D300 preview

[farrukh]

A mighty camera:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond300



Shutter life 150,000 exposures
Auto-focus tracking by color (using information from 1005-pixel AE sensor)
Auto-focus calibration (fine-tuning) now available (fixed body or up to 20 separate lens settings)
Its a 1dmk3 for $1800

[farrukh]

Bigger viewfinder vs 40D
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/NikonD300/Images/sidebyside-001.jpg

LCD detail vs 40D:

D300:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/NikonD300/Images/lcd_d300-001.jpg

40D:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/NikonD300/Images/lcd_40d-001.jpg

[blonde]

i can't even look at their new grip without getting pissed!!! just look how nice it is compared to the canon piece of you know what!!

[farrukh]

i can't even look at their new grip without getting pissed!!! just look how nice it is compared to the canon piece of you know what!!

Yeah especially 40d is a big design joke :(

[deeeez]

the preview was nice... I'm still waiting for some credible hi res. photos with the ISO turned up. The cool thing is that the viewfinder coverage is 100% i think..and the focus uses both colors and shapes too.. the AF is also the same as the D3 and there was a great post on DP about someone using it at a Mets game.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&thread=24736304&page=1

[dwarfmcdougal]

I've always liked the switch on the back of Nikons that changes the metering.

[AdamJL]

One thing I've always enjoyed about DPReview is their "comparison" charts, where the better model's features are highlighted in green.....That review just says it all!

On paper, the D300 is the king of that segment of camera. Regardless of the price, I'd pay that much for a Camera with those features.
Canon caught with their pant's down and... canon's exposed?

[SilverOnemi]

i'm starting to think jumpship to nikon.

[Bosscat]

i'm starting to think jumpship to nikon.

I betcha your not alone in that thinking.

[Jon_Doh]

Canon needs to wake up - they've released two duds in a row (40D and Mark III) and there are too many choices out there now with better offerings. The d300 is tempting, but I despise Nikon's controls. I just wish Canon would step up to the plate and release a real upgrade. Putting the Rebel's sensor in the 40D is not an improvement and neither is putting a couple of pieces of foam tape sufficient weather proofing. The viewfinder is only slightly larger, although they're harping how much bigger it is. And while we're discussing viewfinders, why give only 95% coverage when the competition is giving 100%?

Yes, I know the d300 costs $500 more than the 40D, but the d300 has better features than the current 5D, which costs $1000 more. The 40D has the feature set you would expect in the next generation Rebel, XTi or whatever you call Canon's entry level camera. Except for fps it's no better than Nikon's d40 at twice the cost. I've been loyal to Canon since 1991, but even I have to admit they dropped the ball big time with the upgrade to the Mark III and 40D.

[Master-9]

i'm starting to think jumpship to nikon.

How much for you Ef 50mm 1.4 lens?:D

[raveelement]

Except for fps it's no better than Nikon's d40 at twice the cost.

lol, good one

[The Hardcard]

Well, don't let loyalty hold you back. Plus, it really isn't that hard to sell your glass for most of what you paid for it. Everybody who feels the Nikons are so much better, by all means, go for it. Especially if you feel the D40 gives you everything you would get from the 40D, hell you could probably make money in the switch.

[sadatk]

i'm starting to think jumpship to nikon.
Not alone :confused::oops::cry:

[griftnet]

Looks like a nice camera, but I would rather stay with Canon. They have always been good to me... It is just like comparing Ford and Chevy... Not much difference...

My motto is "Buy what you like not what they like"

or you could wear what Mom picked out for you......:)

Mike

[blonde]

would i still be welcome here if i bought a Nikon? ;)

[griftnet]

Not alone :confused::oops::cry:

See ya!

[sadatk]

See ya!

Hey, i'm not jumping ship yet! :p Just in the thought process

[griftnet]

Hey, i'm not jumping ship yet! :p Just in the thought process


Just pulling your leg!!

Have fun:)

Mike

[EOSAddict]

As nice as it looks in spec, I really can't get my head to like the layout and controls and the use of small o's in the LCD to represent the zero in the Av/Tv really annoys me for some reason.

My 30D isn't suddenly going to take rubbish pictures (unless I make it!) nor is a 40D or 5D so I'm sticking with EOS like I have since 1989 when I first assessed the Nikon/Canon handling and went with the EOS 100 instead of the F60

[John_B]

would i still be welcome here if i bought a Nikon?
No! :lol:
Just kidding, honestly I wish Pekka would open an Nikon section in the forum. (the server might lag a tad then ??? ). Then we can all be together still :)

[petiot111]

I am amazed by the number of function this camera has .... what amaze me the more is that the D200 already had most of them. Gosh, canon's really late.

[EOSAddict]

would i still be welcome here if i bought a Nikon? ;)

For you Snir? Of course ............. not (j/k)


I am amazed by the number of function this camera has .... what amaze me the more is that the D200 already had most of them. Gosh, canon's really late.

Just out of curiosity what functions do you see Canon really missing?

[GTRacer]

I have to hand it to Nikon, their cameras look so much nicer than Canon's. ;)

[EOSAddict]

I have to hand it to Nikon, their cameras look so much nicer than Canon's. ;)

Each to his own :)

[GyRob]

I have to hand it to Nikon, their cameras look so much nicer than Canon's. ;)
first post ;)
is this a 1.5 crop camera it doesent say but the sensor is not full size .
Rob.

[EOSAddict]

D300 is 1.5 crop Rob

[Yohan Pamudji]

i can't even look at their new grip without getting pissed!!! just look how nice it is compared to the canon piece of you know what!!

You and me both.

[GTRacer]

Each to his own :)
They just look cooler. It's like comparing a '67 Mustang with a '67 Camaro. :cool:

first post ;)
is this a 1.5 crop camera it doesent say but the sensor is not full size .
Rob.
Yeah... I'm no troll though. But I'm a free agent when it comes to dSLRs... I'm going crazy as to which side I should pick! (I have a G7, so that's a +1 in Canon's favour though...)

[tom s]

I like my 400d and my Canon glass.
when my 400d gets broken I will pay $$$$$$ for that 21 MP Camera Canon is offering :)
I don't need features, I need IQ.

[Yohan Pamudji]

Aha, I just found a shortcoming of the D300. The 15 cross-type AF sensor are all up and down the middle like the 1DII, not spread out over the frame like the 1DIII. The 40D is actually better in this respect since although it still uses that lame diamond AF point arrangement at least all 9 points are cross-type and they're spread over a larger area of the frame.

[FreeBonger]

Hmm... Canon and Nikon were just about even for entry level DSLRs when I got into photography 3 months ago... but I didnt look at higher level cameras because I always heard Canon had the advantage. Hopefully Canon can get the ball rolling again... by the time I get an upgrade into mid-level DSLRs in 6-12 months.

[Yohan Pamudji]

Back to the grip: the D300 has a very ingenious feature--the ability to use the D2X/D3's batteries! Can you imagine if you could use the 1DIII battery with the 40D grip? With the rated life being 2200 shots IIRC, and user reports claiming 3000+ shots on a single battery, you'd never have to change batteries mid-event ever again.

I do wonder about it not having a support column to stick into the body though. Will that one screw and little plastic nubs hold it securely in place?

[Tom W]

The D300 doesn't interest me, though it has some interesting features.

The D3 would if it had more megapixels. But Nikon is just jumping into the full-frame game - their next full-framer will probably be a better competitor for the 5D or it's aftermath.

[gjl711]

i'm starting to think jumpship to nikon. Jumping ship is a bit extreme but it's clear that Canon has become a bit complacent and Nikon has caught up and possible surpassed Canon for high ISO performance. But it's really going to come down to the pics. I for one still plan on getting the 40D and though the 300 on paper looks nice, I am not ready yet to un-invest in all the Canon gear I already have.

[Nick_C]

The LCD on the Nikon looks almost widescreen'ish.

If it turns out as good as what we have seen so far, or better, I think Nikon sales may take over from Canon.

[Nick_C]

Jumping ship is a bit extreme but it's clear that Canon has become a bit complacent and Nikon has caught up and possible surpassed Canon for high ISO performance. But it's really going to come down to the pics. I for one still plan on getting the 40D and though the 300 on paper looks nice, I am not ready yet to un-invest in all the Canon gear I already have.

It easily happens, Canon has had the lead for so long now that they just may have underestimated Nikon.

[The Hardcard]

Jumping ship is a bit extreme but it's clear that Canon has become a bit complacent and Nikon has caught up and possible surpassed Canon for high ISO performance. But it's really going to come down to the pics. I for one still plan on getting the 40D and though the 300 on paper looks nice, I am not ready yet to un-invest in all the Canon gear I already have.

From what I've seen so far I'd say Nikon has come very close Canon. The few D3 and D300 pics I have seen still are a little noisier than Canon at the same ISO. Doesn't mean there won't be better ones coming out.

I think they have definitely eliminated Canon's market for photographers who love to use Nikon but switch because of the sensor. Most of those guys will switch back, along with a number of traditional Canonites.

Maybe it's just me, but I think Canon's images look better at low ISOs. Not a glaring, obvious difference, but side-by-side, I always like the Canon's better. Even Ken Rockwell's comparision to prove that the previous Nikons have better IQ, I thought the Canon pics look better. Maybe less anti-aliasing? I don't know.

[Bollan]

For the first time after 20 years with Canon i'm really tempted. The AF system on the D300 is what really makes me drool (at least on the paper). I personally take a few more grains in my images in favor of better AF performance to be honest. I guess Canon's ISO performance will still be better but the difference will be smaller than ever.

Canon's main weapon in the battle will always be their strong lens lineup in the end though.

400/5.6 - 70-200/4 IS - 17-55/2.8 IS

These three lenses are darn good reason for me to still stick with Canon.

[gooble]

The 40D has the feature set you would expect in the next generation Rebel, XTi or whatever you call Canon's entry level camera. Except for fps it's no better than Nikon's d40 at twice the cost.

You've got to be joking.

[Milan]

I am sure canon was not totally in the dark about what Nikon is going to put out. They tend to keep close tabs on each other so they know what the other is up to. I am sure canon has something up their sleeve and we should be patient.

[Glenn NK]

For the first time after 20 years with Canon i'm really tempted. The AF system on the D300 is what really makes me drool (at least on the paper). I personally take a few more grains in my images in favor of better AF performance to be honest. I guess Canon's ISO performance will still be better but the difference will be smaller than ever.

