Canon EOS 7D vs Nikon D300

Tie
Canon EOS 7D

74

Nikon D300

73

Tie

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 7D

Rapid fire
Continuous shooting
8 fps
Barely any delay taking photos
Shutter lag
131 ms shutter lag
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Great viewfinder coverage
Viewfinder coverage
100%
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D300

Focus points
Many focus points
51
Badge
Built-in focus motor
Autofocuses with more lenses
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Viewfinder coverage
Great viewfinder coverage
100%

galleries

Explore our gallery of 43 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 7D.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D300.

competitors

Canon EOS 7D Competitors

Canon EOS 70D

Canon EOS 70D

Pro DSLR

$408 - $899 body only

$891 - $999 with 18-55mm lens

HDR Has in-camera HDR
Autofocus Video autofocus
Dynamic range Less dynamic range
Canon EOS 6D

Canon EOS 6D

Pro DSLR

$625 - $1,499 body only

$1,899 with 24-105mm lens

Low light performance Significantly lower noise at high ISO
Color depth Better color depth
Cross type focus points Significantly fewer cross-type focus points
Canon EOS 7D Mark II

Canon EOS 7D Mark II

Pro DSLR

$618 - $1,499 body only

$786 - $1,849 with 18-135mm lens

HDR Has in-camera HDR
Cross type focus points Many more cross-type focus points
Battery life Slightly shorter battery life

Nikon D300 Competitors

Nikon D7000

Nikon D7000

Entry-level DSLR

$440 body only

$1,220 with 18-105mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Cross type focus points Fewer cross-type focus points
Nikon D90

Nikon D90

Entry-level DSLR

$378 body only

$1,010 with 55-300mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Overall image quality Better image quality
Weather sealed No weather sealing
Nikon D300S

Nikon D300S

Pro DSLR

$1,337 body only

$1,250 with 18-200mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Movie format Shoots movies

discussion

Canon EOS 7D
EOS 7D
Canon

Report a correction
Nikon D300
D300
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments