D2X vs D300s

[Brett R]

Hi All

A quick question....I have a D200 and have decided to upgrade.

My question is this: would I be better off buying a second hand D2X for around 1k less than a brand new D300s...not to interested in video so this query is just from an image point of view.

Cheers
BrettR.

 

[Kwanying]

I have no exp with D300s but here a site with sample of D300s vs D300.
Hope it helps.
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/newproduct/20090811_308340.html

Oh something i notice is all D300s jpeg have smaller file size than D300.

 

[photonut2008]

http://www.bythom.com/nikond300review.htm
--
Anthony Beach

 

[Wilfred W]

Why upgrade?

just from an image point of view..

If you want better high ISO, D300 would be better.

if you shoot mainly low ISO, you won't gain much going for either one. In fact , I probably prefer D200 files to D300 at base ISO. D300 has more details but D200 retain better color in the shadow.

Hi All

A quick question....I have a D200 and have decided to upgrade.

My question is this: would I be better off buying a second hand D2X for around 1k less than a brand new D300s...not to interested in video so this query is just from an image point of view.

Cheers
BrettR.

--
Wilfred

 

[jfriend00]

Hi All

A quick question....I have a D200 and have decided to upgrade.

My question is this: would I be better off buying a second hand D2X for around 1k less than a brand new D300s...not to interested in video so this query is just from an image point of view.

I own both a D2Xs and a D300. I use the D300 as my primary camera and the D2Xs is my backup or 2nd body with a different lens. Both are fine cameras, but if I must pick one, I pick the D300. The difference between the two is most noticeable above ISO 400.
--
John
Popular: http://jfriend.smugmug.com/popular
Portfolio: http://jfriend.smugmug.com/portfolio

 

[James Kei]

That is if you only consider ISO performance....D300 or D700 (best)

D2x body build & speed of response are a lot better than D300. Bird shooting, sport in outdoor-daylight, are excellent.

really depend what you want....

Hi All

A quick question....I have a D200 and have decided to upgrade.

My question is this: would I be better off buying a second hand D2X for around 1k less than a brand new D300s...not to interested in video so this query is just from an image point of view.

I own both a D2Xs and a D300. I use the D300 as my primary camera and the D2Xs is my backup or 2nd body with a different lens. Both are fine cameras, but if I must pick one, I pick the D300. The difference between the two is most noticeable above ISO 400.
--
John
Popular: http://jfriend.smugmug.com/popular
Portfolio: http://jfriend.smugmug.com/portfolio

--
James
http://community.webshots.com/user/cwkei

 

[Kaj E]

Hi All

A quick question....I have a D200 and have decided to upgrade.

My question is this: would I be better off buying a second hand D2X for around 1k less than a brand new D300s...not to interested in video so this query is just from an image point of view.

I would not consider the D2x an upgrade from the D200, the D300s perhaps, the D700 absolutely.
--
Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

 

[Brett R]

Hi All

Thanks for the replies so far...much appreciated.

I shoot mainly outdoor equestrian, the only time I shoot indoors is for my VR stuff, mounted. The review by Thom seems very pro D300...I suppose the second-hand D2X is 1k cheaper than a D300s...so I could spend that on some new glass....

Thanks, any more input appreciated.

Cheers
Brett.

 

[Cultured Vulture]

Hi All

Thanks for the replies so far...much appreciated.

I shoot mainly outdoor equestrian, the only time I shoot indoors is for my VR stuff, mounted. The review by Thom seems very pro D300...I suppose the second-hand D2X is 1k cheaper than a D300s...so I could spend that on some new glass....

Thanks, any more input appreciated.

Cheers
Brett.

Just curious, where are you finding a D2X in good condition for $800?
--
Respond to rudeness with civility, it really annoys them.

Regards,

JR

 

[Dazza76]

Hi All

A quick question....I have a D200 and have decided to upgrade.

My question is this: would I be better off buying a second hand D2X for around 1k less than a brand new D300s...not to interested in video so this query is just from an image point of view.

I would not consider the D2x an upgrade from the D200, the D300s perhaps, the D700 absolutely.
--
Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

I would would absolutely consider the D2X an upgrade from a D200. The build and speed of the D2X is superb. Seeing as the poster states it's mainly for outdoor shooting I'd certainly go for the D2X and put the change towards better glass.

 

[Jeff Kohn]

The D300 has better noise performance from ISO 400 and up; it's a substantial difference that you'll notice in real-world shots. The D300 also has almost a stop more dynamic range. The new AF system has its tradeoffs - AF sensors aren't as spread out as on the D2x, but there are more of them and the D300 is generally regarded as being better at tracking AF for moving targets. There's also the larger, higher resolution LCD and the fact that you can shoot at 8fps with the add-on battery grip.

The D2x is better built and handles better, the D2 series camera body is really nice and even with add-on grip the D300 doesn't feel as good in your hands as the D2x. But pretty much all of the internal electronic guts of the D300 are superior.

