I read about Scot Kelby's trip to Tuscany and how he had to buy a Nikon D5000 because he forgot his D300 in a hotel room. Long story short: he deiced to sell his Nikon D300 after he got the D5000. So far nothing out of the ordinary.


Then a reader contacted me today with a tip that Terry White is also selling his Nikon D300 - he announced that on his twitter page two days ago (here is the actual D300 listing on eBay).


Coincidence? Probably - I will let you decide. Scott Kelby and Terry White are members of  NAPP (National Association of Photoshop Professionals). Scott Kelby is also one of the hosts of dtowntv, which is sponsored by Nikon.

Anybody else selling their D300 in order to get the anticipated D300s?

This entry was posted in Nikon D300s. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • nkuser

    The site D-Town TV is not sponsored by Nikon. It’s a video cast produced and created by Scott Kelby.

  • here is my source:

    “DTownTV, which airs each Thursday and runs 10-12 minutes, is sponsored by Nikon ® and produced by Kelby Training. With Scott Kelby and Matt Kloskowski, as its hosts”

    • Remington

      Your source is correct. Even Scott indicates, I believe, in the first episode that Nikon came to them and asked them to do it. Which was why there was not a v-cast for Canon… they didn’t ask them.

    • nkuser

      I don’t think it’s an official sponsor since there are no Nikon logos on that site. Also, sponsorship can come in the way of technical support and products to demo on the site.

      • funny

        a sponsor is a sponsor is a sponsor. NR is correct, you’re not. end of story.

      • that’s the best form of marketing – you can push your product without even displaying your logo on the site

      • mark

        There is a nikon rep on almost every episode with a tip.

        • nkuser

          Don’t get sponsorship confused support.

  • Ricardiano

    The nikon d300s fix rhe rolling shutter problem?

    • WoutK89

      I am happy they did, my videos look so much better 😛

    • PHB

      No, the only way to solve the rolling shutter problem is with a new sensor with an electronic shutter.

      That would be a totally new technology and not something that Nikon would roll out first in an ‘s’ model.

      I think we will see electronic shutters appear in the near future for four reasons. The first and biggest is cost, mechanical shutters are expensive to make. Second is flash sync speed, an electronic shutter can sync at any speed as there are no moving parts. After that there is reliability and eliminating the jelly effect.

      The downside to an electronic shutter is a very slight loss in ISO response as it requires one gate per cell on the surface of the sensor. But this cost could well be eliminated by the microlens structure.

      • WoutK89

        D400 has an electronic shutter? Is that the major upgrade they are trying to achieve?

      • An electronic shutter is a new technology? What do you think point and shoots use? And what do you think the d70/d50 used to get the 1/500 sync speed?

        • Toby

          @Micah: It would be new *to the D300 series* and thus, not a minor upgrade. If they were going to change the sensor (an electronic shutter is part of the sensor) then they would likely change other things as well.

          P.S. Learn to read plz.

  • Alex

    I will be selling my D200 on Ebay this week.
    Why ? Because I am buying a D40 (6MP).
    And why am I buying a 6Mp camera, after owning a D200 ????
    That’s all I can say for now, but this summer is going to be hot….

    • jomomma

      Less cryptic, more hints. No point in posting about rumors you won’t post about on a rumor site, right? 🙂

    • You know where is the tips submission link on this site, right? Use it! Now!


      • uh, is that the same old Alex that’s full of crap and has a website about him saying so?

        • Alex

          I think you’re thinking of Joseph Nicholas Spina.

          PS – I’m a different Alex than the Alex whose post we’re discussing xP

          • dave

            I’m selling my laptop and getting an abacus. You do the math 🙂

  • Ubiquitous

    I can never get over how fickle people are. I will never sell my D300 – the D700 is a different story. I talk to my D300 and tell her: “How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.” She responds: “Grow old with me, the best is yet to come.”

  • I ‘would’ sell my D300 (and in fact, tried), but it’s difficult to sell a perfectly working camera when it’s been run over by a 4WD vehicle.

    Full story here:

    • ouch!

      • Mike

        I sold my d60 last week, but my basis for that is all NR 😀

        • I better be right…

          • You’ll be close enough that you shouldn’t have to worry.

          • Mike

            oh no, it will be fine. i know something will replcae the d40/d60 product in the near future, and I know I sold my d60 for more than I paid for it 🙂

  • Eh??

    completely pointless to sell perfectly working camera. i doubt anyone actually make prints on this site… just bigger MP to count pixels at 500% magnification.

    • I make prints!

      …but I’m not going to buy another crop sensor cam. Ever. (well a point and shoot upgrade is nearing, but that’s not what I’m talking about.) I will say that 12mp make stunning enlargments that whip 35mm AND most of the MF shots I see–for resolution/sharpness that is. The camera doesn’t make the images. If it did I’d be out of work.

      It’s a d800 or D3x by the end of the year. And yeah, I make 20×30’s regularly. Just ask me about it if you wanna talk shop.

  • johnny pierce

    I have been waiting to by a D90 body but they have been backordered for 10 weeks and who knows when they actually get released. Meanwhile I’m wondering if paying twice as much for a new D300s might be the way to go. The D90 is now nearly 14 years old in dog years so why is it worth spending the $$ on when I can spend $$$$ and get a 2009 D300s. Have I convinced myself yet?

    • Keep working on it. You’re almost there 😉

    • Anonymous

      You may want to wait for the d300s release, even if only to allow the price of the d90/d300 to come down

      • Eh??

        or what if D300s is just one whole smoke everyone happen to chase after?

        If you sold your camera, you sold it for NO reason!

    • dave

      D90 is now 6yrs old in dog years. It was announced September ’08

  • low

    do i even need to say it?

  • anon

    Why on earth would anybody sell the D300 to buy exactly the same camera (D300s) again? If the D400 was coming I could understand this behaviour, however. Video in Nikon bodies has been nothing but a useless joke so far.

    • Why? Good question!

      Are there ppl who will do it? Unbelievably, yes. Over here in Japan, I’m sure there’ll be plenty of it (makes for a great used market!!). When status is what you’re after and not actually taking photos, then hey- a new camera sounds pretty good 😀

      • PHB

        I don’t see the point either, video will be a great asset in DSLRs in the future, but only after the bugs have been ironed out. That means the ability to compress the video stream to good MPEG2 or MPEG4 (AVCHD), the ability to add an external mic, no jelly shutter &ct.

        If Nikon sold a dedicated video body that captures full HD or better for $1000, I would buy one immediately and probably two for my podcasting (see Quantum of Stupid on You Tube).

        The market is definitely there. But the D300s is not that camera and its going to take some time for that camera to emerge. I don’t think thats going to be the D4 even.

        I think it most likely that if the D4 emerges in the near future it is going to be a revised version of the D3x sensor that gets at least 3200 ISO and the new features to attract the pro photographer will be built in WiFi capability, built in GPS and a software infrastructure that uses them intelligently to support studio workflow. So you can take a picture and have it appear in your lightroom catalog instantly. OK so you can do that today with a strap on dongle, but thats a major amount of hassle and hassle is not something you want in a convenience feature.

        I suspect any increase in resolution will have to wait for the D5 or for a D4x model. Thy could probably make a 50MP sensor today but it would only get ISO 800 or even less.

        • Ken Elliott

          >> “If Nikon sold a dedicated video body that captures full HD or better for $1000, I would buy one immediately”

          You and me both. I’d much rather have a REAL HD camcorder housed in a Nikon body. It needs real mike inputs, headphone jacks and both autofocus and manual focus. Bonus points awarded for letting me set pre-focus points and have the lens move to those point using a speed-control toggle. For those who don’t know, this allows you to start recording with the focus at point 1, then smoothly move the focus to point2, as you pan the camera.

          If Nikon gave us a DX or FX HD camcorder with these features, and without the rolling shutter, they would become an overnight sensation. No still shot capability needed. But it must take F-mount lenses.

          • Ennan

            that would be a dream.

          • Dreher

            when you look at videos made by the d90 or the rebel t1i/500d you see that, besides video compression and rolling shutter, moire is a third issue.

            you get moire when the camera’s sensor does not have enough resolution to capture the projected image. to prevent it, dslrs have low-pass filters that blur the image, only letting through those patterns that extend over a wide enough part of the image, so that the sensor can resolve them. to see what happens without a low-pass filter, just look at leica’s m8.

            in dslr video however, since only about every third row, and every third column of the sensor is read out (today), the sensor resolution is effectively lowered while capturing video. so the low-pass filter becomes too weak, and the unavoidable consequence is moire.

            i believe the only way to fix this is to read out the whole sensor for each frame. the camera would then compute an additional low-pass in software, like a gaussian blur, to obtain the 10% of the image that makes up the 1080p or 720p video frame.

            maybe next generation? d400? would be very cool. my wishlist: 1080p24 and 1080p30, electronic shutter, full sensor readout, h.264 compression. chance of that happening? i am pessimistic.

  • Alex

    This is a silly post. I think this is the sort of thing that Thom Hogan was talking about when he came here and gave you a lecture about site content…. you’re practically creating a rumor out of something that’s probably nothing. I wouldn’t be surprised if Terry White is selling his D300 for the same reason Scott did. He probably ready scott’s blog, went out and tried a D5000, liked it, and bought one himself.

    • Alex, I value your opinion as a NR reader, but I don’t give a s**t what TH thinks about my site. Read the post again – I am not starting a rumor, I am reporting facts that probably are coincidental (I mentioned this in the post… and even in the title). I believe NR readers are smart enough to make their own mind based on the provided information.

      • Tim Catchall

        Good that you don’t give a s**t what he thinks. His posts here came across as exceptionally arrogant. I suspect he is worried because you are taking traffic from him. Keep up the good work.

        • Homeslice

          NR admin,
          In my opinion, this is poor taste and should be avoided:
          “but I don’t give a s**t what TH thinks about my site.”

          just sayin, keep your head high bro & keep up the good work.

      • Alex

        Not to be snooty or anything, but I think I was right:

        • yes, you probably are right, but do you expect Terry White to say “Yes, I am getting the D300s from Nikon and I want to sell my D300 now before the price drops?”

        • Alex

          why would he buy a D5000 if a D300s was coming out? I mean, he clearly did buy a D5000. He has video footage on that blog that was taken with it.

          • Alex

            I should rephrase that first sentence:

            why would he buy a D5000 if a D300s was coming out and *he knew about it*?

    • funny

      Thom is a great guy but his inmature personality comes out rather easy. If you have a high traffic site and make vague references to a special surprise, you have zero standing to complain if anybody tries to speculate what it may be.

  • rad

    I can’t believe that people are liking this useless fluff more than the iPhone app. At least that was practical and meaningful, not just a bunch of mindless banter.

    • funny

      practical? hauling a phone to control a camera is the definition of impractical. that’s why it got voted down. sure it will impress the geeks. move on

      • KevinR

        Can you really call it “hauling?” I mean, it weighs what, 5 ounces? I understand that using such a loaded word adds to your claim, but it is you are being rather disingenuous and sensational when you use the word “hauling.” You do not have to grab a Uhaul to bring an iPhone with you.

        In fact, chances are if you have an iPhone you already have it with you. Since it is you know, a phone. And how is carrying a phone impractical?

        You see, when I focus on the primary function of the device when get a practical situation. When I focus on a secondary function of the device, of course we get an impractical situation. The reason being that most are not going to buy an iPhone and “haul” it with them just to use it to control a camera. Yet, someone who has it as a phone, find it practical to use a device already present for a new function.

        So I say to you, move on.


        • KevinR

          Grammar Edits:

          Strike the words in parentheses.
          “but (it is) you (are)”

          Replace the word in parentheses with the word following”
          “… function of the device (when) we…”

  • Trey

    If you are serious about video then you will wait for the Scarlett or Epic by Red. Its going to be 3k for $3k. Its a true video camera and yes you can use Nikon glass on it. The whole DSLR doing video thing is a joke and a complete waste of time and resources. I like the idea that Red about everything be interchangeable. No more upgrading an entire body each year. Just upgrade the parts you need. Nikon has made enough money from me.

