D300 versus 20D continued analysis

Started Dec 5, 2007 | Discussions thread
narayana Contributing Member • Posts: 655
Re: D300 versus 20D continued analysis

Nice shots and good comparison of two unlike machines, BUT (you got it) there is definitely a trade-off with the D300 I found unacceptable since at 400ISO necessary and very gently and carefully applied NX just could not retain the details I was shooting for, no. I had other problems in that new zooms and old zooms found that focus on the same STATIONARY objects (the side of a house) varied enormously shot-to-shot in consecutive frames, and my copy, which has had to be returned also really messed up metering-wise. Again normal well-lit daylight subjects (same row of houses, crosslit (better and easier for AF than your birds) were not just repeatedly thrown out of focus, when the camera said they were in focus, on focus priority single AF, but I got my first completely blown RAW Nikon highlights as well. Irrecoverable detail lost at the shadow end as well.

I still hated parting with the thing, until my agonies were resolved for me by striation of smooth plain surfaces walls and tomatoes in Raw and jpeg. I just couldnt believe it, so sorry!

And I wasnt trying at all to trip up the machine in any way.

I do not seriously believe that Nikon are even aware of this last problem yet, since tests are not done on real-life subjects, but the feeling of being let down may not be Nikons fault. The camera came by courier in its box, in just a plastic bag, so its not for me to say whether my sample represents what Nikon designed, or what the seller 1200 pounds richer sent for that money.
--
narayana

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
gml
jp
jp
jp
jp
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow