You can still buy a brand new Nikon D300s camera today

Nikon D300s... the good old times. Well, you can still buy a brand new Nikon D300s DSLR camera from B&H for $1,199 (D300s was selling for $1799.95 when announced back in 2009. Note that this is an imported model that will not come with US warranty (gray market D300s can now be repaired by third party US repair facilities).

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

    Hello old friend.

  • TheFantasticG

    Isn’t that D7200 money right there? And doesn’t the D7200 do everything better than the D300S?

    • T.I.M

      It does, I bought one last month, D7200’s 800 ISO look like the 200 ISO on my D800 !

      • StevenS

        I thought you were picking up a D500?

        • T.I.M

          I was but it does not worth the $$$ (does not even have a flash).
          And I don’t need 12fps (but I do need the 24MP from the D7200).
          With money I saved I got a nice 28-70mm AF-S f/2.8 (not the 24-70mm)

          • CERO

            You do really use the onboard flash Tim?

            • T.I.M

              when I bought my D800 I thought I would never use the onboard flash (I have 2 SB900)
              But I do use it !
              Sometimes you just need a tiny little extra light to make a picture look much better, people won’t even notice that a flash was use for the picture.

          • That 28-70 is a fantastic beast of a lens, much more durable than the stupidly designed 24-70. Good buy. Great on an APS-C body if you actually want a mid-range zoom where the 1.5x crop is a benefit.

          • dabug91

            I went from the D7100 to a D750 and sold my D7100 to a friend. I loved the D7100 but had invested in a bunch of Nikon’s f/1.8G primes and was wanting to finally take full advantage of them. I was considering picking up a D7200 when the price is just right as a backup camera, but I really want dat 4K on the D500 so I can enjoy my own content on my 4K monitors and TV’s.
            I also hate that with the D7200 you can only do 60p in the 1.3x crop mode. Kinda annoying, and of course no tillty screen.

            • T.I.M

              I don’t do video so 4K is not for me.
              Be careful when buying a “4K” TV, make sure it’s able to display real 4K resolution (3840×2160) most cheap 4K TV are able to play 4K video but in lower resolution.
              Also, to enjoy the high resolution, your 4K TV must be HUGE. at least 70″, or else the image will look like a regular HD TV.

            • dabug91

              Oh don’t worry, I’m quite the tech savvy consumer so I know plenty about whether a 4K TV or Blu-ray player etc is true 4K for that matter (or more specifically UHD) and whether they have proper DHCP support and can offer 4K at 30hz vs 60hz etc.
              I use a 4K Dell P2715Q for all my photo editing because the colors are plenty accurate enough for my work since I don’t do any serious printing and work with sRGB.
              In my opinion, even for sitting up close at a desk, 27″ is still a little too small of a screen for UHD/4K resolution, but the price of a 32″ monitor for instance is double that of what you can get for 27″ or 28″. But even still, simply having the 3840×2160 resolution has noticeably improved my productivity when editing photos from my D750 because of being able to see them so much closer to their native “6K” resolution without having to zoom in and out so frequently.

    • Apples and oranges. The D7200 has a VERY small buffer, no AF-ON button and other features and isn’t built to anywhere near the same standard. The D300s is a professional grade camera, the D7200 is a nice camera, but wouldn’t hold up to the day-to-day rigors of professional use.

      • John Albino

        Actually, the D7200 DOES have an AF-On Button, as long as you don’t need an AE/AF-Lock button… which I’ve never felt the need for because I can achieve the same effect but using AF-ON to focus, releasing it (thus locking focus), and holding exposure by disconnecting focus from the shutter button and simply keeping exposure locked by holding the shutter button with a half-press. I do that even with cameras with both dedicated AE/AF-Lock and AF-On buttons.

        Like other Nikons from the F5 forward, Custom Settings easily change the abilities to set back-button focus on the D7200., I really don’t feel much handling difference in the D7200 from my d800, and earlier, the D300 and D700 that I had. Even the lowly D3200 and D40X were able to have back-button focus, and others going back to the D70 and D100. It’s all in how you set up your equipment.

        Buffer-wise, the D7200 is HUGE compared to my D2H of many years ago, and I really didn’t have many limiting problems with that camera, either… AAMOF, some of the best images I ever made were with the D2H, for all its perceived faults of the time…

        I had a D300, and liked it very much, but even though the D300s was a slight (and valuable for many) upgrade, image quality was no better than the D300, and certainly no match for the D7200.

        As far as holding up to everyday pro use, there sure are a lot of free-lance photojournalists using either the D7100/D7200 or the Canon equivalent on a heavy daily basis, because they lack the corporate financial backing to buy (on their own dime) a Nikon D3, 4, or 5, or a Canon equivalent. You can get at least FOUR D7200 cameras for the price of ONE D5, for example, and at least TWO D7200s for the price of ONE D500.

        • Well, like I said, it lacks an AF-ON button. I’d rather have that than have to stand on one foot and wait for a new moon to take my shot. And, I was comparing the D300s to the D7200, not the D2H. You make a great point about cost. I started my photography business with a used D40X, quickly went to a D90 for the AF motor and then to the D300s (that I bought used on ebay for $750) for the focus tracking, extra card slot, overall performance and build quality. Now I’ve decided the Df is the end-all of cameras and I’m not disappointed. The image quality is superb and operationally I love it. Much of what I want access to during shooting is literally at my fingertips and require a single action. I never liked the way traditional DSLRs operate with all the holding of a button while trying to remember which wheel to turn. Oooops, missed another shot! Shit! It’s not the performance tool that many other cameras are, but for the kind of photography I’ve ended up doing it’s fine. I agree with those who can’t figure out why it didn’t employ a better low-light focus module considering how adept it is at high ISO. No camera does everything right.

          • John Albino

            I still don’t see why you can’t consider the AE/AF-Lock button to be a de facto AF-On button when you program it to be so. And I sure don’t get what you mean by “…stand on one foot and wait for a new moon to take my shot…” unless you’re a gunner rather than a shooter at heart. I shot pro sports with a hand-wound (non-motorized) Nikon F back in the ’60s, and learned how to time my shots.

            In the ’80s I thought I was in heaven with 5.5 FPS on a motorized F3 — and remember, in film days, unless you were running with a bulk film back your effective “buffer size” was 36 shots…

            I personally find plenty of buffer room with the D800 as well as the D7200, but of course, everyone gets different MPG on the road even with the same car, so to speak.

            • I appreciate that you don’t mind doing a work-around for the lack of an AF-ON button, but one of the main points of having one is not having to do a work-around. That was one of the things I pointed out to “TheFantasticG” as a distinguishing feature of the D300s over the D7200. It has nothing to do with “gunning”. It has to do with simplifying the use of automating features…that’s all. My Df has an AF-ON as well as AE-L/AF-L button. It obviates the need to use the “half shutter release” technique that many find tiresome and distracting. You’re correct, though, the D7200 buffer isn’t all that bad. Despite all this blather, the point I was trying to make to “G” was that the two cameras are very different and appeal to different levels of shooters.
              The F was a great camera. I shot my first job with one in 1973. Moved on to an F2 and used it until I dropped my photo career for a few years to pursue a corporate job (big mistake).

      • TheFantasticG

        Is it a smaller buffer though? I thought, from the reviews I’ve read, that on the D7200 the buffer was impressively increased and could shoot at a better buffer rate than the D300s (if you adjusted the D7200 down to 12MP 14bit Raw)… So, just to refresh my memory I went to DPReview and it looks like at 14bit the D7200 will clear it’s buffer a lot faster than the D300s, at least according to the Side-by-Side at DPReview:

        • If you don’t get it, you don’t get it. The D330s is one tough camera. You can put long telephoto lenses on and off for years without a problem. D300s has a sold magnesium body…that’s what it’s built to do. If you like DPreview, read their whole review of the 300s, not just the part about the buffer. Or, don’t learn about it and go from there.

          • TheFantasticG

            Passive aggressive asshole snide remarks so you can feel like you’re better than someone on the internet aside, you have a point that it’s a tough camera, but the D7200 is a great camera and can take quite a beating on it’s own then hold it’s own (and win) against the D300. If you choose to just be a gear snob asshole, that’s fine, your choice.

      • TheFantasticG

        True, no AF-ON but you can remap the button on the back for the same function. VERY hard to see where the D300s beats out the D7200 despite them being apples and oranges. I guess because the D300s has a PC Sync flash terminal it’s better or the 10-pin terminal?

        • If all it takes is “re-mapping” the AF/AE-L button, why do camera manufacturers continue to put a separate AF-ON button on their professional grade cameras? I’m sure you’ll find a way to talk yourself into that one.

          • TheFantasticG

            Easy. You answered it yourself. “Professional grade cameras”. They have to have features to make them hit separate price points… but the line is blurred today between pro cams and not pro cams. There’s really not that many differences between a D7200 and the D300.

            It is what it is.

      • TheFantasticG

        Hmm.. Guess we are gonna have to agree to disagree. I firmly believe that the D7200 will hold up just fine under “professional” use day-to-day. The sensor alone leaves the D300 and the D300S in the dust.

  • WillTheLightingGuy

    How about a brand new with Canadian warranty D90? Saneal Camera in Calgary has that plus many NIB lenses and many other gems.

  • doge

    It’d be kinda cool to take that body and put in innards from a 7200 or 5500 inside it.

  • You can buy mine for even less if you want.

  • sickheadache

    When I didn’t have it together.

  • AnotherView

    The fact that you can still buy a brand new copy of a 7-year old camera which is completely outclassed in every possible way does tend to support Thom Hogan’s critical view’s of Nikon’s management. Rather embarrassing I’d say. Even Apple would have killed a 7-year old iphone by now.

    • br0xibear

      We’ve no idea why B&H have a brand new D300s in stock, it might have got put in a box in some warehouse and totally forgotten about. To blame Nikon or their management makes no sense at all.
      It’s not a camera that’s in production.

      • nwcs

        Possibly but to sell at that price?

        • br0xibear

          Maybe B&H are just trying their luck, lol…I don’t know ?

    • sickheadache

      AnotherView has a Narrow View, what if someone had bought wholesale or dealers cost, kept them and selling them, this is a Nikon Deal? Failure!

    • brn

      A DSLR has a lot longer usable life than a smartphone.

      Nikon isn’t selling the camera. B&H is. What does that say about B&H management?

      • TwoStrayCats

        It says they’re very good. They’re making money off obsolete stock.

    • It may be getting sold but nikon has discontinued it. So no blame to nikon.

    • Not necessarily. The D300 and D300s were wildly popular cameras, they flew off shelves and were out of stock off and on for a year or more after their release. Simply put, Nikon was printing money with these cameras, so yeah you bet they let the factories go wild. There’s probably only a few left, and Nikon still made money hand-over-fist on the 300-series.

      You do have a point, though, as this does still smell a little bit like the American auto industry and their “autopilot” production before the crash.

      Still, I think Canon’s recycling of their mediocre 18 MP APS-C sensor design for +10 different cameras is a bigger joke. 😉

  • decentrist

    I refer to my old D300 as the highlight blowout machine

    • catinhat

      Send it to Nikon to fix, mine did nothing of the kind.

      • decentrist

        it’s a joke about it’s dynamic range…I’m sure yours is fine too.

        • Ironically, thanks to Nikon’s amazing history of shadow recovery, the D300s still has better dynamic range than every Canon DSLR up to (and including) the $3700 5DsR. Whoops. 😛

  • br0xibear

    Hi Peter (admin),
    Any new rumours about a D400 ? lol

    • Yes, that D300s is still not properly replaced 🙂

      • Art

        I have to admit, there are so many comments that I see that I really want to make a “waiting for a d400” reply to. It sometimes takes enormous force of will to not do it.

      • I know, they took the pop-up flash off the D500, clearly it is a whole new product line and the D400 will be released in time for Christmas 2016.

    • sickheadache

      I got a message from Akihiro Nikon, the owner of Nikon…400 is evil, like Mothra.

  • nwcs

    Anyone who buys one at that price deserves it! If it were brand new for $299 (what they should go for) 8 might buy one for nostalgia.

    • brn

      Any knowledgeable person who buys at that price deserves it. Someone not so knowledgeable, I would feel sorry for.

      Why is B&H charging that much? One would think they’d sell it cheap, to clear them out. Is there a demand that I’m not aware of?

  • Aldo

    Idk if I should get the d300s or the d500… I’m still hoping they release the d400.

  • CaMeRa QuEsT

    I wonder if I can still buy a brand new Canon AL-1 today. I really, really need the focus aid now…

  • Member

    I think B&H is aiming for collectors. Of course they know you can obtain better iq for less.
    Those were the work horses and after years of pro-use they might be less attractive looking. Therefore I’m not sure if it’s easy to get D300s in a “like new” condition, However no any Nikon collection is complete without such camera.

  • Man. One of the best cameras they’ve ever made…

    • waterengineer

      Agreed. Anyone complaining about this camera doesn’t know how to run it properly. A seminal camera for Nikon. Now about that price…….I would be tempted at, say, $750US or so.

    • CERO

      isnt the D300 superceeded by the D500 now?

      • Sure, the D500 is the modern D300s. But the D300 / D300s was still a ground-breaking camera in its day, and is still a legit workhorse today. The D300 was, if I am not mistaken, the first non-flagship camera to ever possess that generation’s flagship autofocus. (The D3) This feat wasn’t repeated until the D700, and wasn’t something Canon did until YEARS later in the 5D 3.

        But yeah, it’s not necessarily the best investment. Just a safe investment, if you happen to come across one lol.

        • CERO

          Well the D500 supposedly uses the D5 focusing module, isnt that a flagship?
          I wonder how ruggerized the D500 is compared to the D300. Some say the D300 is built like a goddarn tank.

  • D800GuyIsBack

    But Why?

  • sperdynamite

    Any news on the new Df? D750? Needs me a new wedding body soon. I’d love a Df with a working AF system.

    • Ric of The LBC

      Df would be the wrong tool for you

      • sperdynamite

        A DF2 with the D750 AF and the same 16mp sensor would be the perfect tool for me.

        • Ooooohhh, that would be a dream camera for a wedding photojournalist. Actually, gimme a Df2 with the D5 sensor and D500 AF, please. Or, if that costs too much, yes I’d settle for the D4s sensor and D750 AF.

          It wouldn’t be my main camera, but it’d make the best damn 2nd camera I’d ever held…

          • sperdynamite

            Agreed. The DF could not reliably focus my 58mm 1.4G even after calibration. For the price of that thing the AF was a big let down. If they’re going to charge nearly 3 grand for an FX camera it can’t just have a slightly better sensor than a D600. Give me the goods.

    • Do you live in the southern hemisphere lol? Wedding season is drawing to a close here in Southern California, and I’m looking forward to waiting 4-6 months before having to worry about my aging cameras, hahaha… 😉

      • sperdynamite

        NYC. Fall is the big wedding season here. 🙂

        • Ah, I see. Fall colors, or just fair weather? Either way, there’s no new camera coming out for the rest of this year, I bet. If Nikon was gonna do it, it’d be now, and we’d probably have already seen at least a bit more rumoring.

          • sperdynamite

            Yep, lots of nice 60-75 degree days with low humidity. A little bit of that Fall color too, but that’s only if you’re in Central Park.

            Yeah it seems like Nikon is moving slow now. I might just pick up another D810 or even a D750 and decide to skip this next generation. The AF in my D750 can accurately focus my 50/1,4G at 1.4 95% of the time even on moving subjects. Doesn’t get much better than that!

            • I don’t mind Nikon moving slow at all. I’ve never been a fan of the sped-up product cycles that have been encouraged by competition from Sony etc. It is what led to cameras like the D600 and D610, and the bugs in the D750, etc.

              I’m oldschool when it comes to DSLRs, I’ve used the D1X, D2H, and D70. So I’m fine with Nikon taking their sweet time with their next generation of cameras.

  • A very tough camera with decent IQ for its time, although the D90 was slightly better. I made a lot of money with one. Pretty low on headroom, but you learn to work with it. Built like an anvil. Focus tracking is still a strength.

    • Seriously, I dropped mine a ton, got it rained on without ever thinking twice, and it never gave me any trouble. I think the shutter lasted twice as long as it was rated to.

  • And if you’re just an “ordinary” photographer who doesn’t obsess over megapixels or crazy-high ISOs, the D300s is still a fantastic camera, even an acceptable professional tool. I paid my bills with a D300 for a few years, heck more than half my wedding portfolio is still from that camera. Man I need to update my portfolio…

    • tv1000

      but still, why?
      “if you’re just an “ordinary” photographer” why not spend the same money (even less) for a bett

      • Even without knowing what you intended to say after “bett” …I can agree with you. A brand new D300s is definitely not a top-rated investment in today’s market. A sports photographer would be better off saving up for a D500. A general photographer would be better off picking up a D7100 or D7200. Heck, a travel / landscape photographer looking for nothing but great image quality would probably be happier with just a D5300 or D5500; the image quality of those is jaw-dropping at ISO 100.

        Still, for the sake of nostalgia, if I was wealthy I’d pick up one of these, and use it on occasion.

    • nwcs

      It’s a fine camera, even today, but the price should be $399 or less for it.

      • Technologically, maybe that’s the perceived value of what it has to offer compared to something newer. However, that’s not how it works. Physically, the camera itself probably costs far more than that to manufacture.

        • nwcs

          True but the intrinsic value of that camera doesn’t track with inflation 🙂

  • Richard Harding

    If anyone is interested I still have floppy disks and will sell them at a great price, which would be the same as buying a d300

    • TwoStrayCats

      But I want the 8″, not the 3.5″ stuff.

      • Ric of The LBC

        go to Zip disks or Colorado Tapes

  • D300s… My 2nd camera. Dang sometimes I’m sad that I didn’t abuse the camera more! It’s like having a gatling gun but using it as a semi-automatic.
    But your successor did really pushed up the game.

  • catinhat

    If cameras got so much better after D300 why didn’t the pictures improve? Perhaps photographers got worse and it all balances out.

    • nwcs

      Maybe they did improve and you didn’t notice?

      • catinhat

        That very well may be.

    • Fly Moon

      And who are you to decide who’s good or bad? Why don’t you get yourself a 1910 camera and show all of us what you can do?

      It’s called advancement. I am sure we’re getting more photos that were never possible to capture before.

      • catinhat

        I’m just another guy with opinion, which is the main qualification needed here.

        Yes, you can get photos now which weren’t possible before, and this is great. I’m just wondering if those who pooh-pooh D300 could take a great shot with any camera.

  • Richard Haw

    new old stock

  • preston

    I’d rather get a low shutter count used one on ebay for $400-500.

  • That was my second DSLR. Hell of a camera but not enough DX primes.

  • Back to top