Moving from Nikon D200 to D300 .. what did you NOT like?

Wail

Wail

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,671
Name
Wail
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

The time may be ripe for me to move on to a D300; but before I take the plunge I'd like to “learn” as much as I can. Though I’ve read a lot about the D300, I hardly came across negative views / reviews.

Still, I’d like to hear from existing D300 users who’ve migrated up (or down as the case may be) from a D200. What do you miss, what do you not like, … I want the negative views please.

Thanks
 
The crappy base ISO (low ISO sacrified for high ISO), missing bracket button, £500 you'll wish you'd spent on glass instead.

If you shoot ISO100 or ISO200 this D300 is a clear step backwards, less DR than the D200 at ISO100 (because this is a "pushed" ISO), and ISO200 has noisy reds and blotchy blues.

Have a look at this thread:

http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=182650

The picture quality of the D300 was a disappointment in the sense that I was hoping for higher base-ISO performance (which I personally care about most), but it was better when compared against the CCD DX cameras at higher ISOs. Of course, it's a superbly-handling package that does have many advantages. My recommendation for those seeking the best quality at base ISO is to stick with the previous 10Mp CCD cameras (e.g., D40x, D60, D80, D200) unless you can afford a D700.

I'd take a D60 @ ISO100 over a D300 any time, anyone up for a shoot-out (rubs hands)
 
Thank you for the post and link. I am a member of NikonCafe aswell, but I didn't see this thread .. or may be I overlooked it as I wasn't on the lookout for a D300 for a while.

That said, I heared a lot about the "not so good" low ISO in comparison to lesser models. This is worrying me a bit, since I do shoot a lot at low ISO, especially when I am back home where the sun shines 24/7.

Other than the ISO issue, is there anything else that is significant?

The bracket button, can I reprogram any of the buttons to give me this option? If so, then great, otherwise I guess I can accomodate my self around that, since it will not affect the quality of the shoot.
 
That said, I heared a lot about the "not so good" low ISO in comparison to lesser models. This is worrying me a bit, since I do shoot a lot at low ISO, especially when I am back home where the sun shines 24/7.

Its true, I shot for a month with one compared to an S5 Pro and D2X. Both blew it away. I don't really care about high ISO much though, and its a bit better, maybe 2/3rd of a stop. Nothing worth the low ISO sacrifice though IMHO.

The Sony A700's sensor isn't very good IMHO, and its the D300's worse point by miles. That body needs the D3 sensor ;)
 
Ouch! I was hoping NOT to hear what you're saying!
 
No doubt the high ISO boys will be a long in a minute to tell you I'm wrong ;)

But you did ask for negatives, and this is pretty well documented.

Actually for the best base ISO, the D2X is probably a great bargain for you, I've seen some silly prices on that.

The D2X is crud though over ISO400. Its a shocker.

Bottom line is that if you need an ISO100 camera, don't buy a base ISO200 camera would be my "take home" advice.
 
While there are a few people that don't like the D300 for various reasons, there are a huge number of people that are very happy with the camera. For me, I got a D3 first, and so when I got the D300 as a backup I was disappointed. Partly because I got used to Pro bodies with the D2x and D3, and partly ( and the main thing for me ) it just wasn't a D3...

People that shoot in studios have been saying they preferred the D2x over the D3/D300 but they were mainly talking about tiny differences in skin tones, and I think Nikon releasing the picture controls for D2x settings may have helped there.

What I do find slightly annoying is comparing a 10mp sensor against a 12mp sensor noise wise. That's crazy, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the 10mp sensor will come out better.

Personally if going from a D200 I dont think you'd be disappointed. It's a much more solid camera, and it's interesting to realise how often higher ISO's ( 200-640 for example ) you use, and at those ISO's the D300 is better. If moving from a D2x then you may find the body isn't quite as nice as you're used to, and ISO100 on those really is very very nice.

Pete
 
I upgraded from D200 to D300 for the kind of pictures I take the high iso above 400 is great but over all not much in it ,by better glass id say.
Luckily my brother has it so I can still use the D200.
 
I have both and still use both. I nearly sold my 200 a while back, but decided to keep it for low ISO stuff,portraits, weddings and stuff..........(after a few spicy views expressed on here.....:D....)

I still use my D70s for landscapes.

The 300 is a better camera in certain situations, the 200 in others, depends what you shoot, for wildlife it is better all round.
 
I use D3's d2x d300 and d200s, I'd put the d300 well ahead of the d2x at 200 iso, the d2x really sucks at anything higher.
Personally I haven't had any problems with the d300, tons of dynamic range, lovely colours bags of fine detail, good low light (not as good as the d3 but still very good) it's an improvement on the d200, but with good lens I'm not sure you'll see that much difference at 200iso. Wayne
 
Speaking as one who has had the D200 then upgraded to the D300, I havent found anything I miss that I had on the D200. Sure the bracketing button is gone, but the D300 will allow you to bracket autoexposure and flash, autoexposure only, flash only, and white balance. You can easily assign a function button to do this.

The D300 high ISO performance is impressive, but I dont understand the low ISO arguement here, perhaps someone can enlighten me. The D300 will go down to the equivalent of ISO 100, same as the D200. What advantage would an even lower ISO give me with my D300 if it gives perfectly noise free images at ISO200?

Allan
 
wow,

THANK YOU, all. This has been great feedback and I can't thank you enough.

