Nikon D300 versus Canon 20D/30D/40D--> I am disappointed :(

Hello,

I have been using Canon stuff for the past few years namely a 20D and I mostly do bird shots. I was somewhat dissapointed with my 20D's lack of adavanced features such as pro AF, good controls etc. and I don't want to pay 4 grand for a mark III. When D300 was introduced I was so excited about this camera and thought it'd be the perfect camera for me, possibly with a 200-400VR. Now I got my D300 and I did some test shots with a Nikon 17-35 f/2.8, in the field camera is perfect, great ergonomics, big and bright VF, nice controls and very nice screen, it is the same if not better compared ti my laptop screen. It feels like a professional film camera, however when I took some pictures and converted them uising Nikon Capture I found that photos contained substantial noise even at ISO 200. The shadow areas have coarse grain, This is not good for me since I always use ISO 400 or 800 for bird shots and recover lots of fine detail from under the wings...

Here is an example.

100% crop , look at the shadow area.

Then I did a test with my 20D with the 17-40 f/4L, both cameras on tripod, exposure set to manual, WB= set to 2500K for both , NR=OFF for Nikon (20D doesn't have in camera NR and I don't like NR'ed watercolor images any ways), I used Nikon Capture for Nikon RAWs and DPP for Canon files. I am surprised at the results, D300 doesn't deliver any extra detail that I can see, and the noise is higher at ISO 400 and above. Frankly I was expecting to see some better detail for the added 4 mega pixels or at least same noise as my 4-year old 20D which is only worth $400 now. I took some 200 test shots today, none of them has the per-pixle-sharpness and crispness of my Canon camera. I think the AA filter on the D300 is still strong like the D100(which was my first digital SLR) and D200, I aslo tried ACR for Nikon, however the colors are off and pictures aren't as good as Nikon Capture.

here are the test pics
Canon

Nikon

100% crop ISO 400
Canon

Nikon

100% crop ISO 800
Canon

Nikon

100% crop ISO 1600
Canon

Nikon

I tried NR in Capture with high quality setting however it smoothened out the detail, not really helpful:(

ISO 800 crop no NR

NR=7, sharpening=5 high quality

Well, after this I tried to convince myslef D300 is a better camera due to features like 3D tracking, so I tried on different subjects with little success, most of the time the focus point will either stay stuck at its original point or track the subject for a few shots and then give up and move in a random direction.

here is an example, this is yellow truck has a distinctive color compared to its surroundings, it is large and it was moving relatively slow at 5-10 mph at most, yet the focus point is stuck at origianl location:

So I think the 3D tracking focus is mostly a marketing gimmick and at best it is not reliable enough to be used for serious work. Then I tried the live view, tripod mode, the contrast detect AF is a joke, so I switched to handheld mode. looks like I have to press the shutter to activate the mode, half press to focus, and then press again to take the shot and then yet press gain to return to live view, this is no less than 4 mirror flips very noisy and annoying.

Turning off all the 3D tracking stuff and using center AF, my old 20D with a f/4 lens hunts less than the D300 with an f/2.8 lens in low light and low contrast.

So what did I get for all this $1800 except for a body that is build better and feels nicer? I really like how this camera feels and handles, shutter is very nice and soft, large bright VF, excellent screen, and don't want to let it go but when it comes to IQ and perforamance sound of reason tells me I should stick with Canon. Can you tell me about other things D300 has that I have been missing? I really liked this camera...

Best,
Arash