 pm

          Saken, you are most welcome. I’m sure the Nikon 16-35mm will serve you well!

  23. 23) Karen
    April 30, 2010 at 2:04 am


    I own a D40 and am now considering an upgrade. I received mix advices… some asking me to get a full frame D700, D300s or D90.

    I basically enjoy taking landscape, macro and outdoor photos. Appreciate that you can give me some advice.


    • April 30, 2010 at 10:06 am

      Karen, if you can afford a full-frame camera, go for the D700 – it has a full-frame sensor and superb high ISO performance. See my Nikon D700 vs Nikon D300 comparison. If you are wondering how a full-frame sensor compares to a cropped sensor, take a look at my Nikon FX vs DX article.

      The only thing to keep in mind, is that if you have any Nikon DX lenses right now, none of them will work at full resolution on the Nikon D700 camera. If you have more than one lens, that is also another factor to consider.

      If you have a bunch of DX lenses that you want to keep, then either go for the D300s or D90 – both are superb (depending on your budget).

      Don’t forget that today is the last day of Nikon rebates, where Nikon is giving away up to $500 in instant rebates for Nikon D700 and Nikon D300s cameras when purchased with a lens. I would seriously look at those deals, because you can get Nikon’s best lenses such as Nikon 16-35mm f/4.0 VR or Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II together with a DSLR. Nikon rarely runs rebates like this and this is a good opportunity to save a lot of money. Even if you do not need a lens, I would still recommend to get one, because you can sell it for a good price…

      Hope this helps.

  24. 24) Karen
    April 30, 2010 at 4:55 pm

    Hi Nasim

    Thank you very much for your reply. I do own a couple of DX lense and will hence most probably get a D300s. Fingers crossed.


    • April 30, 2010 at 5:31 pm

      Karen, no problem! Just make sure to get it today, if you want to take advantage of the Nikon rebates. Like I’ve said before, even if you do not need a new lens, it might be worth getting it now, due to a large discount.

      Good luck and let me know if you have any other questions!

  25. 25) Karen
    May 2, 2010 at 2:24 am

    Hi Nasim

    It’s back to the drawing board for me because I didnt like the feel of D300s in my hand. (It is way to big for me to hold it comfortably).

    Now it’s more like D90. Am now deciding on whether I should get the kit or just the body as I own a 18-200VR.

    I use it mostly during my travel and enjoy landscape and macro shots.

    Appreciate your view.


    • May 5, 2010 at 8:14 pm

      Karen, see if Nikon is running any combo deals right now and if they are not, go for body only. If you do not own a fast prime lens, I highly recommend checking out the 50mm f/1.4 or the 30mm f/1.8 DX.

  26. 26) Karen
    May 5, 2010 at 8:19 pm

    am a proud owner of d90. Let’s see whether the camera will be proud of me. Thanks for your advises and informative blog.


    • May 5, 2010 at 8:24 pm

      Karen, congratulations with your purchase! The D90 is excellent and I’m sure it will serve you well :)

  27. 27) Dawn Taylor
    May 17, 2010 at 1:31 am

    Hello, I have a D70 and want to upgrade, I take mostly landscapes and wildlife and birds. I really am not interested in the video. Would you recommend the D300 or the D700? I have several lenses, mostly DX and of course that is a factor due to lense replacement costs. Any help would be appreciated….pro and cons.
    thx, Dawn

    • May 24, 2010 at 1:11 am

      Dawn, go for the D700 and don’t look back! It is way better than the D300 and you will be amazed by its performance, especially on high ISOs. Check out my Nikon DX vs FX article to see the difference.

  28. May 26, 2010 at 5:08 am

    The D90 is an excellent DSLR and I believe the D700 is really excellent in low light. In brighter light I do not see much difference. The D700 viewfinder is frankly, the best. Nikon glass for FX format is expensive. Based on cost, sometimes smaller size helps, and always smaller price is better

    • June 4, 2010 at 5:20 pm

      David, there is a difference in shadow noise between a DX and FX body, so there is still a difference, even in brighter light.

  29. 29) Sharris
    June 22, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    I am wanting to upgrade from a Rebel xti. I am considering the Canon 50d or the Nikon D300. I take a lot of “action” shots (wedding dances, sports, etc) in low light. Thanks for any input!

    • June 29, 2010 at 11:22 pm

      Sharris, if you already have Canon lenses, then you might want to go with the 50D or 7D. If you have nothing to lose, then go with the D300s.

      Let me know if you have any questions.

  30. June 24, 2010 at 8:56 am

    Dear sir,
    i am useing D300s camera .
    Tell me one thing that is there any difference to use SD or CF cards . Can SD card reduce the Quality of image.or any thing……else

    • June 29, 2010 at 11:22 pm

      Amit, no, there is no difference. Just use whatever is more convenient or accessible for you.

  31. 31) peter
    July 23, 2010 at 7:49 am

    what lens should i buy for d300s, for landscape?
    Considering the price also

    • July 29, 2010 at 2:53 am

      Peter, there are multiple choices:
      1) Nikon 10-22mm DX
      2) Nikon 12-24mm DX
      3) Nikon 16-35mm

      All are excellent for wide-angles.

  32. 32) enrique torre
    October 5, 2010 at 3:27 pm


    What Nikon lenss would you recomend for taking very clouse up pictiures of incects?


  33. December 30, 2010 at 3:53 am

    Hi Nasim
    Hi have the nikon D3oo i want to know if the nikon D300s is the same body
    I’m photografher underwater i want know is posible to use the same housing?

    • January 6, 2011 at 11:19 pm

      Saul, while both cameras have the same sensor, the camera bodies are actually a little different, so your underwater housing might not work for D300s. I would check the current manual/specifications of your current housing to see if it can fit both.

  34. 34) nikos petof
    March 17, 2011 at 2:24 am

    Hello Nazim,

    what is your opinion about the D300S + 200-400 lens setup ?

    i work now with D3S + 200-400, mainly for wildlife photos, but i am thinking to get the D300S, I’ve found at good price. My main reason is that with D300S i will have basicly 300-600 lense. Attractive enough, i think. But what about the quality at high ISO 1250, 2500?
    Or should i get, for almost same money, the NIKON 85 1.4? Basicly I have 70-200, so i am covered in this range but I heard a lot of very good opinion about this lens.

    best regards,


  35. May 5, 2011 at 10:53 am

    Gosh, it was almost 2 years ago. There is no significant update to Dxxx line since d300. D7000 seems to have quite a lot better sensor. I wonder whether nikon will make D7000 a new top DX line or there will be some D300 replacement.

  36. 36) james pinder
    August 5, 2011 at 10:16 am

    i was just wondering if there is any image quality differances between the two cameras??

  37. 37) Paul
    August 7, 2011 at 9:43 pm

    Hi Nasim,

    I have a Nikon D300s and I would like to know and understand how depth of field preview button works. Can you give me a walkthrough on this. I tried searching through the internet and I don’t see any guides on how this function works. Even the manual does not explain the functionality. I really want to utilize this camera function but I need some help. Im using a 35mm 1.8G DX lens.

    Thanks in advance

  38. 38) Lee
    September 22, 2011 at 4:17 pm

    I have just held a D7000 for the first time at our camera club, it is awful – like a basic Canon. I use a D200, which can be in my hand for 3 or 4 hours whilst shooting weddings and wildlife. I wanted a body with a better low light capability, but there is no way I could use the D7000 for more than a few minutes before it became uncomfortable, Neither does it have useful features at hand like the D200/300/700/3/3x. Forget it – it is a flash consumer camera, NOT for a pro that uses it regularly. Why does nobody mention these points, why are you all wrapped in features and specs?

