I just ordered a used D300 with 3 different lenses from Japan. Thanks to you

I use a D700 and D300s (the S variant has a few mist-have improvements) as a pair.  In good light, I would challenge anyone to pick the "inferior" DX images when looking at photos, not pixel peeping, but just the actual photo as an end item.

My D300s mostly has my long lenses, giving me that bit of extra reach when needed.  I also have the OG 17-55 f/2.8G Nikkor, which while huge and heavy, gives terrific image quality in the normal range.

The D700 is my ticket into Digital Nikon shooting after over 50+ years and it mostly has one of my dozens of AI/AI-S Nikkors from my old F-class cameras.

I still haven't seen any reason to "upgrade" after having these cameras since they were released.

I still have my D300, never bit on the D700 because I saw no sense in moving from a 12mp DX camera to a 12mp FX camera.  Instead I waited for the D750 and that served me quite well from 2015 to 2024 when I moved to the Z7 II.  Still take the D300 out on occasion because unused cameras tend to die.  Software today is amazing and I will upsize my D300 images by a 1.41 factor because it forces interpolated results.  Learned way back in 1998 that if you did a 2X upsize 1 pixel became 4 identical pixels so the end result was giant pixels instead of a blend.  Programmers can be lazy and there is still a lot of that doubling in use because it reduces the calculations required for a full interpolation.  In addition it is a 4X increase in resolution and most lenses cannot handle that much magnification.  

Procedure is rather simple, I open the NEF file in DXO Photolab 9, edit the image as needed, and then export the JPG with a 141% size increase.  Then I take that image to AIarty and do a 1:1 single pass of MoreDetail V3.  The end result is an artifact free 24mp image that looks identical to what I can get with my Zf with that particular lens.  I will also note that Focus Confirmation with non CPU lenses is a giant benefit that Nikon should have enabled with the Zf.  That they did NOT is just plain NASTY.

My Nikon DSLRs are D300, D700, and D810. The D300 was the first one (for 150 EUR in 2022) in very good condition with extensive accessories. I see significant added value in the extended telephoto focal length range; no longer need a 300mm lens, as I can achieve the same field of view with the 200mm. Using only the central areas of the image, compared to full-frame, the D300 produces impeccable quality. The colours are very close to those of the D700.
I purchased my D700 with 9400 shutter releases for 337 EUR in 2025. I estimate – in accordance to your preference – the true reproduction of the visual impression from a 24x36mm  Nikkor F lens as well as the added value in the wide-angle range compared to the D300, and better high-ISO performance. The focus aid for all old Nikkor MF lenses is even better than on the D300.
I've no need for AF, image stabilisation, or video. Therefore, these cameras are the best choice to me. The D810: it's only used in the 5x4 format because I actually hate that long 3:2 Leica "towel", especially in high format.
I've been a Nikon photographer since 1971, and still own and shoot with my Nikon F/F2/mat/matEL/EL2/F801S. Most of my 25 lenses are 'vintage' ones from 1969 to 1990, all MF except the plastic but not spastic AF1.8/50mm D and the AF /135mm D.C.

Благодарю Вас за чудесный обзор!

A few years ago I got back in to photography after about a 15 year break. I was a wedding and portrait photographer in the film and early digital days. I have to agree that many people are worried about megapixels when they probably don't need to. I bought (new) Nikon D1X, D100, and Fujifilm S-3 Pro back in the day for my business. I sold clients up to 20x24 inch prints from those 5-6 MP cameras and printed a few 24x30 inch prints for display. How many hobby photographers print that large? My D1X died years ago, the S-3 still works but the viewing screen died so you can't "chimp" when you go out and the D100 still works. Since getting back into photography (strictly as a hobby) I've added a few Nikon DSLRs (D200,300,700, 7100,7200) and a couple Fuji mirror less (for vintage lenses). Nothing over 24 MP. I'd love to have a newer Nikon mirror less but I don't NEED it.  Now that I don't do photography as a business I enjoy it a lot more. :)

Great video and content. Share your opinions on D700. Could never afford it back in it's day, now making up for lost time. Cheers.

I have both. They are both 12mp but if you really look close the D700 pics render very different from the D300. D300 picks up noise quite quickly. In the darker spots of a pic things get mushy. The D700 pics however stay very clean.

I stared with a D300 the year 2008, and its noisy,. It broke down a few years ago so I bought a D700 2nd hand, I have not evaluated it yet.  Then I find a D800E 2nd hand and a year after I bought a D850. I like the D800E. I kept all my old lenses from D300, FF lenses, so I can use them on the D700. I had to update some lenses to D850standard and I got 3 zooms too ,24-70mmF2.8, 70-200mmF2.8 and 200-500mmF5.6..  Some problem focusing Zeiss planar 50mmF1.4 on the D700. Mostly my lenses are manual.

I have both. For tele photography the 300 wins as I get the advantage of the crop and lose no lens speed. My 300mm f4 becomes a 450mm f4 and the quality beats cropping the D700 image. However my preferred camera is my D3x as when I crop to match the D300 sensor the quality is rather better.

I went from the D70 Camera to The D300 Camera and shot weddings with them for years. I rented a D 700 to shoot a wedding and like you mentioned I got all my lenses back. Many of which were manual focus and I use manual focus lenses  in the film days for years and I like manual focus. In fact I installed split image focussing screens in both my D700 and my D300 and even my D70. So using the D700 like I mentioned, I got all my lenses back my 24 F2 was actually a 24 F2 field of view. And my 135 F2 wasn’t too long as in 200mm FOV.
So I totally agree with you the D 700 is the way to go it also had the same viewfinder as my F90 X film camera so the transition was easy and it works well with the old film lenses. That’s why I stuck with Nikon because they didn’t make all your lenses obsolete. Although now with mirrorless, you can use all those old lenses and they’re not cheap anymore as many of them are buying them up and using them on video production. Thanks for your reviews and insights and I certainly agree with your observations,  my D300 developed a bunch of hot pixels and so I seldom use it anymore. Although I hear Lightroom actually takes the hot pixels out when you load it into the program? Glad to hear you can use these new programs to make the pictures we took years ago even better than what they were then. Thanks for sharing. Regards Gerry.

I have both and have never had an issue putting an FX lens on a DX body. I only buy Nikon DSLR’s that are at least 10 years old and were highly regarded well after their release date. I don’t buy pro DSLR’s. The older cameras take good photos and I don’t need to spend a fortune on features I don’t need.

The D700 has produced amazing images from my travels in Indonesia. It’s hard to take a bad photo there. Some say it’s indestructible. That’s wrong. I wrecked one at a waterfall in Bali and another at a street protest in Melbourne, Australia when I went down. I am on my third now which I got for the delivery charge, $25. It only had a bent CF pin which I straightened out easily. I like it very much and would only select the D500 over it if I had to make a choice.

The D300 is much newer to my collection but I did some birding with it with a Tamron 150-600mm and was very pleased with the results. I’ll give it another workout soon but at this stage I couldn’t do it justice because it’s hard to take a bad photo Indonesia andI don’t have enough experience with the D300. Nevertheless they both make nice photos.
PS. I only buy from Japanese sellers. They’re honest and the cameras are impeccable when you buy a 5 star unit.

My main camera is the D700. I also own the D7000, but I bought the D300 just because muscle memory makes it easier to use. The D7000 is much lighter, though, so I prefer it for travelling.

I'm squarely in your camp of logic about this topic.  It should be mentioned that your excellent 180mm f/2.8 on the D300 becomes a 270mm f/2.8!  That's an awesome telephoto lens.  2. I've never been convinced to shoot in RAW.  With the capabilities of editing software and now AI, nobody's been able to prove to me that shooting RAW gives you that much advantage.  I've gone back to jpgs shot with a D1h (2.7-megapixels), and have created awesome photos.  3.  All of this "lab" talk is lost on the general public, most of whom just can't see the difference while only looking at  photos on their smartphones.  I bought a D300 for $227 several years ago on eBay with 200 clicks on the shutter!  I also own a D200, D700, D800e, D3, D4, and the whole family of D2 bodies - D2h, D2hs, D2x, D2xs.  They are all a joy to use except when the smartphone crowd looks at you like you're from Mars for shooting with such a big, heavy camera.  Great video.

Can you please do a video about your post production process?

Two things to consider. The internal batteries don't last forever so when they die you lose your settings every time you remove the rechargeable. I own both a d100 and d300. The d300 is roughly 17 years old I think while the d 100 is 25 years old both still work the d100 loses its settings every time you disconnect the the rechargeable and if e100 also has a problem with the tiny LCD display which makes it hard to read I don't know if that will happen to the d300. I still love the d300 and even use the The 100 on occasion

The big difference is the D700 is massively hyped, the D300 or D300s barely gets mentioned. They're both excellent cameras.