Welcome to the forum Gitzo...I'm not a huge fan of aviation photography,but I checked out some of Sam Chui's work on your reccomendation and you are right....this guy is a master of shooting the big steel birds!!......BTW, I crop a lot and I shoot Dx.:-)

Talk about being "a little late" getting into the discussion ! Obviously, many things have happened since this thread was originally started. Apparently the D 300s still wasn't "out" yet. Inasmuch as I just found this website yesterday, (7-14-2012). In reading through what people have said about the D 300s (which apparently was about to be introduced at the time this thread was started) , I'm struck by several things. First is, a few people have mentioned the 300 and 300s along with the D 700. Let's face it folks, there is no meaningful way to compare full-frame sensors with APS-C sensors. But what some people seem not to realize is, images made with less than full frame sensors are (or at least can be), just as sharp, just as ___________(you can fill in the words), as images made with full frame sensors; They just can't be blown up a big. ( Or can they ? ) For anyone doubting this, try this; log onto "Airliners.net"; it's the biggest data base of commercial and military airplane photos on the internet; ( just recently added the 2,000,000 photo. (you can do this without being a member, incidentally) In the search box, type in the name, "Sam Chui"; Sam Chui is just one of the hundreds of great airplane photographers who regularly upload images to the site; he is also one of the very BEST, bar none.

Taking great airplane pictures is much more difficult than you could ever imagine; one of the very BIGGEST challenges is........getting to where the airplanes people want to see pictures of, are........which is.........all over the world ! Then, once you get to Dubai, or Sydney, or some out of the way airport in Nepal, you're faced with what is an impossibility for most people, and that is, simply getting anywhere near the airplanes. Just the other day, I noticed a shot taken in the cockpit of an Airbus 380, (the world's biggest commercial airliner) In looking at it, I noticed it was taken by Sam Chui; in the "remarks" he mentioned that they had just landed in Sydney, after a 13 1/2 hour flight from Dubai. Sam Chui doesn't work for an airline, as a matter of fact, I think he's an engineer. But he logs more air miles flying around the world than a lot of airline pilots do. And he's so well known in the airline industry, and has the reputation of being one of the best airplane photographers there is, that he is able to get places where other photographers can only dream about ! Now, a lot of photographers are able to get "invited" to take flight deck shots in airliners that are sitting on a ramp; (and Sam gets a lot of them) His BIG "trick" is, many of his greatest shots are taken of 747's and other big planes, from ABOVE, (and from not very far above); very few people can "pull this off" ! ( Obviously Sam packs some serious weight with some folks in ATC ! ) So this one fellow is at the very top of the heap, as airplane photographers go;

And guess what.............Sam doesn't even own D3s; as far as I know, I don't even think he owns a D 700; 99 % of the fantastic shots this guy has on Airliner's data base were taken with.........his VERY well-used D 300 ! ( He rarely mentions what lens he's used, but always mentions the old D 300. )

That's just one "extreme" example. Here's another one (which is light years behind anything Sam Chui has ever done)
In Parke County, Indiana, on St. Hwy 59, about maybe 5 miles south of U.S Rt. 36, there's a small billboard sign; the actual photo on the sign is of a covered bridge that's nearby; the picture is 8 ft high, by 16 ft long; the old sign was hand painted on 1/2 plywood; (it needed replacement) The new photo is printed on vinyl film, on four vertical panels of 1/4 inch "alumalite", (which is a "sandwich" of two thin sheets of 30 thousandth in aluminum sheet bonded to a corrugated plastic core; (the stuff is impervious to weather) The reason I happen to know all of this is, because I took the photo of the covered bridge; and NOT with my D 300s, but with a $ 189 Fuji mega-zoom from Wal-Mart ! (Which has a MUCH smaller sensor than even the APS-C one in my D 300s.

From the vantage point of motorists going up and down Rt 59, you'd think the thing was taken with a 5 X 7 Linhoff view camera !
Needles to say, it's not all that sharp, from 3 ft away ! But the only guy who ever sees it from that close, is the farmer who owns the corn field right beside the sign. I doubt if anyone around the area reads NRF, so I'll tell you this...........originally, we had intended to print the vinyl on our 48 in Mutow ink jet; getting the vinyl on one panel is easy, where getting it on four panels, and getting them all lined up to match each other, while not actually hard, is still rather "risky", as there's a lot of vinyl and ink involved; we ended up emailing the SD card with the photo to a big printing plant in Indianapolis, and picked up all eight panels, all crated up, ready to go, for just shy of $1,800; it took 3 guys about half a day to hang them, and I did a bit of carpentry work on the sign frame; About 2 days in all; ( the "bill" was 5K) So we "did OK".......

So you don't always have to have a brand new D 4, or a brand new D-800 even; come to think of it, when I first got the idea to "go digital", I was getting tired of buying film from B & H for my old Nikon F 5; like everyone else, I had to do a lot of reading; I fist thought about getting a D-90; (They were getting pretty "long of tooth" by this time, and the new D 7000 was just about to come out; so I was all set to "spend a little more" and get a D 7000; Understand, I don't make my living with cameras; The D 7000 would have been all the camera I needed; but as everyone knows by now, there are NO BARGAINS to be had, on new cameras just coming out ! (And I like bargains ! ) After much searching, I found a brand new, never been opened D 300s in a small shop in Canada; I bought the thing for almost the same as a new D 7000 would have cost me. So I not only got my bargain, I ended up with a much better camera, than the D 7000;

One thing anyone buying a new "high end" Nikon (or Canon) needs to keep in mind; D SLR cameras are ALL going to be "replaced" with the next "latest & greatest", in just a few years; it's nothing like it was back when Nikon came out with the F-5 film body; that baby held it's own for a loooooooong time, comparatively speaking. Sure, if you're making "big bucks" doing sports, (or whatever), by all means grab yourself a new D 4; (maybe in a few years I may get me a "deal" on a great "mint" D3s; Or maybe I won't, who knows ? Certainly not me !

"a D350 would be justified, but that does look awfully like a 350D and I doubt that Nikon wants an upgraded D300 compared with a competitor's entry level camera."

I don't think either company is too concerned about naming being cofused:

Canon 40D
Nikon D40

Canon 300D
Nikon D300

Canon D60
Nikon D60

"If you change the F to a D you understand where Nikon gets their camera names from. Yeah they never made an F200,F300,F700 so those D numbers are "new" but there was an F401,F501,F601,and an F801."

and in the USA, the F was an N for some reason. My point here goes to what adamz said. English isn't the only language (I don't think most Americans are aware of that lol) but it is the language is wider communication. Perhaps don't use the S in English speaking countries. The used F instead of N in the US so why not some other letter to avoid confusion. Oops, I already said that they don't seem to care if they confuse.

I think if Nikon is not ready or don't have a new sensor ready for the next big replacement of the D300. Then a minor upgrade is inexpensive to do and would still make it a better value than the nearest competition. Yes, For any of us with a current D300 it would be of little value but for the new to Nikon or the one upgrading from lower Nikon's then this new D300s could be a much better product.

Just a thought if this rumor nikon is for real

Pete

Well honestly I don't think that they will really care what we think it appropriate or not. Most probably the model numbers have been laid down in advance with additional indicators for facelifts.

I do agree that the s at the end might give cause to misunderstandings but apparently they have used this before and looks like everyone survived it.

It all boils down to a matter of opinion and you can never please everyone. I decided a long time a go to just go with the flow and not to fret about things that I don't have any control over (well at least I try :D) as it will make your life simpler.

Nikon Canada has advised dealers that the D300 production has ended. Inventories will keep the camera available for four to six months depending on up take.

I also don't like the idea of 301, I understand that D300s is a problem when Your mother tongue is English, as you can get confused, but English is not the only language around the world.

Guys, learn some Nikon history! I didn't just pull D301 from thin air. Nikon use to make an F301. It was the first Nikon with a built-in motor drive. They also made an F2,F3,F50,F60,F70,F80,F90,F100 etc.

If you change the F to a D you understand where Nikon gets their camera names from. Yeah they never made an F200,F300,F700 so those D numbers are "new" but there was an F401,F501,F601,and an F801.

I think it's a better method of naming an update to an existing camera rather than just an D3Xhs mkI,II,III or whatever. If the D300 just adds video and an SD slot, why not just add a "1" instead of an "s".

They could even bring back the "M". They haven't used that letter for a while. How's D300m sound to everyone?
Olympus, Sony, and even Samsung are going retro with their new cameras why not Nikon? At least in the name.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_F301

I don't like the D301 idea, Nikon is not Peugeot :D
What would such a change of numbering lead to? Nikon D326? Maybe, just maybe, a D350 would be justified, but that does look awfully like a 350D and I doubt that Nikon wants an upgraded D300 compared with a competitor's entry level camera.

"D300 came after the D3,"

um...the D300 and D3 were introduced on the same day. If my memory serves me right I believe it was August 23rd 2007. Either way it was the same day.

It makes sense to name it D300s, because the D400 name should be consistent with Nikon historical patterns and come out after the D4 - just like the D300 came after the D3, and D200 came after the D2, and D100 came after the D1.

Going by the Pro body generation cycle of 4 years, this would set the D400 due for release no earlier than 2011.

Exactly why I'm telling Nikon to call it the D301.

nikodoby, I agree with you on the s thing. When I first read Ken Rockwell's D300 review where he said "forget the old D2Xs", I seriously thought he was talking about more than one D2 as in plural. Makes sense when you consider that there's a D2H, D2X D2Hs and so on. Canon 1Ds did the same thing to me.

I think he means the D300s is still just a rumor Gentoo. NR has been wrong once or twice before :( If it's just a D300 update I'm still hoping they call it the D301. I don't like the single D300s because what if you have a group of D300s (more than one D300)? I didn't like the s with D70 and D70s either.

"I am not so sure that the D300s rumor has anything to do with reality."

What do you mean?

I am not so sure that the D300s rumor has anything to do with reality.

I agree with monty and adamz. Now I want to clarify that if I said the D300s wouldn't be something I'd get, I wasn't complaining, I am one of those D300 owners that see's no reason to get this. I agree that such an upgrade is not targeted at me.

However for those who may have a D40, such as my roommate, he is really interested in the possibility of a D300s. I believe it's people like him that Nikon is targeting. Like adamz, I have a D90 as a second body for higher ISO and any video I may want to shoot. At this point, even the D400 would have to have something special that neither of my current body's offer.

I agree that Nikon needs to stay fresh. It's not the first time they've done it either: D40 and D40x, D70 and D70s and how many D2 models were there?

"The trend is [...] people more often [...] skip one model." - agree with You that people often skip one generation, I'm also waiting what d400 will bring, as d300 does not provide enough goodies for me to sell my d200 and get the d300. For higher iso and video I got d90 - great second body and with grip it handles almost as good as d200.

I wonder if all the petrol head forums are also full of complaining when a car manufacturer makes a facelift instead of coming out with a new model?

Consider the D300s a facelift of the D300 to keep the camera model fresh. An introduction date of July 2009 (making it up) looks a lot better than August 2007. In today's day and age things become obsolete (in the eyes of the general consumer) a lot quicker than they used to. This is why the products need to be fresh. This is a good selling argument for those who can't be bothered to do some research before buying.

What strikes me as strange, is that some are complaining that the D300s doesn't have enough new gadgets to upgrade to it ... well guess what, if you own a D300, then you most likely are not the target group of the D300s unless you collect them. In fact when the D300 came, even then many D200 owners said that they wouldn't upgrade because they were perfectly happy with what they had. The trend is the same among Canon users, people more often than not skip one model.

A bit disappointing, but not that surprising. Nikon gains a lot by being able to mass produce the same sensor for a lot of cameras. I'll stick with the D200 for now. I think I'll hold out for the D700X/D800.

Something to be a replacement for D300 is coming, but does anyone think that D300s could be just a plural of D300 and not the name of a new model?

NSX - I'm using sandisk extreme III both SD and CF and never had any problems with neither SD or CF, also as for speed both of the versions are quite similar CF on d200 and SD on d90

It is called Secure Digital card isn't it? Although all security features are implemented by a tiny switch.
SD card reliability is dependent on quality of manufacturing; SanDisk, Lexar and Panasonic are all very reliable, comparable to CF cards. And it is very usable feature to have dual card slots in a camera, for security and other reasons...

I use to hate SD cards but now that so many things use it (like my TV!) I've changed my tune. SD cards are pretty cheap compared to everything else, especially Sony Memory Sticks and CF cards are starting to remind me of bulky VHS tapes. I'd be happy if a D300s or D400 had dual SD/CF card slots. My wife once even washed an SD card with the laundry and it's still working just fine! That pretty much convinced me of SD's superiority.

adamz, isn't SD cards less secure than compact flash?

So isn't it sort of a step back? Then again, it is convenient when you've run out of CF cards.

I have thought in the past of a compact flash SD card adapter.