Thanks for the heads up on this. Looks like only minior improvements to the D300, other than video of course. Also looks like Canon has caught up nicely with the 7D, even surpassed if you consider the 18MP ... which I consider minor as it's only a 20% linear resolution increase. Good to see the two slugging it out. Just imagine what the D400 and the 7D MkII will bring!
Not much difference right now in the APS-C category and more personal choice. Except for Canon's fast primes, f/4 image stabilized lenses and 1080p video. With the 7D, those who were on the fence about switching no longer have a reason to move to Nikon.
I do wish that DPR would normalize the image sizes of the 7D to the D300s. That would only be a fair comparison.
rsg_1 wrote:
Not much difference right now in the APS-C category and more personal choice. Except for Canon's fast primes, f/4 image stabilized lenses and 1080p video. With the 7D, those who were on the fence about switching no longer have a reason to move to Nikon.
I do wish that DPR would normalize the image sizes of the 7D to the D300s. That would only be a fair comparison.
The D300/D300s are very fine cameras.
Well said. The 7D provides us Canon shooters with a D300-equivalent, something we've really longed for, and it does keep me solidly in the Canon camp which is nice because switching is such a pain and huge expense. I was willing to seriously consider it though because the D300 was the camera I'd been hoping Canon would make. In spite of all of the comparisons and claims that one is better than the other (each has its strengths and weaknesses when compared to each other) they are pretty evenly matched and it's nice to see both manufacturers put out full-featured, decently priced products for photographers at every level. You are very correct in saying that the D300/D300s are very fine cameras. So is the 7D. Both are some of the very nicest, in my opinion, which says very good things about the current state of digital photography, in my opinion.
I owned a D300, and now have a 7D, both are great cameras, and I have noticed allot of the features from the D300 on the 7D! The first time I used the 7D my first thought was "This is Canon's own version of the D300!"
Both cameras are very capable, I think the D300 is slightly better feature wise, but I prefer the picture quality from the 7D (but I'm more use to the Canon colours after shooting Canon for many years) but with the 7D, I am noticing the colours are more "Nikon like" (In a good way) then any of my previous Canon's that I have owned.
I guess at the end of the day, it comes down to personal choice which camera to go with, but both are great choices and very capable.
"Canon's own version of the D300" is a very good way to put it. I like Canon's version better only because my Canon lenses fit! I'd have to agree that feature-wise the D300 is probably better. Nikon has always paid more attention to detail at every level of their photographic products (even looking at my old FE2, I'm impressed) whereas sometimes it seems that only those willing to buy Canon's top models are privy to all of the great features. With the 7D it seems that Canon has begun to put the same attention to detail in their other offerings as well, a welcome change.
Nov 17, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
rsg_1 wrote:
Not much difference right now in the APS-C category and more personal choice. Except for Canon's fast primes, f/4 image stabilized lenses and 1080p video. With the 7D, those who were on the fence about switching no longer have a reason to move to Nikon.
I do wish that DPR would normalize the image sizes of the 7D to the D300s. That would only be a fair comparison.
The D300/D300s are very fine cameras.
Sure they still have reason to switch to Nikon, it's called the D3s and the 14-24 and the 200-400VR Canon has nothing like these! Or how about the DX uber-zoom: 18-200VR.
Don't get me wrong, both systems are great and which to choose depends on your needs and desires. But to say there is no reason to switch one way or the other ... nah, I don't believe that.
A few other perspectives
Nikon has fast primes under 200mm, but I will grant that SOME lenses are WAY overdue for an update. A 24 and an 85 update would be nice... just two lenses. We have an updated 50mm for FX/DX and an updated 35 for DX. Besides, zooms way outsell primes, even among professionals.
The f/4 zooms are over-rated and Nikon has decided to go down the variable max aperature zoom road instead and for good reason. For instance, take the the Canon 70-200 ($1200) ... the Nikon 70-300VR ($550) is only about 1/3 stop slower @ 70mm, 2/3 stop slower @ 200mm and a lot better @ 300mm And, if you need faster, the 80-200 f/2.8 is only $1000 and is one stop faster.
Honestly, I don't see Nikon making f/4 zooms. Nikon does not differentiate itself from Canon by copying Canon. Nikon differentiates itself by doing new things Canon does not have (e.g. 18-200, 14-24, 200-400). Nikon zooms work this way (and I don't see this changing):
f/2.8 pro lenses with 77mm filters
high-end consumer zooms with 67mm filters
low-end consumer zooms with 52mm filters.
Video -- it does appear that Canon is doing a better job with video at the moment ... if you need it. But the current implementation of video on DSLRs is a gimick as of yet ... give it time. The difference between 720 and 1080 is not that huge.
Either way, two great systems. Get what you need/want and pray the competition goes on the way it is. I can't wait to see the D400 and 7D Mk II.
Canon shooter here. I agree about the 7d being Canon's D300, I considered switching many times because of the D300, even had a trade fall through one time. I can't wait to get a 7d. Both are great cams.
The f/4 zooms are over-rated and Nikon has decided to go down the variable max aperature zoom road instead and for good reason. For instance, take the the Canon 70-200 ($1200) ... the Nikon 70-300VR ($550) is only about 1/3 stop slower @ 70mm, 2/3 stop slower @ 200mm and a lot better @ 300mm And, if you need faster, the 80-200 f/2.8 is only $1000 and is one stop faster.
As far as lenses go, the f4 zooms are great. You can get both the 17-40 and 70-200 for just over $1200. Great combo. If you shoot mainly manual or aperture priority, variable aperture zooms are not the way to go. That's why, I wish Canon made a 200-400F4. That's got to be a great daytime sports lens.
Sure they still have reason to switch to Nikon, it's called the D3s and the 14-24 and the 200-400VR Canon has nothing like these! Or how about the DX uber-zoom: 18-200VR.
Agree about the 14-24 and 200-400 (as stated above). D3s??, canon has 1ds3 (and likely 1ds4 soon) and 1d4, not much reason to switch there, and canon has 18-200IS, so no reason there either. About the only camera I see as as a reason to move would be the d700, affordable (somewhat), full frame with pro AF. 5d2 is maybe better in some aspects, but lacks the AF of the d700. Same reason d300, was so envied by 40d and 50d owners.
I'm just happy they keep trying to 1 up and match each other. Maybe in a couple of years, we can compare Canon's 200-400 to Nikon's and Nikon's f1.2 primes to Canon's.
Nov 18, 2009 at 08:40 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
packpe89 wrote:
Canon shooter here. I agree about the 7d being Canon's D300, I considered switching many times because of the D300, even had a trade fall through one time. I can't wait to get a 7d. Both are great cams.
As far as lenses go, the f4 zooms are great. You can get both the 17-40 and 70-200 for just over $1200. Great combo. If you shoot mainly manual or aperture priority, variable aperture zooms are not the way to go. That's why, I wish Canon made a 200-400F4. That's got to be a great daytime sports lens.
Agree about the 14-24 and 200-400 (as stated above). D3s??, canon has 1ds3 (and likely 1ds4 soon) and 1d4, not much reason to switch there, and canon has 18-200IS, so no reason there either. About the only camera I see as as a reason to move would be the d700, affordable (somewhat), full frame with pro AF. 5d2 is maybe better in some aspects, but lacks the AF of the d700. Same reason d300, was so envied by 40d and 50d owners. ...Show more →
USED you might get the 17-40 and 70-200 for just over $1200. The 70-200 f/4 alone is $1200 new.
As for the 1ds3, please, the D3s has better high ISO performance ... after all, Canon folks were sure to remind us of how important high ISO is for so many years, we would not want them to forget now, would we? (sorry, just had to say it for fun)
AND, the D3s actually focuses properly too! (this too)
More FPS too!!!
I'm just happy they keep trying to 1 up and match each other. Maybe in a couple of years, we can compare Canon's 200-400 to Nikon's and Nikon's f1.2 primes to Canon's.
I'll agree with you 100% on that and I hope you are right about the lenses.
The f/4 zooms are over-rated and Nikon has decided to go down the variable max aperature zoom road instead and for good reason
The Canon 70-200 F4 IS is one of the finest zooms I have ever owned and I am a 70-200 2.8 VR owner. If there is one lens that I miss after my switch to Nikon it is that one. You surely can't be serious
Andre Labonte wrote:
Sure they still have reason to switch to Nikon, it's called the D3s and the 14-24 and the 200-400VR Canon has nothing like these! Or how about the DX uber-zoom: 18-200VR.
Don't get me wrong, both systems are great and which to choose depends on your needs and desires. But to say there is no reason to switch one way or the other ... nah, I don't believe that.
A few other perspectives
Nikon has fast primes under 200mm, but I will grant that SOME lenses are WAY overdue for an update. A 24 and an 85 update would be nice... just two lenses. We have an updated 50mm for FX/DX and an updated 35 for DX. Besides, zooms way outsell primes, even among professionals.
The f/4 zooms are over-rated and Nikon has decided to go down the variable max aperature zoom road instead and for good reason. For instance, take the the Canon 70-200 ($1200) ... the Nikon 70-300VR ($550) is only about 1/3 stop slower @ 70mm, 2/3 stop slower @ 200mm and a lot better @ 300mm And, if you need faster, the 80-200 f/2.8 is only $1000 and is one stop faster.
Honestly, I don't see Nikon making f/4 zooms. Nikon does not differentiate itself from Canon by copying Canon. Nikon differentiates itself by doing new things Canon does not have (e.g. 18-200, 14-24, 200-400). Nikon zooms work this way (and I don't see this changing):
f/2.8 pro lenses with 77mm filters
high-end consumer zooms with 67mm filters
low-end consumer zooms with 52mm filters.
Video -- it does appear that Canon is doing a better job with video at the moment ... if you need it. But the current implementation of video on DSLRs is a gimick as of yet ... give it time. The difference between 720 and 1080 is not that huge.
Either way, two great systems. Get what you need/want and pray the competition goes on the way it is. I can't wait to see the D400 and 7D Mk II. ...Show more →
Just imagine what the D400 and the 7D MkII will bring! 
