D90 or D300S? +k for help. thanks.

I have the D90 and love it. From what I can tell you're going to get a better focusing system and better iso performance from the D300. The 300 also has the aluminum body vs plastic.

That being said I have a D90 and it has done everything I could have asked from it. High fps, great iso performance, great focusing.

I would get the D90 and invest in a nicer lens

check my pictures if you want some examples

thanks dude. yeah i dont really think the 300 has enough to pull me toward its side. better ISO performance is nice but i can get over those with lenses for the most part. the D90 is sufficient. +k

ah ur the one with the famous camping long exposure. yep im getting D90

i wish my parents bought me my equipment

I wish I had a filming company..



My generalizations about the OP.
1) You shoot skiing
2) This is not coming from your bank account
3) You failed to mention anything about the video feature of these two cameras, so Ill go ahead and say the quality of the video doesnt matter that much to you. Contrary to your username and sig, sure.
4) You are looking at these two cameras because you think they will help your photography, based on the fact that you accredited Benk's shot to the camera as opposed to him.

Anyways. I feel as if you should buy neither.

Because.. 1) Higher fps, sure, cool. Show us every sequence you have shot with your D60. My guess is that you dont have as many as you feel you might. And if you do, unless you are shooting a sunset shoot with flash at every 8 fps, they will probably be fairly boring. No offense, but sequences are something youll grow out of after your first few.

2) Autofocus, If you are shooting those sequences, most likely they will already be pre-focused so you dont need something that fast. Shit if you're really worried about it, stop down. No need to shoot sequences at 2.8

3) ISO, You said most of your shots are skiing right? Why do you need anything past ISO 400 tops anyway?

4) CLS, Ill be honest I dont know much about it, but unless you get into fashion photography and light everything perfectly, I dont think youll use this much.


Do what you please, but question why you really want to upgrade. Holding a D300s as opposed to your D60, doesnt make you a better photographer.

I don't own a filmcompany? I wish I did..



And nick notice how everything he is saying is what I've been telling you ever since you started? Listen once and a while

I reallllly don't think you need to spend your money on a new body. Spend the money on lenses. The d60 is more than capable for what you do.

Higher fps and autofocus are awful reasons to get a new body. Especially one as expensive as the d90 or 300.

What do you have for lenses? I ask because the upgrade to a d90 or d300s is only worth it if you already have a decent set of lenses. Upgrading the body and using a shitty lens will still give you shitty photos (quality wise, you'd be surprised how much good glass makes a difference!).

Wait nick, what didnt you agree with me on?

-Didn't assume he was using it for skiing shots (unless i missed it somewhere). He said action sports, but shooting lacrosse or football is a lot different than shooting skiing

-FPS is used for more than just sequences and if you shoot some sports its nice to have.

-Auto focus is important if you need it, not just assuming he doesn't

-Asking why the upgraded CLS is worth it rather than dismissing his needs of rit

Mmm, well, thats why I gave my little disclaimer. But I never said he doesnt need AF, just that his D60's AF is sufficient and similar to the d90.

i have a pro-optics fisheye. a 50mm 1.8 that id like to focus. i also have a 70-300mm f/4-5.6. not the best lenses but i am still only in high school and do not have a lot of money so im figuring get a D90 and that would last me all the way through college and probably longer. and i shoot a huge range of things not JUST skiing. the ISO on the D60 is like really bad. my friend has a D40 a couple years older than mine and its got better quality...
my camera does not have a commander mode so i cant use any off-camera flashes. i dont want to spend 200 for a trigger either. i think im gna just wait it out and get a new standard zoom lens with some pro glass instead.

all very true. and plus id like to kinda get into portraiture and all that too. i always find it interesting as to like trying to tell a story with it and stuff. my cousin does some of this stuff so he got me into it a lot. http://openshutter.net/ thats some of his work. but yeah i think ur right..ill go lens.

Uhm yeah, new camera should be the last thing on your mind based on EVERYTHING you just said, not your lens line up.

D90

Didnt you just make a thread asking the same fucking question? got no responses and now your giving him advice on it?

I would suggest some moving to some primes, nikon makes some pretty quality glass.
85mm for portraits (however, I'm not familiar with the crop factor on nikon bodies, you might want to stick with a 50 if that works better)
20,24,28mm for wider stuff
135mm if you take any telephoto shots

thats what ive been highly considdering. might get like a 24mm 2.8. and yeah i think someone was telling me my 50mm is equvalent to a 85mm with the full size sensor. but yeah the 85 is like THE portrait lens but thats pretty much the extent of it

^24mm is not really that wide on a crop body. If your looking for a really wide shot, you want to be any where from 10-20 mm