DSLRUsers.com

I'm talking about this here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dtang/sets/72157605407109460/

This was the annual high school musical which for me involved 4 days worth of shooting (1 dress rehearsal and 3 performance nights). This was my first chance working in such an environment with the D300.

Most nights the D300 was spent locked into AF-C 51 point 3D tracking.

Now for my thoughts.

I'm 19 and a university student who worked with my dad's D80 before I saved up enough to pay for a D300. I've stated before that the D300 is an excellent camera. As I'm not a professional, I have no need (yes, want is another matter) to buy a D3 (and yes i have used one).

Unless there is payment inolved or professional work: The better camera is the D80 for non pros. (pros of course use anything they can or find at hand, but i'm trying to make a point here)

Why?

More work needed - but same results gained: As a former head of sound and lighting i had some input on how the stage lighting should be set. The lighting was bright enough such that the subjects were illuminated well enough that even at 5.6 the D300 had no problem shooting at 1/80. This is something the D80 can also do. White balance was controlled with gels on the par cans.

It's not as big or imposing as a D300. I had massive snobbery from parents with EOS1DMkIII(!!!!) and 70-200 f/2.8 IS L lens who jacked up their ISO to 3200 just so they could shoot at 1/320. The younger children were unnerved by such a big camera. In contrast, the smaller D80 was less of a scare to the younger children.

With the same lens, the D80 is easier to hold all night, and with VR, the mass damping of the extra D300 weight is negated.

I could write more but simply - even though i get better results with the D300, I simply do not enjoy using it. I cannot pick it up and shoot for fun and I find it is very much a "serious work" camera. When you're not a pro, how much photography is serious work? When you hold a pro camera, people place expectations on you and those expectations can detract from the enjoyment of shooting.

I guess i've learned that technique always takes precedence over equipment. So in that, I suppose the D300 does help you become a better photographer. And come on, when your picture is lauded as better than that taken by some guy with an 1DS, how good does that make you feel?

I think the D300 and D80 are a similar size...

In any case, the 1DS isn't known for great high ISO noise, it's more of a studio camera than a low light camera. I'd go far as to say its low light noise would be similar to the D300 on the same glass.

There's one thing that I was taught when I was learning to shoot weddings and that was to make sure you have the biggest camera there (even if it's not the most expensive). You get the most respect and guests get out of your way making life a lot easier.

Will all due respect, the D300 as good as it is - it's not a "pro" camera in it's own right.

D2X, D3 and the Canon equivalents are "pro" cameras.

However, put a grip on the D300, add some nice glass, good skills, and an olive and you have all but for half the price.

Re the "feel" of D80 being better than the D300 - I think that will be highly subjective and personal to you and what other cameras you have come from.

The point is as you say, the results you got with the D300 are better and required less PP. That's what a pro tog wants, and what you should want too.

I think this could easily be summarised as: Different cameras have different features and you should choose the camera which has the features you need (or desire). I don't believe it is a pro v amateur discussion.

I am not a pro but for me the D300 has the features I need for the sort of photography I do. A side by side comparison of the two cameras (e.g. Nikon Australia) shows me that the D300 is better for me. Of course, different people have different needs and as such a different body may suit.

It's the reason I reach for the D40x + 18-200VR combo most often even though I have a D200 and 2.8 glass as well. It depends on what you need to do with the camera and I have a lot of fun taking pics with the D40x it's so light next to a full D200 setup...I can only imagine how much worse it is with the D3.

Leave the D300 for the 'serious work' and consider a D60 or something if you want to travel light or look less conspicuous...I guess that's what P&S cams are for

mickey wrote:It's the reason I reach for the D40x + 18-200VR combo most often even though I have a D200 and 2.8 glass as well. It depends on what you need to do with the camera and I have a lot of fun taking pics with the D40x it's so light next to a full D200 setup...I can only imagine how much worse it is with the D3.

Leave the D300 for the 'serious work' and consider a D60 or something if you want to travel light or look less conspicuous...I guess that's what P&S cams are for

I want to rebuy a D40x or a D60 for those same reasons, stealth, portability. I love the D300 and the 2.8 glass I have for it though. I have to say that the D300 is one of the best feeling DSLR's I have used/picked up (and that is a lot of SLR's), but something about the D40/40x/60 series body has a very nice feel about it as well, in a very different way. The D80 is a nice size, but is caught in the middle IMHO.

I doubt that any particular camera is the ideal camera for every situation. For example
I made the decision last year that taking the D200 and lenses on an overseas trip was
going to have some disadvantages. So I bought a Canon S3 P&S with image stabilisation,
10x zoom range, and high quality video capability. Could not have been better. Mind you,
I was a bit envious of the guys with DSLRs, but not for any good reason.

My point is, have as many different cameras as you can afford and want/need and
use the appropriate camera for each situation.

Or in my case, using the *only* camera you have in *every* situation I like having no choice, it makes my decision easier..

Pehpsi wrote:Or in my case, using the *only* camera you have in *every* situation I like having no choice, it makes my decision easier..

That works!! Now if only I had ONLY ONE lens!! then no choice there as well. Hmm that makes me think point and shoot.

Hmmm, one lens... Now that's impossible We're all lens whores!

Pehpsi wrote:Hmmm, one lens... Now that's impossible We're all lens whores!

True, true, I am thinking of getting yet another lens, but am saving until I can buy it outright!! Always looking to get the next bit of gear!

One lens, as if I could do that!! Not since I have discovered the joys of good glass.

Yes, I'd quite like a 10-600 F1.4 AF-S Macro which is the size of 18-200 ?

Why can't they just do that huh ? huh ?

kiwifamily wrote:Yes, I'd quite like a 10-600 F1.4 AF-S Macro which is the size of 18-200 ?

Why can't they just do that huh ? huh ?

 ROFL!!! Why not make it a AF-S 10-600mm f/1.2 VR Micro Nikkor (with a free fisheye attachment). I'm willing to make it AF-S 70-200mm VR sized though.

that would resemble a bazooka..

-j