Canon's main weapon in the battle will always be their strong lens lineup in the end though.

400/5.6 - 70-200/4 IS - 17-55/2.8 IS

These three lenses are darn good reason for me to still stick with Canon.


It's OK to drool on paper - it can be recycled or thrown out.;) Just don't drool on your gear.

We need to see some actual images taken by the new Nikons. Hyperbole is usually wishful thinking in action.

[RichNY]

I am sure canon was not totally in the dark about what Nikon is going to put out. They tend to keep close tabs on each other so they know what the other is up to. I am sure canon has something up their sleeve and we should be patient.

Relatively speaking Canon's offerings are more like going sleeveless to black tie affair.;)

[Milan]

I do believe they know what is at stake. Hopefully they will come out with something to rival them sooner than later.

[Davidoff]

Ok, I'm switching now.... wait, I already shoot with Nikon :D

Anyway, the hands on preview looks really promising for the D300 and if the D3 is what it's supposed to be and really has the quality that has been shown in some "stolen" pictures in other forums, it'd be what I call a turning point for Nikon :cool:

[deeeez]

Only if I had $5K.... :( you guys have to read the Dp thread regarding the D3 AF by the pro canon shooter who got to try it on two occasions (Day and Night).
The guy's name is Ed Betz. Incidentally the D3 and D300 have the same AF.

[JaertX]

what a piece of junk...it doesn't even have a direct print button! :rolleyes:

:lol:

[gooble]

I am sure canon was not totally in the dark about what Nikon is going to put out. They tend to keep close tabs on each other so they know what the other is up to. I am sure canon has something up their sleeve and we should be patient.

I bet they did know what Nikon was doing but I'm not sure what they're gonna do about it in the near term. In less than a year they've updated four out of their five lines. The only thing I see up their sleeve is the 5D replacement. This D300 is filling a hole that Canon has in its lineup and doesn't seem capable of filling within the next two years.

[petiot111]

Just to answer EOS Addict:

just looking at dpreview, all what i wished at some point:

- rubber foot (it is nothing, just a nice design touch)
- so many buttons can be custom configured (as oposed to the totally useless dedicated print button on the 40D)
- real (2%) spot metering (instead of the 4% on the 40D)
- no rubbish night portrait, night landscape etc mode: i would easily trade the memory that those use for an addition user custom 4 dial)
- 4 selectable timer delay (2 5 10 20 sec)
- cleaver card format short cut button combination
- dedicated metering and focus mode switch (fast switching withtout taking the eye of the VF)
- detailed photo display data that includes focal length and lens type (usefull when not having access to a computer)
- in VF grid display (can be switch on and off ... that is so simple and yet so useful)
- active folder selection option / advanced folder operation
- change file name prefix (DCIM can become whatever you want)
- only 4 no-nonsense picture style as opposed to the vivid, not-so-vivid, neutral not-so-neutral (i exaggerate) canon ones
- rename / advanced management picture style control
- controllable active D-lighting (enhanced normal moderate)
- interval timer shooting (brilliant idea!!!)
- compatibility with old non cpu lens
- dedicated lamp for focusing (instead of this awful and battery killing flash firing)
- selectable center weighted circle diameter 6-8-10-13 mm
- tweak able exposure metering
- Continuous low shooting speed tuning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 fps
- auto LCD illumination (any button will light the lcd)
- with grip, virtually any type of battery can be used
- almighty battery status in number of image and percentage AND battery life testiong mode (so you can know when your battery is realy dead sand when you have to buy a new one
- and so on and so on

none of the xxD canon camera have even half of that level of flexibility

I am just amazed.

[EOSAddict]

Just to answer EOS Addict:

Thanks!

just looking at dpreview, all what i wished at some point:

- rubber foot (it is nothing, just a nice design touch)
- so many buttons can be custom configured (as oposed to the totally useless dedicated print button on the 40D)
- real (2%) spot metering (instead of the 4% on the 40D)
- no rubbish night portrait, night landscape etc mode: i would easily trade the memory that those use for an addition user custom 4 dial)
- 4 selectable timer delay (2 5 10 20 sec)
- cleaver card format short cut button combination
- dedicated metering and focus mode switch (fast switching withtout taking the eye of the VF)
- detailed photo display data that includes focal length and lens type (usefull when not having access to a computer)
- in VF grid display (can be switch on and off ... that is so simple and yet so useful)
- active folder selection option / advanced folder operation
- change file name prefix (DCIM can become whatever you want)
- only 4 no-nonsense picture style as opposed to the vivid, not-so-vivid, neutral not-so-neutral (i exaggerate) canon ones
- rename / advanced management picture style control
- controllable active D-lighting (enhanced normal moderate)
- interval timer shooting (brilliant idea!!!)
- compatibility with old non cpu lens
- dedicated lamp for focusing (instead of this awful and battery killing flash firing)
- selectable center weighted circle diameter 6-8-10-13 mm
- tweak able exposure metering
- Continuous low shooting speed tuning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 fps
- auto LCD illumination (any button will light the lcd)
- with grip, virtually any type of battery can be used
- almighty battery status in number of image and percentage AND battery life testiong mode (so you can know when your battery is realy dead sand when you have to buy a new one
- and so on and so on

none of the xxD canon camera have even half of that level of flexibility

I am just amazed.

