Reading mode: Light Dark

D70s to D300 - What do I lose?

Go to last post
The (too) strong AA filter in D200 was also one of about 3 reasons I didn't go for one and chose to shoot with D70 most of the time.

Let's hope D300 do have a weak AA filter. So far samples seem to show that it's at least weaker than D200's.
knickerhawk said:
If you have quick release plates to mount your D70 on your tripod
setup, you'll probably need to buy new ones. L plate in particular
is not likely to work.

My one worry about my likely upgrade from a D70 to a D300 is that the
D300 will have a stronger AA filter. The D70 suffers from occasional
moire but its weak AA filter makes for good micro-detail. One reason
I never upgraded to the D200 is that it has a strong AA filter. It
just looks like too much work to get D200 images to sharpen up like
I'm used to from the D70.
--
My photos: http://www.pbase.com/imageiseverything/root
Click to expand...
 
...my patience. Can hardly wait till the D300 arrives.

I think you will gain a lot and I will miss anything, then I can grap my D70.
 
I'd always assumed that the difference in sharpnesss between the D200 and D70 was purely down to a strong AA filter on the D200, but I've begun to have doubts about that lately. Someone posted before/after sample shots from a D200 that had its AA filter removed, and the increase in sharpness after removing the filter was very, very, minimal.
knickerhawk said:
If you have quick release plates to mount your D70 on your tripod
setup, you'll probably need to buy new ones. L plate in particular
is not likely to work.

My one worry about my likely upgrade from a D70 to a D300 is that the
D300 will have a stronger AA filter. The D70 suffers from occasional
moire but its weak AA filter makes for good micro-detail. One reason
I never upgraded to the D200 is that it has a strong AA filter. It
just looks like too much work to get D200 images to sharpen up like
I'm used to from the D70.
--
My photos: http://www.pbase.com/imageiseverything/root
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pixelfixer.org
 
From what I've heard from professional photographer Thom Hogan ( http://www.bythom.com ), he says that with ACR 4.2 (in both Photoshop CS3 and in Lightroom 1.2), the rendering of Nikon NEF files is better than before, but the majority opinion (ok, this is "questionable" ; )) of folks is that Nikon's on software (whether in the form of Capture or CaptureNX) provides the best rendering of the file. As for not caring for the NX interface, give it some time to mature. The rendering engine is the same "underneath the covers" as was/is in Nikon Capture 4.x. All NIK software has done is to wrap the engine with a new user interface. There are plenty of folk giving UI input to the (new) developers (NIK) and I have confidence that we'll see a better interface (not different, just improved). So, using ACR 4.x either in Photoshop CS3 or in Lightroom yields the best-so-far output from a non-Nikon raw converter -- according to expert opinion (Thom).

Both Nikon and Adobe have an interest in getting their customers (you, I) to "upgrade" to the latest and greatest so they, naturally, only put new features into their newest products and these features include handling of newer raw files. For example, the Nikon D2X NEF is handled by Capture 4.x but the D2Xs is not (directly -- you can hack/force it to work) -- they are both handled by CaptureNX, though. Nikon wants to stop maintenance on what they consider is an outdated product (Capture) and so when a new camera body comes out, they only put support for it in their current product (CaptureNX). The same logic applies to Adobe and Photoshop/ACR. Whether any individual "likes" this is another topic... :-)
--
Dave
 
Thanks Dave,

Well, I had been holding off updating to CS3 but I will probably suggest to my boss I need to update (I use CS2 at work and at home) when I eventually get a D300.
Rick
--
Nikon Dee-Seventy 's' ,Nikon SB-Eight Hundred Flash
 
davhol said:
D200 is that it has a strong AA filter. It just looks like too much work to get D200
images to sharpen up like I'm used to from the D70.
Click to expand...
I got D50, once was stated it has not so strong AA filter as D200,
not so weak moiry as D70, well said in words.

I have now very bad per-pixel sharpness.
I use multiple trick to get something satisfied by sharp in RAW converters.

It really worth many times to consider,
once I and people around are very not satisfied loose many pictures,
not able to rich desired degree of quality.

Than, I was assured by D200 owners there in their "best sharp"
after simple "sharpen" CS3 filter,
samples was provided:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1039&message=24755814&q=vgrigor&qf=m

so I'm in doubt: does it was "possible visible good sharp after one filter D200" all correct ?
 
John Tangney said:
Any idea if this will work on D3/D300?
Click to expand...
Nikon has kept the same 10-pin remote shutter release since the film days. They would be ridiculed mercilessly if they even considered a change.

So... yes, the Phottix 10-pin wireless remote for Nikon bodies will work on the D200/D300/D2/D3 bodies.

If you buy it on ebay, cost including shipping to US is US $28. I have one, and I've seen 100m range on the remote in straight line-of-sight conditions. Very good value for money !

