| Moderated by: chrisbet, |
|
|
| D300 Compared with D200Thread split from "A Quick Question" | Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted by Robert: Wed Nov 11th, 2015 17:37 | 1st Post |
| This thread is a split from several off topic posts in Iain's "Quick Question". Eric Wrote: In fairness I think you missed a significant step not going to the D300. Not quite the magnitude of the D2X to D3 step change, but the D300 was in the same wave of urgent upgrades designed to win back users who were drifting towards Canon for better high ISO noise performance. And as such did make a significant step improvement worth buying into. Eric, I had been led to believe, by several 'knowledgable' people that the D300 was pretty much a cosmetic up-grade from the D200. I know one or two here have maintained that the D300 up-grade was more than cosmetic, but: There were also two other factors, I wasn't prepared to invest a further £800 in another new body when the D200 was producing the quality of images that I needed and my long term goal has always been a full frame 35mm (FX) camera, indeed I still miss my 6x6 Bronica S2a single lens reflex. But MF digital is out of the question on cost grounds and also their sensors are only slightly bigger than FX anyway, so there isn't much to be gained. In the next few month I am hoping to acquire a D3, a good one has come available from an unexpected quarter and I hope to clinch it next year. So, as I do, I have been reading up as much as I can about the D3, while I am aware of the basics, I want to swat up on the detail. One of my sources of info is DPPreview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3 One of the things in the review I have noticed is that they are constantly referring to the D300 and many of the components seem to be common, for example the rear viewing screen. They also make direct comparisons between the D3 and the D300 both regarding image quality and ISO performance. They regard the D300 as a worthy stable mate for it's big brother. The comparison images at the end of the review compare very favourably with the D3 until about ISO 1600, when the D300 starts to break down. The smaller sensor packing almost the same number of pixels then shows it's limitations. I am very tempted to try a D300 and see how it feels and performs, they can be had for very little money now. It may be worth a punt, even though I still intend to get the D3.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Eric: Thu Nov 12th, 2015 10:25 | 2nd Post |
Robert wrote:This thread is a split from several off topic posts in Iain's "Quick Question". Well I think those knowledgable people were talking through the wrong orifice. Lol So... a new CMOS sensor and Expeed processor, more active pixels giving higher resolution, wider ISO range with greater noise reduction, 51point focusing system, bigger LCD with more pixels, faster fps, burst rates and buffer,...that's a cosmetic upgrade? I really enjoyed the D300. It was better than the D2X never mind the D200. (Although in fairness I only had a D200 for IR so didn't see its full colour performance. The only thing that eclipsed it was the D3 at that time. And had I not gone to FX I suspect I may still have it. Don't get me wrong...I still think the D3 is the best choice for you. I wouldn't waste any of that money trying a D300. The step change in all areas is the D3. I just think the D300 is a forgotten hero.
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Robert: Thu Nov 12th, 2015 14:29 | 3rd Post |
| Mmm, one of them was a salesman at Calumet, Manchester, when I bought my second D200, I was dithering whether to stick with a second D200 or step up to the D300. I suppose you should never listen to sales people... Probably wanting to off load old stock. I thought he would have been wanting to sell a full price current camera rather than old stock at a very knocked down price. I wasn't contemplating parting with cash for one!  I may be able to do a deal.I was just thinking if the D300 IS so much better then I should have one instead of my beloved D200. I don't see the D3 as being my only body, I do see a place for a good robust DX body for times when I want more reach and less weight. We have a very good rugby team where I live and they provide some very spectacular photo opportunities at times. I don't do sport but I do enjoy photographing it. A D3 and a D300 would make a good combo, 80 - 200 on the D3 and the 300 f2.8 on the D300 would be very useful. Another worthwhile factor would be a standardisation of features/menus and settings which seem to be pretty much similar between the D3 and D300 as applicable of course. A question, do the D200 and the D300 share the same battery? The other option I looked at when I got my second D200 was to get the Fuji version which offered arguably a better sensor. The deal breaker was the batteries weren't interchangeable. I accept the D3 batteries are different, because that is a completely different camera.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Thu Nov 12th, 2015 16:08 | 4th Post |
Robert wrote:
Yes they are if I remember correctly. The EN-EL3e works in the D300 and D200.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Thu Nov 12th, 2015 16:42 | 5th Post |
| Thanks Jk. I now have slightly muddy water, I have been offered the choice of D300 or D300S... The main difference seems to be video but there seem to be several smaller improvements like a proper button in the multi controller as on the D3 and dual card slots, a-la D700. I think the shutter count is <10,000 and I am sure a good deal can be struck. Any thoughts?