OF all those the only ones that I would really affect me would be selectable VF grid and selectable FPS (both are great ideas!)

I'm not sure backwarss compatability of lenses applies to EOS since the EF mount has remained the same since it was introduced.

Most of the rest are clearly nice, but not having them, for me, won't really affect my photography. But, each to his own... thanks for the feedback.

[Milan]

I bet they did know what Nikon was doing but I'm not sure what they're gonna do about it in the near term. In less than a year they've updated four out of their five lines. The only thing I see up their sleeve is the 5D replacement. This D300 is filling a hole that Canon has in its lineup and doesn't seem capable of filling within the next two years.

From another post of mine i wrote
"What about a 5D MKII and a 5Ds MKII just like the 1D bodies. The 5D MKII would compete with the D300 from Nikon (and Kick it’s a..) with a crop sensor. The 5Ds MKII would be the full sensor and in a class of its own. The 40d would beat their D80 and canon would rule because it offers more options for everyone. I feel this middle section is kind of lacking and this would strengthen their positioning."

[Davidoff]

From another post of mine i wrote
"What about a 5D MKII and a 5Ds MKII just like the 1D bodies. The 5D MKII would compete with the D300 from Nikon (and Kick it’s a..) with a crop sensor. The 5Ds MKII would be the full sensor and in a class of its own. The 40d would beat their D80 and canon would rule because it offers more options for everyone. I feel this middle section is kind of lacking and this would strengthen their positioning."

How'd that work ? You're comparing a brand new 1300$ 40d with a one year old 900$ D80.

By the way Petiot, a some of those features were already implemented in the D70.

[Nick_C]

what a piece of junk...it doesn't even have a direct print button! :rolleyes:

:lol:

WHAT? that was the only reason I went full frame, the direct print button on my 5D just felt a little better quality than the rest of the cameras I tried :p

[SilverOnemi]

whoa nikon all the way, nikon d300 is MINE.

[farrukh]

whoa nikon all the way, nikon d300 is MINE.

Congrats, post the duck shot on nikonians forum once you get it :D

[Glenn NK]

Congrats, post the duck shot on nikonians forum once you get it :D

Will we see the duck shot by Christmas?;)

[SilverOnemi]

Yeah for shure ;)

[deeeez]

no matter what i shoot, I'll always post here. This forum, I believe has transcended the "brand name" nonsense.. I think the majority of people here prefer discussing the actual photograph you post as opposed to the camera that was used to shoot it.

[Bollan]

Only if I had $5K.... :( you guys have to read the Dp thread regarding the D3 AF by the pro canon shooter who got to try it on two occasions (Day and Night).
The guy's name is Ed Betz. Incidentally the D3 and D300 have the same AF.

I was afraid to hear something like that. Specially when it comes from a pro like Ed who was a Nikon shooter for many years and switched to Canon when D2H came out.

I can see some similarities with the MKIII issue right now. When Nikon failed the D2H many jumped ship and have stayed since but Canon better watch out now when they finally got some serious competition on the pro market again.

Quote from Ed Betz

" I was covering the Mets game tonight and there were 2 D3's there.

I was allowed to shoot with one for a bit and I have a few comments.

First, let me say, that several years ago, I was a Nikon shooter, and when the D2H came out, I was VERY vocal about it's problems.
I did detailed testing (if you search the messages you'll find some of the stuff) and the results were not good news for Nikon. As the result of that, I became a Canon shooter, and still am.
Tonights experience with the D3 has really changed my mind about Nikon.

The camera "FEELS" great in your hand. The controls are really well placed (as they have been in most Nikon Cameras). The Auto focus was SPOT on and VERY VERY fast (even under night time baseball lighting)
While all of that I expected from the camera, there was something I never expected. The image quality was BY FAR the BEST I HAVE EVER SEEN in a digital camera. The detail in the images was STUNNING.
The camera was set for iso 2000 when it was handed to me, and I must be honest and say that they looked BETTER then the iso 800 I was shooting with my Canon Mark II. The color was pure and rich.
Just for fun, I turned up the iso to 3200 and to my astonishment, it still looked BETTER then my 800 iso on my Mark II. Both in color and in noise.
The noise is NOT ONLY very low, BUT, the quality of what noise there is (unlike the D2H) was pleasing. One of the problems I had with the D2H was not only the amount of noise, but the QUALITY of it. The D3 changes all of that.
The final test came when I opened the images in Photoshop. I must say, if I didn't shoot them myself, I never ever would have believed that they were iso 2000 and 3200. They look like 400 and 640 (only better) then my Mark II.
Finally, the level of detail that the camera captures goes FAR BEYOND anything I have ever experienced in ANY digital camera .
So, my hats off to you NIKON.... I only wish you would have done this sooner, before I spent tens of thousands switching to Canon.......
Perhaps there is a Nikon switch in my future."

End quote

The entire thread can be found at http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&thread=24736304&page=1

[farrukh]

Good post Bollan,

Please take my word, as a real Nikon D2H critic, that the D3 is the BOMB!!!!!!! when it comes to image quality....
--
Ed Betz

[ducko]

From what I read about the features, the d300 is a bargain. I think that if Canon waited until after nikon released this new camera, they would have lost out on a lot of presales. I hope that Canon announces a really nice 5d replacement soon to cheer me up. :-(

[Mr. Clean]

So tiresome. This is better that is better jumping ship not jumping ship direct print button 2% vs 4%.
It's everywhere.
It's kind of sad that the digital world took away some of the love of photography people used to have and turned it more into a my camera is bigger than your camera game.
A local photography contest at our fair was one by someone who shot with a Pentax K-100D. How does that stack up to the 40D or the D300?
I would reckon that 5% of the people that jump ship would see some financial gain from selling pics that the other camera wouldn't have gotten, the other 95% is composed of gearheads. I think that's pretty darn generous.
Look if you jump ship don't let the door hitcha where the good lord splitcha.
After that, show us some pics that your new camera got you that your old camera couldn't have.

[gjl711]

Whats wrong with being a gearhead and a photographer?

[Mr. Clean]

Whats wrong with being a gearhead and a photographer?
Nothin' really, to each their own. Heck I'm one too but it's more with glass. At the end of the day though I think it's important to remember it's the picture that matters not the camera that took it. There's such a thing as getting too wrapped up in the gearheadedness though methinks.
John Shaw is one of my favs and has taken so many beautiful pictures and he uses that crappy D2H or whatever it's called.:lol:

[ducko]

Nothin' really, to each their own. Heck I'm one too but it's more with glass. At the end of the day though I think it's important to remember it's the picture that matters not the camera that took it. There's such a thing as getting too wrapped up in the gearheadedness though methinks.
John Shaw is one of my favs and has taken so many beautiful pictures and he uses that crappy D2H or whatever it's called.:lol:

I'm not saying that you can't get great shots with an old film camera. At this point, I'm not even talking about pictures. It's all about keeping up with the Joneses. I certainly get great shots with my 5d and 30d and don't have any reason to go out and buy the latest and greatest camera. I thought we were just talking about the technology that is being put in to this d300. They are all very appealing. Do you need all these features to get great shots? No, probably not. It doesn't hurt though. :-)

[Yohan Pamudji]

To me the features that matter are the ones that allow me to consistently get great shots in challenging shooting conditions--low light, bad weather, etc. You can make great photos with any camera, but certain features (AF, high ISO noise, weather sealing) allow you to get great shots consistently in all sorts of situations, providing of course that the operator does his part :D Lot's of people who can afford to take their time with trial and error and don't need to deliver great shots on a consistent basis regardless of shooting conditions don't understand this need, and tend to scoff at people who demand more out of their equipment. To each his own; just don't belittle my needs simply because you don't need the same features, you know? It amazes me sometimes how quick people are to put down others without giving a second thought to the fact that their requirements and situation are different, but I guess that's just human nature.

Not targeting any particular person here, just ranting in general. Almost every major feature of the D300 is better than the 40D, and if I were in the market for a 1.6x crop camera I would definitely pay the same amount for a Canon equivalent of the D300.

[gjl711]

...Almost every major feature of the D300 is better than the 40D, and if I were in the market for a 1.6x crop camera I would definitely pay the same amount for a Canon equivalent of the D300.
Of course it's still only on paper. I would like to see some real pics.

[deeeez]

I'm getting so damn sick of searching the web for some damn high ISO samples of this friggin camera... sure, it looks good on paper but so did the d200 except it didn't do well with 400 ISO and above. and I care about that just aaaaa littttleeee bit...

[gjl711]

I'm getting so damn sick of searching the web for some damn high ISO samples of this friggin camera... sure, it looks good on paper but so did the d200 except it didn't do well with 400 ISO and above. and I care about that just aaaaa littttleeee bit...
Well there is this site:
http://www.photographybay.com/2007/08/31/nikon-d300-sample-images-at-iso-6400/
I don't know how real it is but the ISO6400 at full size looks very noisy.

[Mr. Clean]

I'm not saying that you can't get great shots with an old film camera. At this point, I'm not even talking about pictures. It's all about keeping up with the Joneses. I certainly get great shots with my 5d and 30d and don't have any reason to go out and buy the latest and greatest camera. I thought we were just talking about the technology that is being put in to this d300. They are all very appealing. Do you need all these features to get great shots? No, probably not. It doesn't hurt though. :-)
The Joneses disease is a terrible thing too, very hard to resist.
Of course it's still only on paper. I would like to see some real pics.
I'm sure they will perform very well though you know? Nikon and Canon have about the same spotted past as far as releases go but for the most part they're both pretty dang good at getting the good shots out.
To me the features that matter are the ones that allow me to consistently get great shots in challenging shooting conditions--low light, bad weather, etc. You can make great photos with any camera, but certain features (AF, high ISO noise, weather sealing) allow you to get great shots consistently in all sorts of situations, providing of course that the operator does his part :D Lot's of people who can afford to take their time with trial and error and don't need to deliver great shots on a consistent basis regardless of shooting conditions don't understand this need, and tend to scoff at people who demand more out of their equipment. To each his own; just don't belittle my needs simply because you don't need the same features, you know? It amazes me sometimes how quick people are to put down others without giving a second thought to the fact that their requirements and situation are different, but I guess that's just human nature.

Not targeting any particular person here, just ranting in general. Almost every major feature of the D300 is better than the 40D, and if I were in the market for a 1.6x crop camera I would definitely pay the same amount for a Canon equivalent of the D300.
It's not trial and error I don't think, it's knowing the limitations of your camera. Now someone going from a 20D to a d300 and you shoot sports? I could understand that, personally I'd keep the glass and go to a 40D. AF is really what matters in my opinion, and that's what gets keepers. not a VF grid display or a selectable timer or fancy picture styles or a rubber foot.
Weathersealing is a different beast entirely. I bet 95% of the weathersealed body users don't have an entire lens lineup of weathersealed lenses. I don't, but then I didn't buy the 1d for weather sealing.
What happens if people switch and Canon trumps Nikon again? And then vice versa? So much time lost switching systems = lost shots and a big pain in your a$$ :D
Still, the D300 is a cool camera! :lol:

[blam]

i really dont know why everyone is comparing the D300 to the 40D...the price difference is pretty big....its like comparing a D40 to the 40D.

Nikon has put out some GREAT cameras on paper and Im sure the IQ will be superb.

Canon has been dragging its feet ever since the release of the XTi

[blam]

Well there is this site:
http://www.photographybay.com/2007/08/31/nikon-d300-sample-images-at-iso-6400/
I don't know how real it is but the ISO6400 at full size looks very noisy.

wow...that looks pretty bad imho....

[gjl711]

i really dont know why everyone is comparing the D300 to the 40D...the price difference is pretty big....its like comparing a D40 to the 40D.
To be fair you really can’t compare total $$$. It would make more sense to compare the difference in cost as a %. For example, the D40 is only 74% of the cost of an XTi but the only 38% of the cost of the 40D. With the 40D being 72% of the cost of a D300 comparing the 40D to the D300 is really no different than comparing the XTi to the D40.

[Yohan Pamudji]

It's not trial and error I don't think, it's knowing the limitations of your camera. Now someone going from a 20D to a d300 and you shoot sports? I could understand that, personally I'd keep the glass and go to a 40D. AF is really what matters in my opinion, and that's what gets keepers. not a VF grid display or a selectable timer or fancy picture styles or a rubber foot.
Weathersealing is a different beast entirely. I bet 95% of the weathersealed body users don't have an entire lens lineup of weathersealed lenses. I don't, but then I didn't buy the 1d for weather sealing.
What happens if people switch and Canon trumps Nikon again? And then vice versa? So much time lost switching systems = lost shots and a big pain in your a$$ :D
Still, the D300 is a cool camera! :lol:

Yeah, I'm not gonna switch--got too much time, effort, and money invested into learning and acquiring the Canon system. The D300 is what I wish Canon would come out with, which is a pro spec camera in a smaller form factor. My 1DII cameras are great, but I'd love to have a pro camera with a detachable grip that I could use for personal use without being so conspicuous. 5DII, anyone? :D

When I said "trial and error" I was referring to the fact that some people can afford to shoot at a slower pace, take minutes to observe the scene and compose, fiddle around with settings, and try different things including manual focus; and if the light gets dim or the weather gets bad they can just pack up and go home. You know, basically take their time and setup the shot just right without any time or situational constraints. I shoot a bit of everything--sports, weddings, portraits, etc.--so unless I'm out there taking photos for personal use, my needs are usually different from the casual user. That's why I mentioned AF, ISO noise, and weather sealing as real benefits for my use. Not all of my lenses are weather sealed (35L, 85L II, 135L), but many are (17-40L, 24-70L, 70-200 2.8 IS), so I'd like to see that feature in a lower priced body soon.

1D Mark IV: 12MP fullframe, 10fps, fixed AF system (:D), optional vertical grip, $3500. I'd be on that like white on rice.

[blam]

To be fair you really can’t compare total $$$. It would make more sense to compare the difference in cost as a %. For example, the D40 is only 74% of the cost of an XTi but the only 38% of the cost of the 40D. With the 40D being 72% of the cost of a D300 comparing the 40D to the D300 is really no different than comparing the XTi to the D40.

fair enough.

the XTi is still leaps and bounds over the D40 imho, as the D300 is over the 40D

[Mr. Clean]

Yeah, I'm not gonna switch--got too much time, effort, and money invested into learning and acquiring the Canon system. The D300 is what I wish Canon would come out with, which is a pro spec camera in a smaller form factor. My 1DII cameras are great, but I'd love to have a pro camera with a detachable grip that I could use for personal use without being so conspicuous. 5DII, anyone? :D

When I said "trial and error" I was referring to the fact that some people can afford to shoot at a slower pace, take minutes to observe the scene and compose, fiddle around with settings, and try different things including manual focus; and if the light gets dim or the weather gets bad they can just pack up and go home. You know, basically take their time and setup the shot just right without any time or situational constraints. I shoot a bit of everything--sports, weddings, portraits, etc.--so unless I'm out there taking photos for personal use, my needs are usually different from the casual user. That's why I mentioned AF, ISO noise, and weather sealing as real benefits for my use. Not all of my lenses are weather sealed (35L, 85L II, 135L), but many are (17-40L, 24-70L, 70-200 2.8 IS), so I'd like to see that feature in a lower priced body soon.

1D Mark IV: 12MP fullframe, 10fps, fixed AF system (:D), optional vertical grip, $3500. I'd be on that like white on rice.
I might be in the minority, but I rather like the built in grip with the 1 series. It has a better feel to it and there's nothing to come undone. Not that the 30/40/5D feels bad, they just feel bulky in comparison.

I shoot similar things to what you do too. I think it still boils back to knowing your camera and the limitations. In sports, I meter, slap it in manual and go. The 1 series AF is what I need there. Portraits is similar - no special camera needed there because almost any camera can AF on stationary subjects 95% of the time. Landscape is about the same as portraits. Weddings though, I wish I had something a bit cleaner to use, but still, 1600 slightly overexposed in a Mark II is pretty darn good!

I can see how the D300 seems like the best of all worlds, it's just not better enough to me to switch...heck, nothing at this point moves me to switch from what I'm using.

[deeeez]

Well there is this site:
http://www.photographybay.com/2007/08/31/nikon-d300-sample-images-at-iso-6400/
I don't know how real it is but the ISO6400 at full size looks very noisy.

I've seen those.. they are pre-production model ISO6400 shots...
I want to see ISO 1600 and 3200... with the current production models..
I'm not expecting miracles...
If it performs similar to the 40D with more MP crammed into the sensor, I'd consider that a very good outing for the 300D.. frankly, I don't see a way to squeeze cleaner ISO shots at crop sized sensors..

[Yohan Pamudji]

I might be in the minority, but I rather like the built in grip with the 1 series. It has a better feel to it and there's nothing to come undone. Not that the 30/40/5D feels bad, they just feel bulky in comparison.

I shoot similar things to what you do too. I think it still boils back to knowing your camera and the limitations. In sports, I meter, slap it in manual and go. The 1 series AF is what I need there. Portraits is similar - no special camera needed there because almost any camera can AF on stationary subjects 95% of the time. Landscape is about the same as portraits. Weddings though, I wish I had something a bit cleaner to use, but still, 1600 slightly overexposed in a Mark II is pretty darn good!

I can see how the D300 seems like the best of all worlds, it's just not better enough to me to switch...heck, nothing at this point moves me to switch from what I'm using.

I'm right there with ya. There are a lot of features of the D300 that are gimmicky, although with use they might be nice too, but AF, and weather sealing are the main ones that I really wish would migrate to a non-1-series camera, and I can't see Canon stopping their high ISO noise improvements.

For sports I do what you do too--manual exposure. Weddings need fast AF and clean high ISOs just as much as sports! Portraits I just threw in there for variety, not to prove any point really.

The camera is already rarely the limiting factor for me. If I don't get a shot it's almost always my fault. But improving AF in particular will get it to the point where I never have to worry that the camera will let me down. That's part of knowing your camera's limitations--wishing for better when no amount of technique can compensate for a camera's shortcomings.

And when I talk about grips I don't mean the cheap, flimsy, plastic things that Canon designed for the 20D/30D/40D. I mean something like the current 1D grip, just detachable. I've never used one since they're not out, but just look at the D300 grip (scroll down to the "Battery pack" section):

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond300/page4.asp

Magnesium alloy like the camera body it attaches to, looks like it's covered front and back with the same rubber as the body, takes both regular D300 batteries and the larger D2x/D3 batteries (imagine if the 40D/5D could take 1DIII batteries!), and just looks like it fits on the D300. The 20D/30D/40D grip is awful on its own, but next to the D300 is even worse. As with everything D300-related the proof is in the pudding, but in theory THAT is the kind of grip I want to see Canon make.

[Yohan Pamudji]

On a side note, what's up with Live View getting to be popular across all manufacturers all of a sudden? Talk about your gimmicky features. What percentage of DSLR users will really use this feature, and how often will they use it? I can see situations where I would use it, but I could live without it if they swapped it out for some of the more critical features I've mentioned before. Sometimes I wish DSLRs were like cars where you could add/subtract options/features as needed.

[gjl711]

On a side note, what's up with Live View getting to be popular across all manufacturers all of a sudden? Talk about your gimmicky features. What percentage of DSLR users will really use this feature, and how often will they use it? ...
I for one love that live view is coming to SLRs and will use it whenever I can but especially for macro. Being able to zoom in and magnify 10x will allow you to focus to a level of accuracy you could never achieve with a viewfinder. Anyway, I have been shooting SLRs for 30 years and have had my eye buried in a viewfinder so long that there are dents on my cheeks, so I relish the fact that I once again may be able to enjoy the event with my real eyes and not have watch through a tiny little viewfinder. However, SLRs are not there yet. They are getting close, but still not there. Alas, for the most part it's still eye in the viewfinder.

[Bobster]

i'll stick with Canon shooting full 14bit RAW @ 6.5fps rather than downgrading 2.5fps if you want to shoot 14bit RAW with the D300..

[Glenn NK]

On a side note, what's up with Live View getting to be popular across all manufacturers all of a sudden? Talk about your gimmicky features. What percentage of DSLR users will really use this feature, and how often will they use it? I can see situations where I would use it, but I could live without it if they swapped it out for some of the more critical features I've mentioned before. Sometimes I wish DSLRs were like cars where you could add/subtract options/features as needed.

After using a real 35 mm camera from 1962 to 2006, whenever I took my Canon A95 PS out with live preview, I was a bit embarrassed because I still felt that any knowledgeable and self-respecting photographer wouldn't use a PS camera.

