#188 in Digital cameras
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product
Reddit mentions of Nikon D300 DX 12.3MP Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)
Sentiment score: 2
Reddit mentions: 4
We found 4 Reddit mentions of Nikon D300 DX 12.3MP Digital SLR Camera (Body Only). Here are the top ones.
Buying options
View on Amazon.comor
- Self-cleaning sensor unit magnesium alloy construction with rubber gaskets and seals
- EXPEED Image Processing System and similar Scene Recognition System to that found in the D3
- 3.0-inch LiveView LCD display , new 51-point AF system
- 12.3-megapixel captures enough detail for poster-size photo-quality prints
- In burst mode, shoots up to 100 shots at full 12.3-megapixel resolution
- 12.3-megapixel captures enough detail for poster-size photo-quality prints
- 3.0-inch LiveView LCD display; new 51-point AF system
- In burst mode, shoots up to 100 shots at full 12.3-megapixel resolution
- EXPEED Image Processing System and similar Scene Recognition System to that found in the D3
- Self-cleaning sensor unit; magnesium alloy construction with rubber gaskets and seals
Features:
Specs:
Color | BLACK |
Height | 4.49 Inches |
Length | 5.79 Inches |
Number of items | 1 |
Size | full-size |
Weight | 2.04 Pounds |
Width | 2.91 Inches |
> They paid $4500 for the photographer and didn't get rights to make digital copies to distribute to guests? Who the fuck did they get, Ansel Adams?
you'd have to pay a lot more for ansel adams: he wasn't a wedding photographer, and he's been dead a few years.
"$4500" doesn't really tell me a whole lot. what does that include? is that just to show up? does that include a professionally-produced album? what did the photographer cover? what were his costs (assistants, gear, etc)? for a whole package, $4500 isn't too bad. if that's just to be there, maybe we're looking at "ripped off" territory. if the photographer sucks, definitely.
> I can see making people pay for prints (high res, photo-quality isn't cheap),
i'll let you in on a secret. printing a high-res, good quality photo is dirt cheap. i can get an 8x10 printed for about a dollar. but this is sort of like looking at a painting in a gallery, and thinking it should cost the same as the blank canvas. you're ignoring all of the other materials that went into it and of the artist's work, talent, and skill.
so, when you're paying for a print, it's not the cost of physically producing that print that you are paying for. you're paying for all of the other stuff -- the quality of the image, etc. the photographer has set his prices at what he thinks is fair for his time and effort and skill, and so that he can make enough back to cover his other costs as well as doing things like eat and pay his rent.
64306
The camera I used was this one. My father paid around $1000 for it (8-9 years ago), and I think it now costs less than half of that... So that's definitely true, as new cameras appear the old ones keep getting cheaper!
It's also funny that my phone camera has 21 MP while that one has only 12.3 MP... Phones are replacing so many things.
What about a D300?
you can pick up older used cameras for pretty cheap these days. this would be a decent beginner setup
https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B000VJX7DW/ref=dp_olp_all_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=all
https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-Focus-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1486530440&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+35mm