D2Xs vs D300

[MattyO]

Okay here is a question for everyone. I am going to be buying a new body soon. I think the d3 is out of my price range at this point in time.

The D300 and D2Xs are pretty similar, with the d300 having better high iso noise, but the D2Xs having a much better body construciton.

Now, my question is Is the CAM3500dx AF on the D300 superior to that of the CAM2000 on hte D2Xs. This is a really big point for me.

Is there any other reasons why I would want to buy one over the other?

[gstark]

Matty,

Save your $$$ and get the D300. Many people are seeing it as a replacement for the D2X, and rightly so. Body construction is solid, AF performance is brilliant, high ISO leaves the D2X eating its (sensor) dust.

Add on the grip, if you must, but note that they're currently made from unobtanium, so you'll need to wait.


Then you can put those saved $$$ towards some new glass. Which roughly translates to "What saved $$$?"

[Glen]

Matty, I am not sure of the difference in focussing, but after seeing the D300 last night and making the exact decision you are choosing between a s/h D2X or new D300, I chose the D300. My needs would be different to yours, but I do believe the D300 & D3 herald a new generation of sensors and cameras for Nikon.

[Matt. K]

Matty
If you don't do a lot of low light photography then the D2X is more than enough camera.

[Oneputt]

I tend to agree with Matt K. The D2X is one hell of a camera with the only drawback being very low light situations.

[gstark]

But would you buy a D2x rather than a D300, given the differences in the prices of the two cameras?

What I'm seeing you saying here is spend almost three times the $$$, and buy a lesser performing camera. The only advantage that I see in the D2x is that it has heavier duty construction. I do not view the larger, heavier to lug around body as an advantage, and whether the heavier construction warrants the extra cost is probably the only question.

And note too that you can buy 2 D300s for less than the cost of a D2x.

[Matt. K]

Gary
My comments refer to a second hand D2X at a reasonable price. If buying new then the D300 would have to be the choice.

[Raskill]

Good question Matty.

I was going to post the same thing.

I don't think we should underestimate the "check our his body" comments from the ladies.....

[marc]

Add on the grip, if you must, but note that they're currently made from unobtanium, so you'll need to wait.

Hi Gary

Have you heard whether Poon has shipped the first orders yet?
(Have sent you an email also)

Marc

[Glen]

Matty, will be interested to see what you choose here, you have been given two sides of the discussion here. I think if you do choose the D2X I would wait till March or so, as the price should be lower with more D300 around. My thoughts were based on D2X being about 50% more than a D300 at the moment (the closest comparison was a D2X on this forum with 127,000 shots for $400 more than a new D300). As a strictly financial way of looking at things, I believe it doesn't offer 50% more shooting capabilites, though I would guess it easily provides more than 50% extra durability. When the 2 units are at similar prices the decision will be harder.

[gstark]

Add on the grip, if you must, but note that they're currently made from unobtanium, so you'll need to wait.

Hi Gary

Have you heard whether Poon has shipped the first orders yet?

I can only speak in terms of your order for the grip, and I've sent Poon two requests for status. When (if) I get a response, you will be the first to know.

[marc]

Thanks Gary

[gooseberry]

Hands down, I'd be going with the D300. I personally wouldn't be paying more than the price of a new D300 for a second hand D2Xs (sorry D2X/s users, but that's how I see it). Even if a brand new D2Xs was the same price as a brand new D300 - it'd be a tough decision.

Sure, the D2X/s has a heavier duty body construction, but how much more heavy duty do you really need over the construciton of the D300 ? (Heck, I know people who've taken D200's on safari in the hot, bumpy, dusty tracks in Africa and they continue to perform well). Not sure I'd want to pay more for a lesser performing camera which will maybe come out a little worse for wear if I decide to slam it against a concrete wall.

Seriously, the D300 is bascially a better, faster camera in a smaller body that costs less than half the price.

[marc]

Put in HSC mode and I'd buy another one

[PiroStitch]

For candids, a smaller camera wins hands down! Noticed that difference when I had the D2Xs. While it looks like you know what you're doing 'cos it's a bigger camera, it's harder to take be more inconspicuous.

The D300 is more versatile than the D2X or D2Xs in that way. Even now with the 5D, if it was more ergonomically friendly, I'd take off the grip and shoot with a smaller camera.

[Raskill]

Of interest the D300 is not a Pro camera.

CAMS for instance asks what gear you have, as do some other organisations and if you don't have pro bodies, it's harder to get accredited.

Rediculous I know, but just another consideration.

[gstark]

I would challenge them.

Seriously

What, exactly, is a "pro" camera?

Would CAMS, in their ultimate wisdom, say that a Leica M4 is not a pro camera?

What about a LF camera?

I would tell them the same thing I tell people who ask me what my income is: none of their damn business. I have what I need to do the job, and that is all that matters.

[Raskill]

Problem is, it is their business, and they hold all the aces.

[Glen]

Matty, this discussion by Thom has a paragraph on what he believes are the advantage of the D300 over a D2X or D200. It is the second last paragraph labelled "how much better than before". In it he lists the advantages as: better autofocus system, higher ISO capabilities, 14-bit data, Live View, and a shooting speed boost.

Seems to confirm the better AF is in the newer model.

[sirhc55]

The problem is that no one has any idea as to what the word ”pro” means.

Place a box brownie in the hands of a ’photographer’ and that camera becomes pro through human intervention

[bwhinnen]

Matty, this discussion by Thom has a paragraph on what he believes are the advantage of the D300 over a D2X or D200. It is the second last paragraph labelled "how much better than before". In it he lists the advantages as: better autofocus system, higher ISO capabilities, 14-bit data, Live View, and a shooting speed boost.

Seems to confirm the better AF is in the newer model.

That is actually a fairly good thought provoking article from Thom...

[Glen]

I agree Brett, a good way to look at the differences between the D3 and D300 and a realistic look at what the differences to the older models is.

[jamesw]

Problem is, it is their business, and they hold all the aces.

agreed.

[MattyO]

there is nothing i shoot that i need to be conspicous for...

neither are a bad camera, and like alan says, you really do need to look the part.

but in saying htat there is only a few instances in which i find the d200 inadequate. its still a few months before i will need a second body, so i have plenty of time to think. But if the AF on the d300 is better, then maybe that is the way to go!

maybe the answer is to buy a d3 and maybe a 400 2.8 to eliminate the crop factor difference

........... if only it was that easy!

[gooseberry]

its still a few months before i will need a second body, so i have plenty of time to think. But if the AF on the d300 is better, then maybe that is the way to go!

Yep, it'd be good to thionk through it a little more, perhaps with more reviews or more of your own personal testing at a shop....

Anyway, with regards to the AF, interesting is that PopPhoto (if you care for their opinion) has named the D300, camera of the year and this is what they had to say about the AF

"Its autofocus system? The fastest in very low light and most sophisticated we've ever seen. And even when you get beyond the numbers race of AF points -- this camera boasts a record-setting 51 -- it packs such paradigm-busting savvy as the ability to track subjects by color and even skin tone. Try it, you'll be as amazed as we were"

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4857/th ... -2007.html

[Glen]

Gooseberry, thanks for the link, a interesting read. These were the same guys who voted the D70 camera of the year in 2004.

[gstark]

Gooseberry, thanks for the link, a interesting read. These were the same guys who voted the D70 camera of the year in 2004.

I guess that makes them Nikon fanboys then.

[jamesw]

interesting is that PopPhoto (if you care for their opinion) has named the D300, camera of the year

uhhh... that was quick?

[broadbean]

Anyway, with regards to the AF, interesting is that PopPhoto (if you care for their opinion) has named the D300, camera of the year...

I always find it amazing something wins the product of the year when it's barely been out a month or so. Even more so when it's claimed to be the "Oscar of the Photo Industry". What, you mean voted by peers and possibly no one's even seen all of the contenders?

Still, if I do end up getting a D300, I will definitely bask in its CoTY glory!

[gooseberry]

Gooseberry, thanks for the link, a interesting read. These were the same guys who voted the D70 camera of the year in 2004.

No worries Glen, yeah, thought it was an interesting take on the different cams.

uhhh... that was quick?

Anyway, with regards to the AF, interesting is that PopPhoto (if you care for their opinion) has named the D300, camera of the year...

I always find it amazing something wins the product of the year when it's barely been out a month or so. Even more so when it's claimed to be the "Oscar of the Photo Industry". What, you mean voted by peers and possibly no one's even seen all of the contenders?

Still, if I do end up getting a D300, I will definitely bask in its CoTY glory!

Hahha... I guess it's like the real oscars where they release a movie just in time for the oscar nomination period.

[gstark]

Anyway, with regards to the AF, interesting is that PopPhoto (if you care for their opinion) has named the D300, camera of the year...

I always find it amazing something wins the product of the year when it's barely been out a month or so. Even more so when it's claimed to be the "Oscar of the Photo Industry". What, you mean voted by peers and possibly no one's even seen all of the contenders?

I think the answer to the question you're posing can be found if you consider the question "what camera was the runner-up?"

[wendellt]

d300 rules

i used leighs d300 last night at a really dark bar
with a candle as a single light source we got wicked stuff at ISO1600
low noise great rendition of course we were shooting 30mm f1.4 1/40

the d2x is way more noisier relative to the same exposure as above
im seling my d200 and getting a d300

love it

[MattyO]

noise isn't really an issue for me... i am happy with my d200 to 800 iso.