Now that's just how I felt - it's not suggesting that you people that use PS cams aren't self-respecting and good photographers - it's just a feeling I had. And it may have had something to do with the dinky little size of the A95.

When I hold a "regular size" DSLR up to my eye to compose and focus, at least I feel like a photographer, not like the kazillion tourists that come to my city every year with their cutesy little PS thingys. It doesn't help them either when they attempt to shoot the legislative building or the Empress Hotel at night from 300 yards with the flash firing off.:rolleyes:

One observation about live preview: Even with a 3 inch LCD, composing the shot accurately will be difficult if not impossible - it's just too small to see the edges of the frame accurately. Although the viewfinder is smaller, it's much closer to one's eye, and composing with it is accurate (neglecting the rather stupid concept of 95 percent coverage).

[deeeez]

i'll stick with Canon shooting full 14bit RAW @ 6.5fps rather than downgrading 2.5fps if you want to shoot 14bit RAW with the D300..

Because God knows you want 14bit tonality when you are shooting at 8 FPS RAW ;)

Also the overwhelming and noticable IQ difference of 14bit vs. 12bit is so clear to see. Please, honestly tell me that there is a noticable difference in IQ that can be attributed to the 14bits, because I can't see it.. and I've seen a ton of 30d vs 40d, 20D vs 40D, 5D vs. 40D vs. god knows what threads.... :p

:D

Oh and please don't think that I'm trying to convince you that you have to switch or something... I'm just commenting on the 12 vs 14 bit thing...

[gjl711]

... Please, honestly tell me that there is a noticable difference in IQ that can be attributed to the 14bits, because I can't see it.. and I've seen a ton of 30d vs 40d, 20D vs 40D, 5D vs. 40D vs. god knows what threads.... :p.....
You'll never see the differance on an 8 bit display just as you'll ever see the differance in a jpeg. You may see the differance when processing the raw file as you have a bit more data to work with. Hopefully, I will soon know ;)

[deeeez]

You'll never see the differance on an 8 bit display just as you'll ever see the differance in a jpeg. You may see the differance when processing the raw file as you have a bit more data to work with. Hopefully, I will soon know ;)

keep us posted please... I'm very skeptical but I'm keeping an open mind..

[deeeez]

You'll never see the differance on an 8 bit display just as you'll ever see the differance in a jpeg. You may see the differance when processing the raw file as you have a bit more data to work with. Hopefully, I will soon know ;)

WAAAAIITTTT a minute :)

You mean no matter what I do, I can't see the difference on my monitor? or for that matter anyone else?

hmmmmmmm :confused: do those 40D's and d300's come with new monitors? :D

[gjl711]

WAAAAIITTTT a minute :)

You mean no matter what I do, I can't see the difference on my monitor? or for that matter anyone else?

hmmmmmmm :confused: do those 40D's and d300's come with new monitors? :DWell, I'm hoping that you'll see the difference when printed, but right now with 12 bit raw, the camera captures more color information that nearly all video cards can display anyway, right? 8 bits for RGB and 8 for the alpha channel. That's only ~16 mil colors.

[ACDCROCKS]

I find this topic humerous, haha I really do. If anything, we should be happy...If were looking at the d300, thinking it's a good camera (and it could be), can you think of what the next canon be like? Were not happy with canon, and this is the extra allie we need to kick thier butt and want a better product. I've been with canon for 2 years, I don't think I would switch, even though I have Nikon. I prefer canon and always will. If we survived film, we'll survive with out a few features. If you don't liek whats currently happening, go back to film.

[deeeez]

Well, I'm hoping that you'll see the difference when printed, but right now with 12 bit raw, the camera captures more color information that nearly all video cards can display anyway, right? 8 bits for RGB and 8 for the alpha channel. That's only ~16 mil colors.

How would one edit the pictures on the monitor if they only show up the way they are supposed to on the prints?

lol....I honestly think this is just a gimmick... maybe I'm just plain ignorant...:lol:

[farrukh]

I find this topic humerous, haha I really do. If anything, we should be happy...If were looking at the d300, thinking it's a good camera (and it could be), can you think of what the next canon be like? Were not happy with canon, and this is the extra allie we need to kick thier butt and want a better product. I've been with canon for 2 years, I don't think I would switch, even though I have Nikon. I prefer canon and always will. If we survived film, we'll survive with out a few features. If you don't liek whats currently happening, go back to film.

Canons been sitting on the beach, eating chicken and watching girls all the year. and thats it :lol:.

A trunk card still left (5dmk2) I'm also waiting for it but Canon has been disappointing this year so hopes are not so high.

[ACDCROCKS]

Canons been sitting on the beach, eating chicken and watching girls all the year. and thats it :lol:.

A trunk card still left (5dmk2) I'm also waiting for it but Canon has been disappointing this year so hopes are not so high.

Good come to those who wait right? haha. :rolleyes:

[farrukh]

Good come to those who wait right? haha. :rolleyes:

Yes may be...

[SilverOnemi]

Canons been sitting on the beach, eating chicken and watching girls all the year. and thats it :lol:.

A trunk card still left (5dmk2) I'm also waiting for it but Canon has been disappointing this year so hopes are not so high.

Agreed.