D300 to woo Canon shooters

^ it'd be a 6 or 7D, not a 3D

I'm not that fond of the usability of the Nikon cameras, but they're starting to fix it - e.g. the zoom in/out buttons. There's lots of people saying they wouldn't jump ship because of glass etc, but look at how many Nikon shooters did the opposite in the last few years. I think as an exercise, I'll cost up how much it will cost me to change (at least I can keep my flash ). Being able to do wireless flash with one flash is a good starting point, not to mention that LCD, the focussing, the weather proofing, superb build quality and more.

Wow, ok, it would cost a fortune to move to Nikon (especially given that the D300 will cost more than current D200 prices, I'd imagine) - although of course, it depends on whether the comparable system enables you to get shots that you couldn't with your Canon gear, or easier, or more accurate.

40D - £760, 24-70 f/2.8 L - £764, 70-200 f/4L - £407, 85mm f/1.8 - £244 - total = £2,175
D200 - £794, 28-70 f/2.8 - £1049, 80-200 f/2.8 (no f/4 option) - £671, 85mm f/1.8 - £239 - total = £2,753

Disclaimer - I could use my flash, so didn't factor that in, and my Sigma 30mm costs the same on both. So, if I bought from scratch, the Nikon kit would cost £578 more (or 26% more) (prices here from www.camerapricebuster.​com.)

Ocean Blue wrote in post #3900135
The D300 should move the standard for LCDs forward in a big way. The DPReview preview has a D300 screen compared to a 40D screen. The pictures can be enlarged over on the site and the comments also note that the D300 screen line the pixles up like an LCD monitor where as current camera LCDs stagger the colors. Here's the relevant page that the two attached small photos came from and where the screen is further discussed: http://www.dpreview.co​m/previews/nikond300/p​age3.asp

I think it's utterly ridiculous that this is actually as big a deal to someone as it is. I for one do not deliver my photos from the back LCD. I think money spent on making HD-LCD for preview purposes is just unnecessary. Basically Nikon came up with a great solution to a problem that just didn't exist in the first place.

goatee wrote in post #3900251
I'm not that fond of the usability of the Nikon cameras, but they're starting to fix it - e.g. the zoom in/out buttons. There's lots of people saying they wouldn't jump ship because of glass etc, but look at how many Nikon shooters did the opposite in the last few years. I think as an exercise, I'll cost up how much it will cost me to change (at least I can keep my flash ). Being able to do wireless flash with one flash is a good starting point, not to mention that LCD, the focussing, the weather proofing, superb build quality and more.

Wow, ok, it would cost a fortune to move to Nikon (especially given that the D300 will cost more than current D200 prices, I'd imagine) - although of course, it depends on whether the comparable system enables you to get shots that you couldn't with your Canon gear, or easier, or more accurate.

40D - £760, 24-70 f/2.8 L - £764, 70-200 f/4L - £407, 85mm f/1.8 - £244 - total = £2,175
D200 - £794, 28-70 f/2.8 - £1049, 80-200 f/2.8 (no f/4 option) - £671, 85mm f/1.8 - £239 - total = £2,753

Disclaimer - I could use my flash, so didn't factor that in, and my Sigma 30mm costs the same on both. So, if I bought from scratch, the Nikon kit would cost £578 more (or 26% more) (prices here from www.camerapricebuster.​com.)

i did the same exercise and it will cost me about $2000 more to move myself to the Nikon system (D3) which is not that bad considering the fact that their 500 f4 alone costs $1000 more than the canon...

Although I have only had the 40D for a short while, I am very pleased with it. That is not to say that I am not extremely jealous of the D300's focusing and weather-sealing. Obviously the focusing has yet to be tested, but I imagine they will have gotten that part right. My gut feeling is that the 40D image quality will surpass that of the D300, but it probably won't be substantial. I would love for Canon to release a 40Ds at ~$1700 to 1800 with the 45-point AF system and full weather-sealing.

Also, DPReview states that the D300 focusing points are not engraved but are lyquid crystal so you only see them in the viewfinder if they are selected. That seems like a pretty cool feature. I assume that with the Canon 1-series bodies all 45 points are always visible in the viewfinder whether selected or not, right?

Ocean Blue wrote in post #3900135
The D300 should move the standard for LCDs forward in a big way. The DPReview preview has a D300 screen compared to a 40D screen. The pictures can be enlarged over on the site and the comments also note that the D300 screen line the pixles up like an LCD monitor where as current camera LCDs stagger the colors. Here's the relevant page that the two attached small photos came from and where the screen is further discussed: http://www.dpreview.co​m/previews/nikond300/p​age3.asp

Yep, that'll be great cos all the camera owners I know look at their LCD screens with a magnifying glass.

All we use the lcd for is checking the histogram, no serious photographer would trust an LCD for more than that. Therefore the 'massive LCD resolution' is pure marketing BS -looks good but means nothing, like a bodykit on a small hatchback.

And don't even go there about the HD video out, how many of us regularly hook up our cameras to TVs to view pic's?

There's always going to be a "better" body with more bells and whistles. . .but will that make for a better picture or photographer? Instead of relying on all the technology, we should perfect our techniques, both shooting and PP. My $0.02. IMO, better glass is the way to go.

McManus wrote in post #3900588
Although I have only had the 40D for a short while, I am very pleased with it. That is not to say that I am not extremely jealous of the D300's focusing and weather-sealing. Obviously the focusing has yet to be tested, but I imagine they will have gotten that part right. My gut feeling is that the 40D image quality will surpass that of the D300, but it probably won't be substantial. I would love for Canon to release a 40Ds at ~$1700 to 1800 with the 45-point AF system and full weather-sealing.

Also, DPReview states that the D300 focusing points are not engraved but are lyquid crystal so you only see them in the viewfinder if they are selected. That seems like a pretty cool feature. I assume that with the Canon 1-series bodies all 45 points are always visible in the viewfinder whether selected or not, right?

NOPE if all are activated only the outer ring shows Known as ring of fire.
Rob.

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.

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.

Meh....it doesn't compete with the 5D for the most important features I need. #1 gripe: NO ISO 100 . #2 gripe: no ISO 100......yep, that's a huge deal for me. I wanna see some image samples of high ISO to see if Nikon has improved their noise performance.....but not having a working low ISO range just baffles me I suspect even at ISO1600, the noise won't be any better then the FF 5D. The D300 is a good step up from the D200, but it's now even more of a different camera then the 5D.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=370690

you can enable iso 100 tru CFuntions.

SilverOnemi wrote in post #3902264
you can enable iso 100 tru CFuntions.

that's boosted ISO....no native ISO 100, so DR and noise is best at ISO 200. Not the same as what ISO was for film (slower film gets you better DR and resolution).

The D300 is basically the ultimate camera we have been crying about for the last couple years...the 3D. It's got the superior autofocussing, high resolution with good high ISO quality, weather sealing and high fps. If Canon came out with this, we would all be holding hands singing Kumbayah.

AdamJL wrote in post #3900204
^ it'd be a 6 or 7D, not a 3D

Er... what? Why would they do that?

Speaking in terms of 35mm film SLRs and assuming Canon will be numbering the pro-line digital bodies in much the same way, wasn't the EOS 3 a much improved successor to the EOS 5 (A2/A2e)? And did the EOS 3 not incorporate many of the same features as the EOS 1 series and improved on features introduced in the EOS 5?

Given this pattern 1, 3, 5... can we assume that the lower number represents a higher end camera in the pro line?

...and the exact opposite for prosumer bodies:
300, 350, 400...
10D, 20D, 30D...

...and I think it's safe to assume that Canon did away with putting "D" in front of the numbers so as to not confuse consumers with Nikon bodies...

D30, D60....

Interested in hearing your logic.

davesrose wrote in post #3902400
that's boosted ISO....no native ISO 100, so DR and noise is best at ISO 200. Not the same as what ISO was for film (slower film gets you better DR and resolution).

thanks for the head's up, i'll attempt to try high iso film, and low iso with a tripod.

I just saw it confirmed that D300 only shoots 2.5 Fps in 14bit mode

http://www.bythom.com/​D3QA.htm