D300 to woo Canon shooters

I don't know how many of you have checked out the specs (or hands on review at dpreview) of the D300, but I find it to be an astonishing camera. Not only have Nikon seemed to sorted out their main weak point of poor high ISO noise, but they still have their superb metering / flash system, and now, they bring a pro level focussing system, a beautiful LCD, and more.

With the D100 Nikon were way behind. The D200 was right there with Canon, but if the D300 is as good as it seems, Canon have been caught wrong footed, and will have to play catch-up.

Will I sell all my Canon gear and move to Nikon? No. But, this competition has got to be good news for us Canon shooters, especially when the 50D is released in a few years.

Well said goatee... AS I just posted in another thread,, Nikon have finally caught up.. it should be no surprise to anyone!

Personally, as droolworthy as the D300 looks on paper... I just don't like the look/feel of Nikons.. it goes back right to when I first chose an EOS 100 over a F60.

Given that the 5DII spec was rpobably frozen for a Feb release, be interesting to see if it's released on time as specced or they delay to address some of the D300/D3 issues such as LCD...

The D300 has very interesting specifications, but before giving a verdict we should wait for test, reviews and real-life shots.
Moreover, its price is closer to the 5D than the 40D; prices in Italy are:
40D: 1100 EUR
5D: 2200 EUR
D300: 1900 EUR

So if you put the D300 in competition with the full frame, high-ISO capabilities, AF system etc etc of the 5D ...
well people that already have Canon, will better off with the 5D for sure!

And if I were new in DSLR world, well I think that full-frame is very
attracting vs. a bigger LCD and some other small features ... that's my
opinion.

@Bigimagic

The D300 price might be closer to 5D but both cameras offer something different therefore D300 will be compared to the 40D.

You trying to compare apples with oranges! maybe try comparing Granny Smith vs Golden delicious.

I read those specs as well especially like the tracking AF on color tone

goatee wrote in post #3898495
I don't know how many of you have checked out the specs (or hands on review at dpreview) of the D300, but I find it to be an astonishing camera. Not only have Nikon seemed to sorted out their main weak point of poor high ISO noise, but they still have their superb metering / flash system, and now, they bring a pro level focussing system, a beautiful LCD, and more.

IMO, Canon has been playing catch-up since the D200 in that market segment (the only segment that affects me). It bested the 30D and was priced very attractively compared to the 5D, matching many of its features. The 40D seems to have been designed as Canon's answer to the D200, and in most repects, it matches up well spec-wise, and is better in a few more.

The D300 is Nikon maintaining the lead in that segment. I'm anxious to see how Canon responds in the sub-$2k dSLR range.

The D3 FX is Nikon attempting to now usurp the Pro level. And if the performance is as sexy as the specs, they just might.

One things for sure, though: Canon will respond and it will cost me lots of money.

Dekka wrote in post #3898656
One things for sure, though: Canon will respond and it will cost me lots of money.

Hahahah.

I see a 40Ds and a Mark IIIn in the works

I see a MK IIIN for sure and quite soon (MY guess) not to sure about a 40Ds though

The 5D upgrade could be make or break for Canon, if people are not happy I see some moving over,, it is all about lenses I guess

bidimagic wrote in post #3898536
<snip>
So if you put the D300 in competition with the full frame, high-ISO capabilities, AF system etc etc of the 5D ...
well people that already have Canon, will better off with the 5D for sure!

Even with this, I'm not so sure! Unless you use the 5D for landscapes, I can see little advantage in full frame. I think the 'hidden' war, is with the lenses, where Nikon does seem to be more pricey - add up the total cost of a comparable Nikon or Canon setup, and as far as I can see, the Nikon system will be considerably more expensive, but maybe they'll drop the price of their glass as well. . who knows?

All I know is that Nikon's return to form has got to be good news for users of both systems, as we get the higher specc'ed and better built systems .

Dekka, the D200 is another "looks good on paper" camera. In use though, it isn't nearly the camera the 30D is.

And there's nothing about the D300 that convinces me it will be better than the 40D.

TBAATAR wrote in post #3898606
@Bigimagic

The D300 price might be closer to 5D but both cameras offer something different therefore D300 will be compared to the 40D.

You trying to compare apples with oranges! maybe try comparing Granny Smith vs Golden delicious.

technically speaking, it is correct to compare D300 vs. 40D, as both are cameras with a cropped sensor, but in the market price matters,
and you should compare products by price as well, so D300 and 5D are
IMHO perfectly comparable

goatee wrote in post #3898775
Even with this, I'm not so sure! Unless you use the 5D for landscapes, .

Well, coming from film SLR, a full frame DSLR is the target for me, and I'm
saving for it, no matter how good crop sensor cameras are.
It is a matter of lenses, perspective and DOF, and 1.6x sensor changes
the "feel" about them.
However, everyone has different point of views depending on what they
are shooting and how.

Anyway, 5D is also a top-performer in low-light situations, maybe D300
is an high-ISO strong competitor, but remember that they put 12 megapixels
into a 1.5x crop sensor ... we'll see.

We'll see. I also came from 35mm, and I use a 5D (not mine) on a regular basis, but whilst I like the low light performance, and the resolution it gives, I'm not fussed about the viewfinder <shrug>

45D and 1D IIIN to be released next year!