Since 2006 I have owned a D200 for stern shooting situations and I got a D40 in early '07 for everyday shots (a grand camera - I give it SIX stars! - an intact discreet evaluate is desired!), and after earshot about the D300 gratis in late 2007 I debated over whether to get one. I was very cheerful with my D200, which I took on some overseas trips and it performed rightly. After display-ing a D300 in supplies and analysis some online reviews, I resolute to take the force. It was a big investment but now I have no regrets - if not for the total state, then for one thing: COLOR! Or one more thing: what Nikon calls 'Active D-Lighting' (translation: a significant change in the mainframe's realistic rendition of differ, highlights, gloom, etc. - the entire packet of "TONE"). Also - can a LCD rear-plaster get any better than this?? In Jim Cramer-phrasing I have to say that this classic is definitely "best of breed."
Pluses and minuses: (reminder: abridged every once in a while since I've worn it for almost 6 months now and thousands of captures - last alter was done on 4/9/08)
PLUSES:
- Incredibly brilliant, pleasingly, sincerely surprisingly inundated incline reminiscent of Velvia (high-saturation Fuji skin used in slides, etc.) is now made expected by selecting the "Vivid" decision in the "Picture Control" menu and cranking up the "Saturation" decision - there are three levels dubious the evade "0" - which sets it just about at the limit possible saturation that could be set in the D200. Even boring photos of equipment around the home, slim, etc. look interesting and... Well, exciting and clear... With it set at +2 or +3 (though the +3 backdrop is a bit extremist for people photos, and renders their skin flush a bit more intense than appears naturally). At the +3 backdrop even blase photos of mundane effects slant purposely-understated "art" in a MoMA-like way. For people I result Vivid+1 or Vivid+2 a bit more sincere within with innate light, as the Vivid+3 saturates just a bit more than I favor. Just like Velvia, these settings also do not amiable the cool insignia one of the minuses of other cameras' 'dramatic' settings - this is what's best (your cool blues, grays, greens, etc. delay cool, while the reds, yellows, oranges, light blues/greens/etc. - timepiece out!) (Edited hint: after about 3,000 shots I saw that inside it might be best to do a handbook fair settle preset off an ashen hedge or carpet or something and then discharge in vibrant style, since in the natural WB style the reds tend to get boosting fully a bit under common inside light and some of my subjects looked like they had a very shade suntan, or even a sunburn, in the core of December! Careful with this... Also tried ensign - i.e. not lucid - blush settings with +1 or +2 saturation, and these were very realistic, though the backgrounds can be dull if your intent on colorful ensign all-around. Maybe best to use those on portraits only. Try them all out and see what plant best.)
- On-lodge so-called "Active D-Lighting" renders shade and highlights in a very realistic style, with no raising of delicate shadow tones to mid-levels (as my outstanding, near-finish-in-its-group Nikon D40 tends to do) - this certainly must be seen to be thought. Coupled with the flush property (and resonant saturation noted above), the truth in the highlights is brilliant. The D40/D200 have this report in declare-capture (i.e. you adjust the captured picture yourself) but this seemed rather crude; here it is said that the Nikon actually computes the needed adjustment and does it specifically for the field you've captured. No more blown or off-redden highlights in those 'erratic' occasions when overexposure seeps into a shot in a very contrasty scaffold.
- The new LCD protect is 3" in magnitude and has a whopping 920,000 pixels (versus 230,000 for the D200, D80, D40, etc.) of resolution - which means figure appraise to limit focusing, affect, etc. is impossibly accurate and well outside the already very high condition of Nikon's 2.5 inch screens and way, way past that of the Canons with the greenish-greyish-tinted LCDs even on posh models like the, much-respected thorough-entrap 5D. Doesn't even come with a LCD bodyguard cover like the D200 did because it's made with tempered flute and is super hardy to scratching, damage, etc. No more looking through synthetic - however transparent - when reviewing shots or backdrop insignia, lighting, etc. (Kind of forever worried me, that.)
- 100% coverage viewfinder - excellent, and not messy up, making composition cleaner; nothing impressed in the viewfinder to get in the way (although you can optionally set the horizon-echelon grid to be on all the time, which I do, since it plants an open place in the central well, and those off-surplus shots are a sting to fix).
- 51-points of autofocus vacant - at first I didn't genuinely anxiety much as I tend to do the old-instruct sense of with one goal for focus, then recomposing - but I ongoing with the 51-detail AF style (the chubby-rectangle locale that uses all sensors) and found that I don't poverty to do this as the D300 always seems to tool the article I sought to focus on - making equipment much, much easier - although for actually scarce shots with a theme in focus and others way out of focus, I move to the manual craze; the AF structure is excellent in haste and accurate tracking of the idea of focus as well (i.e. an operation infant, etc.) The 51 points make this very relaxed to do. Fiddling around in the mass I saw on the big $5k D3 the points are better looking (little red acne) and excluding pushy when composing than these large-ish black rectangles on the D300, but I can live with that (although it reminds me "hey, you don't have a D3!...").
- There issues about firmware and exposure on the D40, D80, where they tended to expose too brightly, and we had to set it manually to -0.3 or -0.7 to get back to habitual exposure. Not on the D300. Perfect all-around. Still, adjusting WB and exposure can make or break the shot. Especially polite is the hazy or 'shadow' backdrop for interior shots in quick sunlight; everything looks pleasingly kind, even if just a trace more than natural. Give it a try if you like loving ensign. Interesting shots can be had with 'tungsten' outside in the snowfall - an unhappy-grey monochromatic world. (If you have snowfall, that is.) Manual WB site is painless off a barrage, or carpet, or scarf, etc. as common with the Nikons in this limit, and makes entirely a bit of difference in odd-lighting situations (i.e. very dim interval, etc.) where the automatic presets, although excellent, don't work well (especially that 'tungsten' - in usual home incandescent lighting in the sunset everything means-blued-out - who uses this? Or being I using it incorrectly? I set WB in that pose off the barricade or rug.)
- other than the complete-enclose antenna (no small difference, that is) and high FPS, there appears, from what I am analysis, to be no major differences (excluding you're the sports or newscast pistol) from the decidedly-lauded D3, which expenses 3x what the D300 outlay; the D3's grand high ISO performance can be mimicked by spiraling off the high ISO sound decrease set "on" in the duck mode in the D300 (see below) Of course, the D3 has many other skin that make it best for pro sports shooters, etc. who neediness that amount and faculty, and of course, filled-framework has no comparison - but I have a bag round of DX lenses (and some non-DX primes) and not prepare to put out $10k+ for a D3 positive a 14-24, the new 24-70 and the 70-200, etc. that I'd want. The differences in picture property due to the complete-scaffold antenna (and other skin I wouldn't indigence as I don't whiz sports or newscast) are outweighed by the cost tangled and the marginal eminence of the difference total. Image quality is essentially the same - except for the pluses of the thorough-trick, especially noticeable in sincerely big prints. Also the usual chubby-border focal chunk versus DX copy relics alive here - yes, that "35mm on a DX is equivalent to a..." continues, and perhaps will while DX lenses stay in our bags. Edit: I have tried the D3 for a shooting sitting and it does focus incredibly steadily, much quicker than the D300 in some luggage. The speed of the focusing and the close itself are unbelievable; that camera is the Ferrari or Lamborghini of Nikons. The D300 may be the Porsche - hey, not a bad compromise - it's unlikely that the typical pro-sumer will hardship the command of the D3 (or of a Ferrari - ever try to do 140mph on the NJ Turnpike?).
These were my big chief pluses which warranted the transition from the D200, but there are a few more which don't actually plead to me but will for some:
- Live View (you can see the likeness on the LCD choice) - perhaps this might draw to a trivet-customer scenery up a photo, but I distrust I'll ever use it. Smacks of "peak-and-squirt," I think, but could be dexterous in some luggage where it is hard to position the eye at the viewfinder (behind the daybed?...) (Edited record: should not have panned this - gave the camera to my 21 year old niece, who tried to take a Christmas picture of my family, and I together - and got half of us in the bottom of the border, and a blank top half of the scaffold! - for those who very grew up using live landscape digital cameras, this perform is very practical - just set it and let them speed - I think the credence of the D300 and the detail that she had to use a (gasp!) viewfinder (as divergent to the RAZR inner mobile camera) threw her off. Some creative cropping may rescue the shot, besides.)