  39. 39) Raquel
    November 6, 2011 at 8:53 pm

    Hi Nasim/ everyone

    I’ve got my new nikon D300s two weeks ago and I noticed there’s a ticking sound in my D300s body when i shake it gently. Think it sounds like a mirror or a lens. But the camera is turned OFF. i plugged out the battery and lens then wag the body, i really can hear this ticking sound. Been searching for technical reviews and forums about this issue but im not lucky enough to find any. Are you guys aware about this? is this normal for any Nikon DX bodies? i never dropped or slammed it. Appreciate for your advice..

    • November 13, 2011 at 11:20 pm

      Raquel, my Nikon D700 had the same thing and still produces a ticking sound when I shake it. It works great, so it does not bother me :) Just don’t shake it I guess, LOL :)

      • 39.1.1) Raquel
        November 15, 2011 at 12:03 am

        Many thanks Nasim. I wouldn’t bother going to Nikon service center then. Cheers!

  40. 40) Jen
    December 9, 2011 at 9:05 am

    What are your thoughts on the D700 versus the D300s for shooting sports photography in crappy lighting conditions? My daughters are figure skaters and it is very difficult to capture those moments as they are moving fast and the rink lighting is so low. I love my basic Nikon D40 for almost everything. I have been shooting some of their competitions with the AF-S Nikkor 55-200mm 1:4-5.6GVR lens, many of the photographs are blurry, though there are some that turn out nice, but not quite as crisp as I’d like. Last weekend, I upped my ISO to various levels and the noise levels made me cry afterwards. It was horrible.

    I’ve heard that the D300s is great for sports photography and the D700 has way better ISO. Ack! Is there one that has both features (other than the D3, which I can not afford)? What would you recommend and is there a lens that you’d recommend with it to zoom in close? Thank you for your help! I’m stumped right now…

    • 40.1) Jen
      December 9, 2011 at 9:43 am

      One more ?: I am not sure I could afford this lens, but I always hear people talking about investing in glass, so if I instead kept my D40 and bought the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8VRII AF-S lens, would that be enough to take crisp photos of ice skaters in rinks with horrible lighting? I can not use the flash as it can disturb the skaters. Thoughts on that in relation to my aforementioned question??? Thanks again!

    • 40.2) Shawn Earle
      March 2, 2015 at 6:30 pm

      I would get the D700 then save the f2.8 lens later. I have the d200 and it’s a nice camera but anything over iso 320 look horrible, with the D700’s full frame sensor i’ve been told iso 1600 photos look clean and sharp. That will get your shutter speeds up a bit, and be tons better if you get the F2.8 lens later. Personally i want a D610 lol

  41. 41) camera
    August 24, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    nice compare nasim, i decided to upgrade my D90 to D300s.after read your post and because it have some new feature and many advantage than D300.

    • 41.1) Brent
      September 12, 2012 at 11:03 pm

      I, too, am considering upgrading from the D90 to the D300s. Have you noticed the improvement in features and autofocus?

  42. 42) nav
    November 5, 2012 at 9:13 am

    I am planning to move away from my basic SONY Alpha(200) to a Mid Range Camera. Although there is a wide range of Nikon’s and Canon’s available. Only question i want to be answered is about lens, When Sony provides Carl Zeiss Lens(ofcourse not with the kit)…..what makes Nikon’s and Canon’s a better choice.

    Honestly i have had better results with my basic SONY DSLR Kit lens(DT 3.5-5.6/18-70) compared to mid range Canon lens for Portraits.

  43. 43) gotglasses
    June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am

    This is probably old news as we now have a D7200 as the top Nikon Dx body. I had a D300 which I used for Indy Car races and it worked very well and could track focus in most cases. This sort of use is very demanding – travel by air, lots of banging around in crowds etc. Then I “upgraded” to a D7000 and for two years was frustrated by the less effective focusing and lighter build quality. This year I went FX with a D700 which has the D300 focusing system and it works even better. Now to my point here – I bought another used D300 because it was cheap and in perfect shape and allows me to get 8FPS with the MB-10 pack which can be shared with my D700. Both cameras are very fast and feels like a NIKON. I stayed away from the D7100 because of the limited buffer which was a deal breaker for my sports photography.

    Thank You for the wonderful website!

Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *