I have Both Camera and the D300 Is better. But The ISO Goes to the D7000, But the D300 Is Overall better focusing. Etc.

I own the D300 and the D7000 and more than a few others. I use the D300 and The D7000 in the field a lot. Don't bother buying a D300. I won't sell mine, out of respect for what I have accomplished with it. Fact is new bodies and new technology have an edge. I sold a D700 I had as it wasn't being used as it had no video mode. I could have sold the D300 but as it had been in some awesome settings....I just won't sell it. But don't go buying a D300 to move UP when you have a D7000. I would buy a very highly rated lens for the D7000 Most of the vets here have already stated this. Good luck!

Don't buy a D300. Save your money and when you want to move to FX, get a D600. Its controls are very similar to the D7000. Meanwhile, as you buy more lenses give some thought to how they would work with a future FX body. Your 50mm is actually shooting at 75mm now. The 85mm 1.8D AF lens is a good choice for not much money and on an FX body it will about equal the angle of view you now get with your 50mm. I think you would like it for portraits with shallow depth of field. Nikon's old 60mm 2.8 macro AF lens could also be a consideration. Look at this thread for some ideas. http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=9682 I am in the process of adding more lenses to it. Next up is the 85mm 1.8D AF lens for portraits.

Leinadbc;

First, if you DO decide to buy a D 300, for heavens sake DON'T buy the older, 300 model; buy the newer 300s; but based on your question, (and I'm not necessarily trying to discourage you from buying a new camera), at this point in time, I would seriously advise you to A. keep on saving up your money, and in the meantime, keep learning more and more about photography !

Yes, the D 7000 IS newer technology than either one of the 300 series cameras; but for anyone trying to convince you that "the 300 has an "inferior" sensor, (as compared to the 7000,) and that a 300 has "worse performance" (because it has been around longer, indicates to me a serious lack of understanding and knowledge about Nikon cameras.

Nikons, (just like ALL complex electronic products), are "aimed" at different "markets"; the 7000, while being newer, is FAR from being "superior"; you're attempting to compare yesterday's $1,700 product, with today's $1,200 product; I can guarantee you, ANY manufacturer can put a lot more into ANY product that costs another $500 dollars ! And saying "there is virtually no difference .........is sheer nonsense !

But more to the point.......which is for your desire to "take better pictures"; unless you are worried about using your camera as a Videocam, I can flat out guarantee you that: in the hands of of knowledgeable photographers (with each camera), the guy with the D 7000 is going to have one heck of a time, trying to make "better" pictures with it, than an equally competent photographer will make with a D 300 or a D 300s ! ( Both are extremely capable bodies; yes, the 7000 produces larger files on the media; but that isn't always what "makes better pictures" !

You already have a very capable camera in your hands; but you have NOT begun to "master" it YET ! Until you do, keep learning; you sound to me like a very bright young man..........you just don't keep improving your skills as a photographer, by buying a newer camera every few years; you learn by "doing", and by making a few mistakes, then learning HOW to eliminate the mistakes. (And believe me, there are many reasons why the 300 series bodies sold for $ 500 more than the 7000 !

warprints said:
Agree with Tcole (and I do have a D300).

+1 I have a d300 as well.

The question of the 85mm would be a great choice. I love it on DX and FX. Does it auto-magically make photos better? No, but no lens does. It does have a different "look" (compression, shallower DOF) that I prefer over the 50mm on DX.

Classic prime kit has always been a mix of the 28/35/50/85/105 (FX equiv). DX has moved that a bit, but a 35mm 1.8, 50mm, 85mm, (50/75/125-fx) is a great kit to shoot for. I normally take the 35/50/85 and swap the 85 & 105 in and out for stuff. the 80-200 is great but I agree, it does get heavy quick and not easy to just "carry" around.

What they said.

Your question should have been I have a D7000, how should I invest some spare money I have, and the answer is: Invest your money in glass!

Agree with Tcole (and I do have a D300).

No. What makes you think an older body with worse performance would give you better pictures? It is older DX technology with a worse sensor. Other then the FPS, 51 point AF and maybe a better constructed body I don't think the D300 offers anything over the D7000. If you want to shoot the 85 then just get that and use it on your D7000. The only reason I believe anyone would get the D300 over a D7000 is if you were shooting in the elements all the time and you were shooting sports or moving subjects in good light and needed the weather sealing and FPS.

I do not believe the D300 will give you better photos than the D7000.

Upgrading to a full frame camera may/could/might/will. ;- )

Hello, I am a young photographer. I own a Nikon D7000 that I got for one of my pictures, I also have a 50mm 1.4D and an old 80-200mm 2.8D, I like to take portraits most of the time with the 50mm and love shallow DOF. I was wondering if a D300 with an 85mm would really give me better pictures? I would keep the D7000 with the 80-200 for music shows for the extra crop ( Don't want to use the 80-200 for portraits as it's too heavy ). I don't really mind the body features, just want my pictures to look nice and I have a little extra cash to invest in photography :)