Rather than pay full MSRP for a D300s, maybe you should consider a D300 if you don't care about video. They may still be in stock new at some places, and I would think the used market price would be pretty attractive now that the D300s is announced.

--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com

 

[Dazza76]

Agreed that the 300 has far better high ISO performance. Not sure i agree about it tracking moving objects better.

I have both the D2X and the D200 and my brother has the 300 and 700. If i could keep the D2X and nab the 700 off him I'd be over the moon. Given that the poster will mainly be shooting outdoor sporting events then I'd certainly go for the handling and low ISO performance on the D2X and use the spare cash for something else. But that's just me.

 

[tak1234]

If you don't shoot over ISO 400 very much the D2X produces better pictures, less noise at base ISO not such fruity colors, faster autofocus, better autofocus points, the ergonomics of the body are better and it handles better with pro glass. Buy the D2X and buy good lenses. The lenses stay good forever and in another year when the D400 or whatever comes out everyone in this forum will rip the D300...

Although if you do find yourself shooting in the 800-1600 ISO range the D300 is way better.

If I were you I'd keep shooting with that D200 and buy like 24-70 2.8 or an 85 1.4 and a 50 1.4... Those lenses will create a sharper shot than mediocre lenses with a D300 or D2x body. Trust me. It's all about the glass

 

[Jeff Kohn]

Agreed that the 300 has far better high ISO performance. Not sure i agree about it tracking moving objects better.

I have both the D2X and the D200 and my brother has the 300 and 700. If i could keep the D2X and nab the 700 off him I'd be over the moon. Given that the poster will mainly be shooting outdoor sporting events then I'd certainly go for the handling and low ISO performance on the D2X and use the spare cash for something else. But that's just me.

Shooting outdoors doesn't always mean shooting in bright sunlight. And keep in mind the D2x has base ISO of 100, not 200 like the D300.

D2x focus is fast, and I actually prefer the AF sensor layout for not having to focus and recompose. But for tracking, I think the denser AF sensor layout of the D300 is superior, and I know others have agreed in the past.

--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com

 

[George DeCamp]

If you want to save some money for glass yet still have a great camera up to and including ISO 400 get a D2x....they are a great buy now. I posted this a few days back;

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=32589990

Not looking to sell you on the D2x, I have a D3 as well as a D300 also and still love the D2x on certain conditions. If you learn it's limitations and learn the camera...and learn how to make good images, you will love the D2x.

Good luck;

George
--
George DeCamp
http://www.decamp.net

 

[RomanJohnston]

I sold my D2X to get the D300 and for me it was an upgrad in shooting experience and an upgrade in file quality as well as DR.

Roman
--

The best tools of a successful photographer as well as a 'well lived' life is appreciation and a sense of adventure.

These are the tools of mastery of all things.

http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

 

[mstamper77]

Hard to imagine a d2x file at iso 100 beating anything the d300 can do.

If low iso is your game, get a d2x for cheap. If you regularly need iso above 200 or need to regularly track moving subjects, get the d300.

But really, iso 100 on a d2x is still to die for.

 

[Jeff Kohn]

Hard to imagine a d2x file at iso 100 beating anything the d300 can do.

I actually agree with this statement, but somehow I think it isn't quite what you meant to say.

--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com

 

[Photo Pete]

Try to get your hands on both cameras and see how they feel. I had both the D300 and D2x and sold the D300. I got more keepers with the D2x because it felt so natural and uncluttered to use.

D2x handling is simply superb. It's not just the body shape and rigidity of the built in vertical grip but the little things like the eyepiece black-out blind that set it apart from the D300. The low iso image quality is also superb and the RAW files are extremely well balanced in colour and tonal output which gives a great deal of flexibility in post processing.

There really isn't very much difference in high iso ability in good light (to achieve fast shutter speeds)... less than half a stop if properly exposed, although the D300 is about one to two stops better at hiigh iso in poor light.

Initial focus aquisition, particularly for low contrast subjects is significantly better with the D2x although once focus is achieved I'd say the D300 is slightly better at tracking the subject.

I do miss the D300's built in flash for wireless trigger of an external flash and both liveview and focus fine-tune can come in handy... but for me these just didn't outweigh the better handling and low ISO RAW file quality of the D2x.

The D2x is also a significant step up from the D200 (the camera I upgraded to a D2x from), particularly in focus ability (those additional cross focus sensors really do make a difference).

I'd suggest you forget the D300s and either keep your D200 or get a D2Xs (the 's' has a slightly better rear screen). Spend the money you save on good glass.

--
Have Fun
Photo Pete

 

[Andkar]

May I ask why the D200 doesn't cut it any more?

If it is the handling, then a D300 isn't an upgrade. If it is the image quality, then a D2X isn't an upgrade.

Keeping it will save you even more money to buy glass...