Sorry I wasn't online to give immediate feedback, am coming down with a pancrease attack and have been bed-bound.

To give you alll some background, I use 3 cameras and shoot purely for hobby. I don't want to make this a living at the moment as I don't want the obligation of having to shoot with £££ in the back of my mind; also, my current career is paying me too well to let it go.

I use 3 dSRLs, a D2Xs for when I am out purely to shoot ... this is my baby camera which I am madly inlove with. A D200, for when I am out with on a trip, or wherever, and I know there will be something nice to shoot along the way. A D40 which is always in my back-pack as my P&S.

I didn't want to upgrade any of my bodies, as I have been very happy with each of them which have delivered great pictures for the price / technical each individual body provided. That said, I find myself more and more looking to upgrade the D2Xs & D200 to something more able to withstand the elements ... and I need to do this upgrade in moderation (am currently of study leave as such my income & savings are stretched).

So, I figure I will upgrade the D200 for now as much as I would love to do the D2Xs first! There is another issue with upgrading the D2Xs, and that is because this specific body is "dirt" cheap in Saudi (I bought mine, new, back in late 2005 for just under £2,000).

Because of this, I want to move out of the D200 first ... even though I am very happy (and I mean VERY happy) with low ISO quality, but very dissapointed with high ISO quality. Yes, I shoot alot at ISO 1600 and even higher ... I am a fan of not using a flash (all the more reason as to why I am aching for the D3).

I figure I may take the plunge now ... seeing that the main issue is with the low ISO primarily. The rest of the issues have work-arounds that I can manage. As for low ISO, I think my D2Xs will fill that gap for now.

Again, thank you all for the very informative replies; this has been a great help :)
 
allanm said:
The D300 high ISO performance is impressive, but I dont understand the low ISO arguement here, perhaps someone can enlighten me. The D300 will go down to the equivalent of ISO 100, same as the D200.

Allan
Click to expand...

The key word is equivalent, it doesn't actually give you a true 100 ISO, but rather it processes the signal to produce an approximation of what it should be, in a similar way (but not the same, before I get everyone correcting me :lol:) that a dgital soom works on a p+s camera
 
Flash In The Pan said:
The key word is equivalent, it doesn't actually give you a true 100 ISO, but rather it processes the signal to produce an approximation of what it should be, in a similar way (but not the same, before I get everyone correcting me :lol:) that a dgital soom works on a p+s camera
Click to expand...

I think, on the D300, pushing the ISO down to 100 when the optimum value is 200 could lead to image degradation due to over saturation of the pixels ( if I understand what i just read) so, yes, i can appreciate that the "equivalent" setting of ISO100 would have to have some sort of enhancement to clean it up.
But, I am happy with ISO 200 and I see no noise in any of my pictures at this setting.

According to Dpreview.com`s review of the D300, they say about noise....
" From ISO 100 to 400 there is virtually no difference from a noise point of view between any of these cameras, none exhibit noticeable any noise. Indeed visible noise only begins to creep into the D300 shots at around ISO 1600"

So, calling D300`s base ISO of 200 as crappy on a third party users opinion is a little strong. I know who i believe!

I`ve had both cameras, and I must say, any images taken with my D300 looks better than the ones taken with my D200. The D300 has a whole generation of improvements over earlier cameras and it shows.

Allan
 
If it's hi iso you need save up and get the d3, it's just staggering! 2x3 foot prints at 2500 iso with no noise, you can pick up a body only here in the uk for under £3000, probably cheaper again in Saudi. Wayne
 
About the low ISO noise of the D300, I have to say that when I tried it (in a store with just a few clicks that I took ... not a fair measure to be honest) I did notice the image quality wasn't on par with the D200 (I used ISO 200 to give as fair a comparison as I could).

I am sure, if I was able to tweak my setting then I would have been able to get something better; but seeing that I didn't want to abuse my host (shop owner) in allowing me to play around then I just couldn't get enough shots taken.

Still, it is fair to presume that the D300 will not produce as good an image at ISO 400 and less, in comparison to the D200 ... but I can live with that.
 
About the D3, it is on my list and I hope to get it, or the next one up once it's released; but in Saudi we have no VAT as such there is an immediate 17.5% saving. Also, if I buy it when I am leaving UK then I can make a claim back for the VAT I pay and make around 15% saving ... customs do not refund the whole VAT amount here :(

That said, I am still very happy with my D2Xs for the shots I need, upto ISO 800 it's simply magical, this body for and this is why I am mostly happy to delay the purchase of the D3.
 
For freezing an image it's excellent and yeah, its true that it's not as sharp as I wanted but it takes much better pictures than my D80 ever did (imo) with the only exception being macro shots of things that don't move (when I take time to get the lighting right).

I still miss the sharpness of my D40x though, I'd quite like another just for macro stuff.
 
allanm said:
calling D300`s base ISO of 200 as crappy on a third party users opinion is a little strong. I know who i believe!


Allan
Click to expand...


On the same point, I find the light so crappy up here I always ended up shooting at ISO 200 with the D80 so the base 200 of the D300 just saves me adjusting it :lol:
 
I upgraded from a D200 to the D300, and there's nothing I regret about it :)

The better performance at higher ISOs (I'm happy at 800, and can live with it up to 1600 if need be), and bracketing is assigned to the Function button.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top