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Fri Nov 13th, 2015 05:12 | 6th Post |
| Take D300S if you use video. Otherwise the cameras are identical. There might be refinement on buttons but they work the same.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by jk: Fri Nov 13th, 2015 08:27 | 7th Post |
| Regarding the various cameras with 12MP and thereabouts. We seems to have set of cameras such as D3, D3S, D700, D300, D300S, D90 with all much the same number of MP but in themselves very different cameras regarding format FX v. DX, video or not, different AF and batteries. Each camera has niches or areas of distinct advantage, even the D90 can be seen as a cheap, light and functional camera with everything! FX D3, D3S, D700 DX D300, D300S, D90. With Video D3S, D300S, D90 Without video D3, D700, D300. With sensor self clean D3S, D700, D300S, D300 Built-in flash and CLS All except D3, D3S. I am sure there are other key items of functionality that I have missed.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by jk: Fri Nov 13th, 2015 09:24 | 8th Post |
| BTW: I have deliberately not included the D7000 onwards and the D200 itself. Robert, you may find this page interesting. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond300 Half way down it shows a D300 v. D200 features comparison table.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Eric: Fri Nov 13th, 2015 13:14 | 9th Post |
I would get the D3 and THEN decide if you need to change the D200 to a D300. The D3 is SO different that you will fall in love with FX... and DX may fade into the background to the point that the D200 may be adequate when you need DX. Cropping a D3 matches the D300... but of course loses file size.
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Robert: Sat Nov 14th, 2015 06:50 | 10th Post |
Words of wisdom as usual from our Yorkshire bred member! 
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Iain: Sat Nov 14th, 2015 09:10 | 11th Post |
| The only other thing not mentioned with the D300s was two card slots. It was a big upgrade on the D200.
|
| Posted by jk: Sat Nov 14th, 2015 10:25 | 12th Post |
Iain wrote: The only other thing not mentioned with the D300s was two card slots. Yes that is a real bonus as the SD cards are very cheap these days.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Eric: Sat Nov 14th, 2015 13:33 | 13th Post |
Iain wrote:The only other thing not mentioned with the D300s was two card slots. From memory they were 1 compact flash and 1sd card.....so the D3 card could still be used in the D300s in addition to an sd slot. Although some people don't like him, Ken Rockwell does do some good reviews. I just read his review of the D300 and his comments on the improvements over the D200 are even more extreme.... http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d300.htm
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Robert: Sun Nov 15th, 2015 04:21 | 14th Post |
| Thanks Eric, Ken Rockwell reviews don't feature in my bookmark list because I feel he is loud and narrowly opinionated! LOL However, curious to discover more snippets of information from different viewpoints about the two D300 bodies I also dug out his review of the D300S. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d300s.htm Interestingly in the D300S review he dismisses as irrelevant, some of the features of the D300 which he saw previously as reasons alone to go with the D300... However I came away with the impression that he rather liked the 'S' upgrade but didn't like the video feature. I think people have way too demanding expectations of the DSLR video feature. As several members here have said, if you want to do video properly, get a proper video camera. That's fine but for somebody who just wants to make short video clips very occasionally, often in specialised circumstances, especially with specialised lenses, or even underwater housings, it CAN be achieved with a DSLR, despite the limitations of the equipment. I understand even on epic movies some clips are made using DSLR's because compared with the normal video cameras they use, a good DSLR can be considered almost disposable. So they are capable of producing acceptable results providing you don't push the envelope too far. Ken remarks more than once that panning with the D300S produces a jerky image, that makes me wonder if he has turned off VR on the lens... A bit like forgetting to take off the lens cap on an 'M' Leica... LOL On a more basic front, one of the points Ken made was the battery life of the D300 is much better than the D200 and the image processing which removes image artefacts like CA is vastly superior. I suspect this may be related to the D200 Low Pass/Anti Alising Filter which is generally acknowledged to be too strong with it's AA filter. I have noticed with my D200 IR body that the definition is outstanding in comparison with the normal body which will be due to the removal of the LPF/AA filter during the conversion. I'm not convinced of the benefits of having an SD card slot and a CF card slot, one or the other seems more sensible. I don't care for the SD cards, my D3100 frequently has connection errors with it's SD card, in all the time I have used CF cards I haven't had one card read error. I know it's easy to rub the connector surfaces with a tissue and that fixes it for a while but I also don't like the apparent fragility of the SD card in comparison with the CF, nor do I like the insert latching idea, they do fail, then it becomes impossible to keep the card seated in it's slot. I would much prefer push in, pull out, as it is in my Mac Book Pro and Mac mini.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Eric: Sun Nov 15th, 2015 07:18 | 15th Post |
Robert wrote:Thanks Eric, Ken Rockwell reviews don't feature in my bookmark list because I feel he is loud and narrowly opinionated! LOL Made the same mistake on the wife's bridge camera...left VR on and got jerky pans. Switched it to vertical VR orientation only and lot better....just ME being jerky. I've come to love? SD cards. I don't think they are as vulnerable to static and contact damage as they once were. And if you have modern large capacity ones they don't need to come in and out as much. In contrast I had a sticky moment pushing a compact card onto the pins in a cardreader a month or so back which made me realise the SD is probably better. Hark at me changing ships. Lol Yes in hindsight selling that D200IR was prob a mistake. The Fuji conversion is ok but for some reason I don't seem to enjoy using it as much as the D200. And as we know, if the camera isn't a joy to use...it shows in the results..  Of course you could buy my 17-35 lens I used exclusively and successfully with the D200IR .....and make my misery complete. 
