Nikon D90 or D300?

[adkflip]

Folks- Which is the better camera to upgrade too? D90 or D300?

I currently shoot a D50, and love it. Got it about a year ago used from a friend- and is my first DSLR, after messing around with P&S's and learning photography on a Pentax K1000 and ME Super back in the 70's and 80's.

However, I'm looking to upgrade for 2 main reasons:

1) Would like bigger sensor, to give me more freedom in cropping and blowing up prints. I've found many nice shots within shots, but due to the 6 mpx sensor, couldn't really crop and blow up too far. I'm still working on composition skills.

2) better low light performance. I've got a pretty good walk about lens (Tamron 18-200), and I'm looking at some other primes, and faster lens. But I'd also like a camera that has better low light performance.

I'm looking for quality of photos over ruggedness (I'm pretty gentle with my gear).
Price these days is about even for both, used or refurbished.

I would appreciate any constructive thoughts.

Thanks

[zona5101]

Welcome!
That seems to be a pretty common question as I have seen several threads on the topic. Perhaps use the search feature, check out those threads and after reading them you may have some more specfic questions. The obvious answer is the D300, it's all the cost-benefit-suitability for purpose stuff you have to nail down.... good luck.

[kirbinster]

The D90 and the D300 have the same sensor, so if your reason for upgrading is just the sensor then go for the D90 and save money. If you need some of the other features that the D300 offers then you need to think more about the trade-offs for the money.

[adkflip]

Thanks- I had searched quite a bit, and depending on which way the wind was blowing, or who you asked, it landed 50/50. I noticed nobody who asked had stated what it was they were looking for in an upgrade, so I figured I'd throw that out there.

It appears they both have the same sensor, but perhaps there were some upgrades to the D90 that the older D300 didn't have. Many have opined that the D90 seems to perform better in low light conditions- higher ISO sensitivity without noise, etc. On the other hand, the D300 is built tough.

Do they truly produce the same quality pictures? Are their meters similar? Same dynamic range?, etc?

[Almond.Butterscotch]

mechanically speaking, the D300 is stronger (obivously).

150k actuations compared to 100k, weather sealing, and 6fps compared to 4.5fps.

[candleman]

the D300s has 51 focus points and the focus system from the D700.. its a hell of allot more accurate and smoother than the D90.

[LENAAPPLE1974]

I actually made this decision in January. For me, the D300 was an above all the smarter choice - except one thing. Carrying it for great lengths of time for me would be a problem, so I opted for the D90, while not that much lighter, makes a huge difference for my poor wrists. So, I ended up with the D90 - and love every inch of it! A few pluses - it is cheaper (I only needed the body as I was upgrading from the D40x) and it has video. (Which, I have not really tested).

Good Luck & Happy shopping!
Come back and post your final findings!

[enetsang]

I recently upgraded to a D300s (from a D60) and I'm absolutely loving it. I have never used the D90 before but have heard great things about it. Not sure if you're referring to the D300s because it replaces the D300 (with minor enhancements). Like others have already said it has the same sensor so will have similar low light performance. However, you'll find more functionality on the D300 (if it's of any use to you). The key advantages of the D300 over the D90 is that it has a tougher build and can do more fps (again if you need it). Whilst I think the D300s is a great camera...why pay more when you can achieve what you want with the D90?