    • Ken Elliott

      I disagree. The Red sensor is too small at the low price points. The Scarlet with a 2/3″ sensor (small) and a FIXED zoom is $3000-$3700. A full frame Scarlet is $9700 just for the “brain” and needs more components before you can shoot. The full frame Epic is $33,000. The current Red One has a rolling shutter, just like the Nikon. They are different tools.

      Now, give me a dedicated video camcorder from Nikon, that takes F-mount lenses, has mike inputs, headphone jacks, no rolling shutter and an electronic viewfinder with autofocus and I’ll buy one. Add 4,4,4 raw output and they’ll revolutionize the industry.

      • worminator

        That such an obviously awesome product does not yet exist says two things to me:

        1. The technology is simply not there yet. I suppose it’s a bandwidth issue, reading all the pixels significantly faster than the framerate thus avoiding a rolling shutter issue but it could something more complex still.

        2. Surely all the big players are working on it behind the scenes.

  • Nikkorian

    I don’t get it…. what does D5000 have, that D90 lacks? At virtually the same price (difference is 15%) the D90 offers the better LCD, the DOF button, and still has a slightly better sensor. So who would buy the D5000 over it?

    • Eh??

      because gearheads are concerned about owning outdated cameras so they want the NEWEST LATEST and GREATEST cameras!

    • Desinderlase

      + wireless flash support
      + better grip
      + better performance
      + …
      you are right, let’s see what marginal improvement will 300s bring…

  • litebyte

    Scott..mostly known for his ‘free to find on the internet’ information published in expensive books with second hand car salesman humor is sponsored by Nikon.
    No problem about that, as long as you do not believe his story about the reason why he dumped the D300…sorry forgot. 🙂 Scott is a saleman…not a photographer, but at least his message is clear with this lie 🙂

    • worminator

      I concluded much the same thing reading the front page of his site just now. D5000 ISO1600 == D300 ISO 400? Yaright.

  • WillyPete

    Selling mine right now.
    A lesser reason:
    If a new D300s becomes less vapour-ware, it will drive down the price of current second hand D300 bodies.
    Also, I have my more than capable D70 and D2H.

    Main reason:
    Clearing credit cards and planning a saving move for the next gen D700 replacement. I estimate about a year from now.

    • litebyte

      You just have to wait till January

  • Michael

    Scott Kelby is a tool, his show is nothing more than a blatant – Nikon is great, look at all this cool stuff, I’m so good, look how special I am cause I get to play with all this new gear.

    Who cares what he does or what he buys, Nikon probably told him to say he is buying the D5000 cause sales aren’t as strong as they would like them to be.

    He’s a tool.

    • rwbenjey

      Why don’t we start picking on someone who has no business being anywhere near Nikon marketing: Ashton Kutcher. Why the CRAP did Nikon pick him (give him to Canon with the rest of the “consumer” market).

  • i agree that D90 would sure make more sense. if for nothing than motor drive and DOF button, beside other features. I dont really care for scott but that bad sales of D5000 to drive this conspiracy cannot be :-).

  • lox

    Scot Kelby is selling his backup and travel photography camera since he fell in love with a lighter, smaller camera. As the serious photographer he is, he now goes with outdated AF skills and a kit lens, shooting out-of-cam jpeg at 1250 ISO. Fascinating. And credible.

  • well he said he uses it for family P&Sing and as backup it can serve as well paired with reasonable lens for almost any photo job. so where is problem?

  • rwpl

    Who cares who is selling his d300 :] It does not proff anything ( when talking about d300s/d400).

  • Jason

    I love my D300 and the only camera for which I would sell it in order to acquire would be the D700.

  • lox

    Kelby has been “selling” the D5000 for weeks in his weekly video blog “dtowntv”. To switch from the semi-pro D300 to consumer D5000 was the next logical step. What’s next? Is he throwing away his $20k lens collection, because the 18-55 kit lens serves every purpose?

  • Bandwagon

    Interestingly, I just read an article in a photo mag (can’t remember which one right now) and the article was about downsizing travel equipment. Due to travel restrictions, weight, carry on, and all that good stuff that now comes with traveling abroad, the author was advocating carrying lighter cameras that would still accomplish the job that was needed. Not knowing SK intentions, it does match, somewhat, what I am reading elsewhere about choosing your equipment when traveling out of the country. Of course, there were a lot of differences in his story and the magazine’s author, but I thought it was an interesting point to bring up. Have a great day everyone. 🙂

  • Stuart Smalley

    No, I will not be selling my D300. If I’m going to go through the hassle of selling my first born on eBay, I might as well wait for something more revolutionary than the D300s–otherwise I’m just a gearhead. It’s not about the latest and greatest, it’s about using technology to achieve creative goals–like low light photography. So, make due with what you have until you need the upgrade.

    Now that I’ve got my serious thoughts out of the way, I’m going to bow down to the greatness we call Scott Kelby. After all, “this is his 5th year of being named the world’s #1 bestselling author of computer and technology books.”

    As Scott (or Ken Rockwell) would say, “I’m going to write this terrific photography book today! And I’m gonna help people! Because I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and, doggonit, people like me!”

  • Martin

    I will not sell my D300. The D300s will not improve my photography skills, which is what I worry about now. I seldom buy magazines with gear review. I’m looking at composition, metering, etc. Furthermore, I have DX lenses and I’m stickin’ to it. Nothing wrong with FX. I just like my gear.

  • I am not selling my D300 in anticipation of buying a D300s. I have a D90 as a second body so I have the HD movie mode and still image quality on par with my D300 if not somewhat better in some ways such as lower high ISO noise. I am quite happy with that set up and will “wait and see” what Nikon offers in the next few months before buying another body. The D300 is a great camera and I would not want to part with it too much before the D300s becomes available if at all. . . All things considered I might be better off waiting until Nikon introduces a new FX model that competes with the Canon EOS 5 Mark II or even buy a Canon EOS 5 Mark II as I came close to doing before opting for the Nikon D90 and some nice Nikon glass and flash units.

  • Rick

    My guess is that Scott’s selling off his D300 is more than coincidence. DTownTV has about as much depth as a photography magazine, which means that it’s a venue for making advertising sales about gear. I watched the latest issue today which basically was about holding up Nikon lenses that a wedding photog might want to use and to announce that the D90 and D5000 had video. Very little depth. His story about “discovering” the D5000 and, thus, his selling the D300 is cute of course, but it’s a gear site and Scott probably already has a D300s from Nikon and is producing more “informative” video as I type. His D300 is no longer earning its keep.

  • Skeptical

    Video is nice and everything, but I wouldn’t put that as a deciding factor for a camera. I am updating to a new D90 soon, video is fun and usefull for making videos of my cats for youtube, but it’s not why I am buying that camera. The better controls are the selling point. Maybe I can get a D300 cheap when the new one comes out, idk.

  • gcardinal

    Sorry but this is not a good post. Scott lost his D300 camera (it was later recovered, but he purcased D5000 in need of a camera). It has nothing to do with D300s or anything. It just a guy who lost his gear, and got a replacement. Thats it.

  • coin$idence, yea right

    like those commercials for washing powder…

  • Haf

    I will soon be selling my D700 to buy a point & shoot (it will be a Nikon for sure, but I haven’t decided on the model yet)

  • Dweeb

    The guy’s a multi-millionaire that could afford stereo Hasselbalds. This is just a bunch of drivel to get the fanboys going. End of story.

    • Dweeb

      Hasselbalds, Hasselhofs, you get the idea.

  • Mike

    I’ve written this once, and I’ll write it again. Scott Kelby is a Photoshop jockey. He is a decent wedding and portrait photographer (according to some people, but I think his stuff sucks, hence the reason he uses photos from iStockphoto in some of his books, along with his own), but he is not a Nikon endorsed photographer. Being endorsed by Nikon as a photographer is one of the hardest things possible, if you look at their track record: Joe McNally, Joel Sartore, crikey, even Arnold Newman did ads for them. Art Wolfe was declined by them before he went to Canon, who sponsors Avril Lavigne for Christ’s sake. (Nikon’s using of Kate Moss was for a point & shoot, so that’s different) Just because Nikon sponsors an event he works with, doesn’t mean he is privy to diddly-squat gear wise. Especially since he promotes Capture NX’s competitor.

  • Back to top