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Iain: Sun Nov 15th, 2015 09:33 | 16th Post |
| I'm like you Eric with reguard to SD cards I'm using 64 and 32gb SD cards and have had no problems. I would say that getting the fastest cards you can afford is worth it.
|
| Posted by amazing50: Thu Nov 19th, 2015 03:41 | 17th Post |
Iain wrote:I'm like you Eric with reguard to SD cards I'm using 64 and 32gb SD cards and have had no problems.Agree,and now the prices, even on the best cards, are reasonable. Remember paying about $1000 for an IBM Microdrive 1GB CF for the D1.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by jk: Thu Nov 19th, 2015 15:27 | 18th Post |
| amazing50 wrote: Remember paying about $1000 for an IBM Microdrive 1GB CF for the D1. OMG I thought that I was the only fool who did that. Seriously I did the same and at the time it was a great solution but a serious wallet hit.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Iain: Fri Nov 20th, 2015 12:28 | 19th Post |
| I couldn't afford that so had to make do with 256mb ones.
|
| Posted by Ed Hutchinson: Wed Dec 2nd, 2015 23:21 | 20th Post |
| Hi There Yes I know it has been a while since I darkened these pages, but I am back! I must say I loved my D200 and lusted after a D300s, the 200 never failed me like all my Nikons always reliable Now I have the D7100 and it is lust multiplied many times over, smaller, lighter and for me easier to use. At one point I was having trouble finding CF cards and I discovered an adapter that was the same size as a CF and held an SD It worked like a CF This allowed me to carry SD card spares, what a concept one type card for all my cameras. Best wishes to all, and my you all live long and prosper Ed Don't take life too seriously, You won't get out alive anyway! 
____________________ R.O.C.E.D. retired old cranky extremely dangerous! |
| Posted by Robert: Thu Dec 3rd, 2015 01:17 | 21st Post |
| Hi Ed, good to hear from you! You have prompted me to think Eye-Fi... They use SD type cards, I have never really considered Eye-Fi because I don't trust the principle and I tend to use multiple 4Gb CF cards. I do have a massive 16Gb SD card in my D3100 but never fill it, ever. I usually offload after each days session of a few snaps. a 1Gb or 2Gb card would do equally well! But, with a D300S I could have a 4 Gb card in the CF slot and an Eye Fi card in the SD slot. Save the same data to both and then I have belt and braces (suspenders?) I can export selected images to my Mac Book Pro or iPad by wi-fi if I wish and when I get home I have the option to have the images transfer to my desktop Mac as I take them, I think... I have just been browsing the Eye-Fi website and I am rather confused, they seem to be pushing Cloud storage now. Not sure if the original function of wi-fi transfer still works without sending it to "all my devices". I really don't want "all my devices" swamped with hundreds of near identical NEF files which I then have to delete, as happens when I take photographs with my iPhone. Happy to share but on MY terms please!