It works for continuous shutter release, mirror up, and bulb modes, in case you were wondering.
  • Bob Elkind
 
Thomas Comerford said:
I'd always assumed that the difference in sharpnesss between the D200
and D70 was purely down to a strong AA filter on the D200, but I've
begun to have doubts about that lately. Someone posted before/after
sample shots from a D200 that had its AA filter removed, and the
increase in sharpness after removing the filter was very, very,
minimal.
Click to expand...
Hi Thomas,

I think I saw those same before/afters. It was in a thread started by one of the Borgs, right? Anyway, my reaction was the opposite of yours. I was floored by how much more detail was visible on the filterless versions, enough so that I'm keeping an eye on D200 prices. If the D300 doesn't live up to expectations, I might buy a reduced-price D200 and have the filter removed. I could be a pretty happy camper with that setup.

--
My photos: http://www.pbase.com/imageiseverything/root
 
knickerhawk said:
Hi Thomas,

I think I saw those same before/afters. It was in a thread started
by one of the Borgs, right? Anyway, my reaction was the opposite of
yours. I was floored by how much more detail was visible on the
filterless versions, enough so that I'm keeping an eye on D200
prices. If the D300 doesn't live up to expectations, I might buy a
reduced-price D200 and have the filter removed. I could be a pretty
happy camper with that setup.
Click to expand...
I forget who started the thread, to be honest. I think there were similar before/after shots from a 5D also. I'd love to know for sure just how strong the AA filter is.
knickerhawk said:
--
My photos: http://www.pbase.com/imageiseverything/root
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pixelfixer.org
 
Mach Schnell said:
First, the D300 (and D200) have no internal wireless receiver. It is
a shame. The wireless release on the D70 (and others) is just so
darned convenient. I really wish Nikon would include it on the more
expensive bodies. Wired remotes are a big step backward in my
opinion.
Click to expand...
Whilst I agree in general (wireless is very convenient to use in lots of cases), wired remote that uses full capabilities of 10pin socket has a much wider use than just triggering the shutter(timer etc.). Besides, I found that older nikon wired remotes (MC-20) work just as well on my D200 as newer and expensive one (MC-36) and you can pick up used one on ebay for a lot less than buy a new one. Besides, when you use your remote control standing behind your camera (to prevent camera shake), remote IR controls are really awkward to use because you need to point them to camera front (as it was the case with my previous D70).
 
Thomas Comerford said:
knickerhawk wrote:

I forget who started the thread, to be honest. I think there were
similar before/after shots from a 5D also. I'd love to know for sure
just how strong the AA filter is.
Click to expand...
Here's the link I was referring to. There are also 5D sample shots on that site, so it's probably the same one you're thinking of. To me, there's a noticeable difference between the stock and "hot rod" cameras that I believe would often be visible with the kind of cropped macro work I do. On the other hand, you pay the price with more moire.

http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d200hr.htm

Regards

--
My photos: http://www.pbase.com/imageiseverything/root
 
Also like people said £1300 to start with, maybe you need a PC upgrade and buy extra capacity of Hard Disk, memory and also you probably need larger capacity CF cards and a few of them as well.

Also you may need to add some more quality lenses as with more MP it tends to show off the weaknesses of the lens more and also any photography defencies you may have.

I may get a D300 at later date once I invest in some more decent glass, plus any bugs are fixed and initial launch price of D300 come down in price....
--



My Pictures & Web Site: http://www.dltp.co.uk
 
Thomas,

Yeah, I think I am going to try and be patient and wait until enough people have used the D300 to be sure there are no "surprises" with the first batch. Though, I assume if I haven't pre-ordered by now that will be the case anyway. I suspect the first batch will be immediately consumed and there will be a wait until the next big batch starts to catch up with demand (probably Q1 2008).

I seem to do most of my shooting now with fast primes (50 and 105) so I should be OK lens wise. One of the things that interested me in the D300 is the ability to use older MF Nikkor lenses with some metering. The better viewfinder and LCD should make manual focus more doable than my D70s. There is some really nice old glass available if you don't mind focusing.
Rick
--
Nikon Dee-Seventy 's' ,Nikon SB-Eight Hundred Flash
 
...that's an impressive improvement in sharpness.

This is the only comparison shot I can remember from the previous thread, and for some reason the difference in this case doesn't seem so big.



The examples in the link you posted are much more compelling, though.
knickerhawk said:
Thomas Comerford said:
knickerhawk wrote:

I forget who started the thread, to be honest. I think there were
similar before/after shots from a 5D also. I'd love to know for sure
just how strong the AA filter is.
Click to expand...
Here's the link I was referring to. There are also 5D sample shots
on that site, so it's probably the same one you're thinking of. To
me, there's a noticeable difference between the stock and "hot rod"
cameras that I believe would often be visible with the kind of
cropped macro work I do. On the other hand, you pay the price with
more moire.

http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d200hr.htm

Regards

--
My photos: http://www.pbase.com/imageiseverything/root
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pixelfixer.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top