«

JLA wrote:
> Finally, the viewfinder
> offers a full 100% field of view, something that will cost you three
> times as much to see from Nikon.
>
No. D300 has 100% VF, a better sensor, faster, better AF, and only a
few hundred dollars more, and it's amost a 2 year old model.

Me wrote:
> JLA wrote:
>> Finally, the viewfinder
>> offers a full 100% field of view, something that will cost you three
>> times as much to see from Nikon.
>>
> No. D300 has 100% VF,
a better sensor,
Not sure how you can say that since the K7 hasn't been
released yet. The Nikon has 20% less resolution and less
native ISO range, so personally I'd be placing my bets on
Pentax.
faster, better AF,
Not sure how you can say that since the K7 hasn't been
released yet. The K7 has an improved AF system over the K20D
which was very good. Unless of course you are referring to
the wanky "51 points" or whatever the hell it is that the
D300 has but doesn't have.
and only a
> few hundred dollars more, and it's amost a 2 year old model.
Try about $500 more.
And the D300 DOESNT HAVE:
Weatherproof seals.
Video recording.
Anti-shake that corrects for rotational/tilting movements.
Horizon correction.
Option for IR remote.
Flexible shooting modes (Sv, TAv, customisable operation
within P, S, A & M modes)
Green Button.
User friendly interface.
The flexible white-balance modes (ability to leave the WB
slightly off to allow for atmosphere).
DNG Raw
Plus the D300 weighs 30% more, and is significantly bigger.


--
The Australian Labor Party couldn't run a pay dunny. They'd
have a queue half a mile long, and no-one on the seat.

Doug Jewell wrote:
> Me wrote:
>> JLA wrote:
>>> Finally, the viewfinder
>>> offers a full 100% field of view, something that will cost you three
>>> times as much to see from Nikon.
>>>
>> No. D300 has 100% VF,
> a better sensor,
> Not sure how you can say that since the K7 hasn't been released yet.

Okay - I'm /assuming/ it's based on the same samsung sensor as the K20d
- right?
http://daystarvisions.com/Docs/Rvws/K20D/pg3.html#dr
Maybe thy've fixed it, but I'm not holding my breath on that, as most
fanboys deny the problem with the K20d even exists.
> The
> Nikon has 20% less resolution and less native ISO range, so personally
> I'd be placing my bets on Pentax.
There's not 20% difference in resolution - there's about 20% difference
in pixel count. Nothing wrong with having that, but expecting that it
might make any practical difference is streching tcredibility.
> faster, better AF,
> Not sure how you can say that since the K7 hasn't been released yet. The
> K7 has an improved AF system over the K20D which was very good. Unless
> of course you are referring to the wanky "51 points" or whatever the
> hell it is that the D300 has but doesn't have.
Canon and Nikon put more focus points and more cross sensors in their
higher end models, and systems similar to the K7 system in their lower
end cameras. Why is that "wanky"? Have you tried any of them?

> and only a
>> few hundred dollars more, and it's amost a 2 year old model.
> Try about $500 more.
> And the D300 DOESNT HAVE:
> Weatherproof seals.
Yes it does.
> Video recording.
Now video is something to which the term "wanky" applies. I've been
thoroughly underwhelmed by the results. YMMV. Even if a dlsr maker
manages to get video output acceptable, it doesn't solve the problem
that to get decent results, commercial video producers use a crew of
technically skilled individuals to run the operation. The only
half-acceptable results I've seen for video from a dslr used by amateurs
have been "stillies" rather than "movies".

In article
<4a15c25c$0$24370$(E-Mail Removed)>, Doug
Jewell <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Me wrote:
> > JLA wrote:
> >> Finally, the viewfinder
> >> offers a full 100% field of view, something that will cost you three
> >> times as much to see from Nikon.
> >>
> > No. D300 has 100% VF,
> a better sensor,
> Not sure how you can say that since the K7 hasn't been
> released yet. The Nikon has 20% less resolution and less
> native ISO range, so personally I'd be placing my bets on
> Pentax.

what matters is not the range, but how noisy it is at a given iso.
they both go to 3200 with 6400 in an extended setting. based on the 14
megapixel sensor in the k20d, it's not particularly good in the noise
department.

> faster, better AF,
> Not sure how you can say that since the K7 hasn't been
> released yet. The K7 has an improved AF system over the K20D
> which was very good.

no it wasn't. it was relatively slow.

> Unless of course you are referring to
> the wanky "51 points" or whatever the hell it is that the
> D300 has but doesn't have.

that's part of the better focusing system. the k7 has 11 points like
the d90.

> and only a
> > few hundred dollars more, and it's amost a 2 year old model.
> Try about $500 more.

close enough. the d300 is about to be discounted when the d400
appears, and the d90 is a closer match anyway.

> And the D300 DOESNT HAVE:
> Weatherproof seals.

yes it does

> Video recording.

the d90 has video and is cheaper too. the d400 which is rumoured to be
announced in the next month or so is likely to have video.

> Anti-shake that corrects for rotational/tilting movements.

nikon puts stabilization in the lens.

> Horizon correction.

does that automatically rotate the image so that the horizon is level?
i'll bet it works only on jpegs, not raws. if not, what does it do?

> Option for IR remote.

the d90 has ir, the d300 is wired.

> Flexible shooting modes (Sv, TAv, customisable operation
> within P, S, A & M modes)

it has all that but by other names.

> Green Button.

green button is kinda nice.

> User friendly interface.

that's subjective.

> The flexible white-balance modes (ability to leave the WB
> slightly off to allow for atmosphere).

has that too

> DNG Raw

that is useful

> Plus the D300 weighs 30% more, and is significantly bigger.

some people prefer a bigger camera. for someone who wants most of the
features of the d300 in a smaller package, there's a d90.

"Me" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:gv4mdg$k9t$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Doug Jewell wrote:
>> Me wrote:
>>> JLA wrote:
>>>> Finally, the viewfinder
>>>> offers a full 100% field of view, something that will cost you three
>>>> times as much to see from Nikon.
>>>>
>>> No. D300 has 100% VF,
>> a better sensor,
>> Not sure how you can say that since the K7 hasn't been released yet.
>
> Okay - I'm /assuming/ it's based on the same samsung sensor as the K20d -
> right?

Yes they left it the same, new models are always the same, no improvements
whatsoever.............................