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Ed Hutchinson: Thu Dec 3rd, 2015 09:52 | 22nd Post |
| Hi Robert It is always good to hear from you. Since I lost all my old photos, I now keep the ones I do now on both my iPad and the iMac, they do not go to my iPhone or the wife's iPad mini. I don't remember what I did but I think you can shut off the sharing in settings As a winter time project I plan to rescan all the old stuff I have on slides again It is a long process but what the heck I am retired I don't have anything to do anyway (RIGHT) I have not been out with the camera much this year, seems like there is always something that is more important to someone. I really missed being here it will be fun to catch up, and see how everyone is doing. I need to go get my breakfast it is 645 am and my stomach thinks my throat has been severed or removed completely LOL How is your auto project coming along? Speaking of auto I am in total lust for the F type Jag what an awesome car It so good to see a Jag that does not look like a re badged Aston Martin. Take care and be well Robert Ed
____________________ R.O.C.E.D. retired old cranky extremely dangerous! |
| Posted by Robert: Thu Dec 3rd, 2015 18:54 | 23rd Post |
| Thanks for the kind words Ed. At least you still have the original slides to fall back on. I scanned my old photo's and some of my slides with my D1, things have moved on since then. I need to do them again with my newer higher resolution cameras. I have an old enlarger which I have adapted to a copy stand with powerful LED lamps which give a balanced light but stay cool, which the old power hungry Halogen lamps didn't, in fact at times I had to stop and let things cool down a bit. I haven't been doing as much pure photography either, although I have been keeping a good photo record of my car build and since it was finished and on the road in June I have been taking it on local runs and exploring the lanes around here. Great fun because we have some quite steep hills nearby and I can let her rip up them. The car has a 3.5 Litre (about 213 cubic inch) it's the ex Buick aluminium engine and it's pretty powerful for this country with bags of pulling power.  I have made all the bare aluminium panels myself, and the stainless steel radiator grill too, made that from stainless steel welding rods, took two days just to polish the rods! I had been quoted over £200 just for the mesh to make it from. The welding rods cost me £20, a good saving. I plan to replace the grotty fibreglass front wings with rolled aluminium ones when I get time. Something like this, which is an original 1930 Alfa Romeo. 
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Ed Hutchinson: Fri Dec 4th, 2015 07:46 | 24th Post |
| WOW It really looks good and even better with the alfa fenders, it looks light so she must be quick and many smiles per mile. I know about that Buick V8 they were popular for installation in any small car. I had a friend with one in a Datsun 2000 wicked good fun car even saw one in the back of a VW beetle, and one mid engine in a 54 VW transporter van Oh for the crazy days of youth! NOT My car building days ended when I discovered motorcycles  Now I am into modifying air guns (read to make more powerful and accurate) good fun and cheap to shoot, the tuna and cat food can population is getting much smaller LOL I just ran out of coffee so need to refill bye for now Ed
____________________ R.O.C.E.D. retired old cranky extremely dangerous! |
| Posted by amazing50: Sun Dec 6th, 2015 23:00 | 25th Post |
| Dug out an old 512k microdrive and it still works. Must be about 15 years old.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by Iain: Mon Dec 7th, 2015 09:16 | 26th Post |
| I've still got one of those somewhere. you won't get many pic on one of them now.
|
| Posted by Robert: Wed Dec 9th, 2015 16:56 | 27th Post |
| Never had a micro drive card, struck me as way too fragile for my sledgehammer techniques! I am now in possession of a very clean D300s, albeit a high milage example. Swapped for some of my old (obsolete) gear. As mentioned in my other thread on Geminid meteors: http://nikondslr.uk/view_post.php?post_id=12769 I used the D300s for the first time last night. It was a pretty testing outing, I took 585 exposures of the night sky. I tried 3,200 ISO but felt the images provided by 1,600 ISO were cleaner so given that still left me with an exposure of 4 seconds @ f3.2 I was happy to use it. My greatest delight was the huge difference in battery life, my D200, taking similar images was only managing 40 images per battery last night, whereas the D300s took nearly 600 images and the battery indicator is showing more than half the capacity remaining of the only battery I used in the D300s. I am sure it would have gone on to take at least 1,000 images on that one battery. I did have my Nikon ML-3 remote receiver plugged into the ten pin socket, but it was turned off, so it shouldn't have affected the battery life, or did it? I took a lot of time lapse JPEGS recently in daylight with the D200 and I did notice the batteries were draining quite quickly, even in daylight. I haven't really compared the D200 images with the D300s images yet but from a taking point of view they bear no comparison. The D300s just got on with it. The D200 took a lot more management to make sure the exposure was acceptable and the frequent replacement of batteries I was intrigued to see how it handled the switch from the CF card to the SD card. As the exposure counter counted down on the CF card to 0, I watched the counter, as the last image was saved to the CF card, the counter then indicated how many NEF images could be saved to the SD card and it proceeded to save the next image to the SD card, which I had set as overflow. Neat!
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Eric: Thu Dec 10th, 2015 05:14 | 28th Post |
Robert wrote:Never had a micro drive card, struck me as way too fragile for my sledgehammer techniques! I was in no doubt you would 'feel the wow' in the step change between the 2 series and 3 series bodies. Enjoy!
____________________ Eric |
| This is topic ID = 1260 | ||
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > D300 Compared with D200 | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0702 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 178 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0702 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 178 queries executed.