- Ultrasonic Sensor Cleaner - like the Canons and Pentaxes, Sonys, etc., Nikon lastly offers a sensor cleaner (which is consumer-operated, not constantly operation at each command-up if you set it that way). Might be useful after hard shooting in dirty or, otherwise camera-unfriendly environments, but I never had the indigence for it on any camera I ever had up to now. Just one more thing to perhaps go wound rapidly?
- HDMI output (if your blessed enough to have one of those big-protect HDTVs and want to show your photos to all on the cover; I don't and won't)
- 12MP versus 10MP (for the D200) - great marketing things but MP outside 6-8MP or so has only marginal look on the quality of the likeness and doesn't actually worry ultimately since all it does it highlight the limitations of the lenses or the system of the rifle; I think it is good to have that much more information recorded ultimately if you desire (via the range/compression settings) but I spurt with "large natural" JPG and don't want 10MB+ file sizes when I'm making 5x7 or 8X10 prints at most (or way, much more MB for RAW archives) - A post reminded me/commenter that the elevated MP will be beneficial when cropping a photo considerably for printing - good stage - if you're pleasing 25% of that shot and cropping it, printing it out to 8x10, those 12MP will keep your likeness kind and precisely even at such zealous crops (provided, of course, you're using the big file size settings and have masses of storeroom pause as CF cards, hard diskette space, etc.) I don't do a lot of cropping and rather to produce in camera since I have practically no time to fiddle with Photoshop and the remnants.
- the new grip (sold separately, of course) that goes with it doesn't staff far up into the camera, so you can use the camera's battery as well as those in the grip as well, and influence which to drain first, etc. With the grip you get more FPS for action photography but I don't do much of that, and for me the grip makes the unbroken enclose too big to fit in my flow Lowepro bag (petty but hey, it's one more thing).
- if you've had any Nikon DSLR before, especially a D200, you will feel immediately at home, with no slope-up stage; you don't even hardship to open the sealed manual, since the new features are so clearly located and adjusted that all you do adjust your settings and edge shooting; what won't feel immediately usual is the super-bold tint you'll discern on the intricately detailed 3" LCD. Of course, ergonomics virtually finish; this camera is like a brick wrapped watertight in estimated-textured rubber, complete to grip and wear for long periods of time.
- Capture NX software is included - get this - limitless! - in a chosen number of original sales of the D300. It's panned by some but, if you don't have another software wrap, it's not a bad thing to get a reasonably pro-quality vision software enclose for free. The easy-to-use three-time find adjustment tool is excellent. Edit renewed - there is a Mac Leopard (OS 10.5) type now vacant - yeah! - so all computing formats are supported.
MINUSES
- Quite a bit more dear than the D200 - naturally, since it's a new exemplar, but is it appeal it? - for me it was for the top two reasons; for others, the D200 (or the D80, or the D40) will be much more camera than is enough - also still appears to be hard to get at the right charge primarily; some supply issues reminiscent of the D200 were being seen but appear to have levelled off; now it's hard, I examine, to get the D3.
- When I initially got it I thought that for some incentive the premier ISO settings (i.e. 6,400) seemed to start to quite hazier shots, likely due to high ISO blare discount that is set ON to 'Normal' in the factory default - but who shoots up to ISO 6,400 well, except your shooting hand-held at closer close speeds in very night environments? I had my D200 set for maximum 1,600 in Auto ISO and that was always more than enough. You can always bear the high ISO racket reduction completely off (or set it to low for just a hint of polish-up) and get back to the D200's, and close to the D3's, echelon of quality. I did this and had no more issues that initially troubled me, but a flank-by-fringe comparison of a very overblown crop might yield otherwise. The ISO settings are also odd in that there is no declared ISO 100 but the camera does have ISO options which Nikon calls several degrees of "LO," confusingly; just hardship to learn the terminology and adapt. High ISO noise is also truly only evident, however, if you make 3-bottom-extensive prints, frieze-bulk similes or crop and magnify on your computer screen to unrealistic levels and look sincerely, really strictly. You won't even remark on a 5X7 or 8X10, or superior, engrave in usual circumstances. The fact that there is Auto ISO at all (versus not having it in the Canons) makes shooting a breeze; no fiddling around with ISO settings when you're tiresome to capture an icon. (Edited note: oodles of high ISO shots without NR on have been excellent throughout the holidays, including bounty of bleak, candlelit tables, Christmas trees with on-board lights only on, outdoor shots of decor, etc. Not certain how deafening these would look blown up to big poster or mural-sized prints but for 8X10 or less, I am loyal these are perfectly refined.)
- Wish the flip-up gleam would have a rotating bulb inclusion which you could intention upward and get a bounce glisten for indoor people photographs; fairly persuaded no other DLSRs have this but it would eliminate me having to (buy first and) hold around a Speedlight for indoor shots (i.e. Christmas present-crack by the hierarchy in low light, etc.) lest I get the sallow-ghost prompt of charge moment from the on-board element. I seldom use the on-board blaze except for block-flash outdoors, so it is rather less useful than I would like. Then again, Nikon wants to market Speed-lights, so... The SB-600 is a textbook game. The SB-400 is also a fussy one if your not liability shots with far-off subjects, and it hysterics nicely on the D40 as well.
- I don't know if it's my imagination but it feels like the two spiraling dials (on the front and back, for locale aperture, close speed, etc.) are a bit more buried into the camera body than those on the D200; when I spin them I get memories of shameful 1970s electronics when I would push a knob, and it would breeze up affecting itself inside the radio (or what) and receiving caught in there - I sampled other demos on the deposit deck, and the felt the same as mine - maybe this is too thwart accidental faction when shooting? It's as if they are not at take 90 grade angles to the camera body. Nice felt on the fingers, but I get memories of those "stumped buttons" when I use them sometimes.
- it maybe would be careful to be able to stuff a CF license and a SD license in the camera for recall options; I wish CF cards for their durability, but dislike having to invest in two types of cards - CF and SD - for the D300 and the D40, respectively. Don't know who could possibly fire so much to fill a sated 8GB license (maybe if you race RAW+JPG, etc. for sports) but a two-card position would also be kind just to know it's there.
- It's still not thorough-framework - I know, it's not supposed to be, and most DSLRs aren't, but I might have salaried another $500 (maybe $750?) if they'd made it satisfied-entice. However, that means another $5Gs+ on 2 or 3 aforementioned full-frame varied-zooms (and effectively making obsolete my big 12-24mm ample, awesomely versatile 18-200mm, and incisive 70-300mm DX VRs) so doubtless better for the wallet that it's not.
- No PC badge: The new D3 pro variety only free to select pursue members (the D3P, they're work it) has a "PC" button for "Picture Control" - that is, you can cursorily change between your own custom settings you set up in the menu for different picture limitations - say, for landscapes, a high-saturation setting (i.e. "Vivid" with saturation cranked up), and for people, a form-color setting ("Normal" with moderate saturation), etc. - but on the D300 (and the normal D3, for that material) you have to fiddle around with the menu. A button to be able to toggle between picture settings would be a benefit for this camera; otherwise you might miss a shot switching from, say, a high-saturation, fair-calculate adjusted setting for a seashore landscape, then annoying promptly to capture your kids on that same beach - which would give them minute sunburns (on the likeness!) due to the oversaturation and WB adjustment - except you go burning buttons to get into the menus (with the sandy fingers) and fiddle around, making the change. I believe Canons have a button committed to this, which makes me doubt why Nikon isn't belief ahead and, in typical Japanese fashion, doubling the best ideas and features from its competitors.
Other than these few minor (for me) minuses, this camera's new color capabilities, wildly better highlight-renditioning and other features more than correct my investment in it. I'm getting great captures from it. Naturally a lot of that is subjective - best to try it out yourself and estimate before taking the pitch. One look at the metaphors, the LCD, and the other features, and this one might be the one that makes all the Canon owners squirm in their chairs and doubt what to do with all those pricey "ashen lenses" now that they will want this Nikon! (Not that I wouldn't mentality having a 5D and a few of those whites-bodied Canon L-chain teles, of course!...)
Disclaimer: for quick shots around the house of my kids, etc., I still grab my D40 - soon to have a new 18-55mm VR lens briskly shipping from Nikon! - and capture away - it's got to be the best camera in its status, and the images rival the D300 under normal conditions. It's when things get a little multipart (low light, action, the flooded colors, high ISO situations, etc.) that the D300 excels. Especially the drenched colors! Never seen something like this in a DSLR and I've had 'em all (Nikons) or tried 'em all (Canon, Pentax, Sony, Olympus...).
