I apologize if this has been covered. Tried some searches and didn't really find it -- surprisingly, I guess.

But, I am going to upgrade from my D200. I shot 35mm film for 25+ years and have shot digital since the D100 came out. So I am familiar with the "crop" factor issue and it is not particularly important to me at this point.

I am trying to decide between the D300 and D700. Beside the perhaps most obvious for a hobyyist (2 x the price), it seems like there may be features on the D700 that make it worth it.

I am interested in the extended DR. I also am under the impression that the same 12 mp sensor in the FX camera means larger pixels and therefore, arguably better image quality at larger print sizes. The majority of my prints have -- to date -- been 13 x 19. But as the cost of printing gets lower and the cost of printers come down, I can see making them larger.

My shooting is 95% what would be termed, I guess, as Landscape. I currenly own a 300mm f2.8 35mm lens, as well as a Nikkor 60mm macro (nether are FX). I also have a couple of older Nikon mount lenses.

I guess I am asking for advice -- or maybe for someone to talk me "up" to the D700 over the D300. I am willing to spend the $ but only if there is a real significant advantage.

Since most of your work is landscape, I'd love to go for the features you've listed in the D700. I have the D300 and love it for the reach I get trying to shoot birds with a 200-400. On those many occasions that I work on landscapes, I'm often tempted to add the D700 to my toy list, but have resisted so far because most of my shorter lenses are DX and the cost of the FX lenses just hasn't been in the budget yet.

For 13x19, there's probably not a significant advantage.

I've got a D300 which I like, but I'd also like a D700, just not quite enough to trade up or add to the collection.

I'm also using a $200 speed graphic. Just made a 8x10" cropped print of a 16x20" sized enlargement, and I still don't see grain, and that's using iso 400 B&W film.

Andy--I don't think the image quality difference is going to be all that visible at low ISOs. I love my D700 for high ISO but at up to 800 ISO there isn't much to choose between it and my D300 (except for the effect of the crop factor of course).--David

I have both the D300 and the D700. I got the D700 to use two special-purpose lenses for the work that I create--an 8mm circular fisheye and the 24 PCE.

Two months ago, I put this combo to a three-week test shooting in the Republic of Serbia. I had the special lenses for the D700 and DX lenses for the D300.

I was shooting church interiors and iconography with little to no light. I shot, the D700 was the right tool, especially with the fisheye, 17-35 and 24PCE. Many times I had to run & gun--no time for a tripod--and I wanted to remain hidden in the background for my shooting. ISO 3200 and 6400 was the norm for this project and even at this speed, the images are stunning, but don't discount the D300 at even ISO 3200.

When it came to landscapes, the D700 with the 17-35 did the job for wide and a 17-55 and 70-300 worked well for the D300 for quite a bit. However, I certainly miss the lighter weight of the 12-24. If shooting the interiors and the need for fisheye photos by my clint wasn't an issue, I would have just gone light and the D300 would have been fine

What I really like about the DX is the smaller, lighter and more compact lenses which for the most part are every bit as good as their full-frame counterparts, and that extra range from my telephotos. If you need to use the wide PCE lenses or need high ISO, then go to the D700.

I can tell you that when the ink hits the paper, unless the photo was taken with circular fisheye, I couldn't begin to tell you if the image was shot with the D300 or the D700, even running prints up to 20x30 and larger.

Amen to Larry's comment about DX lenses. I really miss both my 12-24 and my 18-200 especially. Now that I have both the D300 & D700 I tend not to carry either of them since then I have to think about which camera I'm using with which lens.--David

Hi David,

It's easy to figure out which body is which--I run the MB-10 on the D300 and usually use a telephoto since I have the "bonus" 1.5x. On the D700, it's almost always the 17-35mm. When shooting in close, the D300 has the 17-55mm. Smaller body combo gets the wider lens. YRMV.

Usually, I try to use my two-leg zoom when I'm working a crowd with the wides;-)

Yeah when are Nikon going to make a reasonable full frame walk around lens? I also miss the 18-200, whilst not perfect is great for everyday use. It seems to me a big gap in their line up.

Any suggestions on this what people use?

Howdy Andy,

I have been going through the same question, D300s or D700?

Yesterday I put my money where my thoughts were and purchased a new D700; it will be here in two days.

Since I am shooting more and more low light venues to pay the bills I went with the better camera at high ISO. I like full frame and use my 14nx in the studio all the time. It will be nice to have a full frame for wedding and family location portraits that will work in those low light conditions.

I am looking forward to learning the D700.

PS: If you are going to buy on Amazon or B&H use the link on this site to get there to shop. Those click-throughs are a part of what helps keep this site operational. Support David if you can.

Rick--I'm sure you'll love the D700. It is amazing to be able to get the D3 sensor in such a convenient and (relatively) inexpensive camera body.

Thanks for the plug about the site links, too! We try to keep them unobtrusive for the sake of useability, but they do help pay the bills.--David