Nikon D300 is Pop Photo's Camera of the Year

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4857/the-camera-of-the-year-2007.html

 

Hmm. The D3 I could see. It fills a niche (speed and IQ in the same camera)
that Canon doesn't have an entry for and, being 2-year later technology
(improved microlenses, 14-bit A/D) than the 5D, should be the leader in 12MP
IQ. It has all the Canonistas sputtering excuses. Definitely camera of the
year material. Good work, Nikon!

The D300 is just another boring APS-C camera. Snore. And it's full well
depth is too small* for it to make use of 14-bit A/D conversion.

*: This is an assumption. It assumes that, as has been true of all sensors
to date, full well depth is proportional to pixel area. The D200 is
brilliant in that it has a perfect match between 12-bit A/D conversion and
its well depth. The 1DII and 5D fail to outperform the D200 at ISO 100
despite their larger pixels.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

 

FWIW, test of the D300 sensor indicates that at ISO 200, it has the same
(insignificant - but marginally greater) DR (14 bit) than the 40d at iso
100/200.
Both show some increase in DR using 14 bit. Both of these cameras have
over 11 stops of DR. I expect that the D3 (and 5d successor) will have
more. Sheesh - how did we ever manage with film?
I wouldn't underestimate the D300 (or 40d) performance at normal iso.
Good samples I've seen converted from raw files look outstanding.
There's lots of crappy 40d and D300 samples floating around. One reason
why so many of the D3 samples look so good in comparison to anything
else is that Nikon put a lot of the first D3s in the hands of pros who
really do know how to use a (d)SLR. That was a smarter marketing move
than we've seen from Nikon for years.

 

Amazingly enough the majority of those samples from the D3 were shot JPG.
It's amazing what one can do when they know how to use their equipment. The
D3 RAW files even make it better.







Rita

 

I'm already amazed by how amazing the D300 works ;-)
You're gonna be one happy woman when you get the D3 (what's the name of the
ship? Not Titanic or Poseidon I hope).
I'm very happy with the D300; the D3 is just too much money for me. I'll be
happy if I can slap some reasonable good glas on D300.
Yesterday I made some pictures of a cathedral in Mafra (Pt), that was
covered with beautiful "animated" lights and music (5th Beethoven). Purely
by coincident. Of course I forgot the tripod, so I had to shoot in darkness.
800 - 6400 ISO.
I'll post a few after processing (darn Capture NX works well, but soooo
slow!).

 

How come no one ever mentions that actual type of A/D converters and
their quality?

 

And two more:

Also camera of the year 2008:
http://www.pcphotomag.com/gear/photography-gear/2008-editors-choice-awards.html

Gold Award:
http://www.digitalcameravideoreview...-reviews/nikon-d300-digital-slr-camera-review

and....

 

From what images I've seen posted it does look like a sweet camera. I'm
almost tempted to get one but I'm fighting the urge. I'm holding out for
the old D3 and some long lenses.

Keep enjoying the D300. It sounds like you are having fun with it.
Definitely get some fast glass and that camera will really perform.






Rita

 

Well, after great deliberation, I ordered the D300 from Amazon,
shipped from Amazon at the regular list price. Of course, before I
hit send I had a little premature buyer's remorse and I went off
figuring out how much extra I'd be paying for film and processing for
the F5 if I didn't go digital. After that calculation, which really
has nothing to do with why I want the D300, I was ready to drop the
$1,800.

I don't think the camera is revolutionary in the industry but for me
it is. As far as camera of the year, yes but not a lot of
competition. Maybe Nikon won't be on the very edge of technology but
I feel it won't let us down. Plus, Nikon USA is right near me.

I am very excited about the camera and the new world it opens up. It's
almost ten years since I got the F5 and it's time to make the switch.
I have an SB28 Strobe so I still might need to get the SB800 but
that's it really, since my lenses will be fine with the D300.

Is the Lantern book any good? I really need to get some of the Lark
books on digital photography and photoshop. I've done a lot of work,
years ago, with photopaint so at least I'm not clueless but for me,
this really is a revolutionary change. I can still remember the smell
of Dektol, stop bath and fixer.

Alan

 

Sure, but too big and expensive for the title. I wouldn't expect "Camera of
the Year" to be awarded to a top-of-the-line pro model that relatively few
people could afford or even want, really.

It sure doesn't seem boring to me, and I doubt it is to many other Nikon
fans either. And I *like* DX cameras.

Neil

 

I bought a D200 about a year ago and fell in love with it. The new
D300 is so attractive that I decided to take the $1800 dollar leap and
give my D200 to my son. Yea I know I probably should have waited for
the next generation but the D200 was so outstanding I am sure the D300
will not disapoint. The auto sensor cleaning sounds nice and the
other features sound great too.

I dont know why people always beat up on Nikon. The D200 is clearly a
huge success no matter what the negative people say. There is no
question that it is a solid and good camera. Once again they want to
bash on the D300. I will let you know how I feel after I get my hands
on mine later today.

LL

 

Nikon envy, probably.

Neil

 

I really wouldn't worry too much about what people say about the D200. It's
a great camera as you say and has/is serving people really well. That being
said, if the D300 is a "slight" improvement over the D200 than it is going
to be an amazing camera.





Rita

 

No, people try to justify their expensive purchases. Canon vs Nikon
discussions generate as many flamewars as PC vs Mac discussions. When
Nikon ruled, there were as many Nikon users beating down Canon users as
there are now Canon users attacking Nikon users.

 

But wasn't that era before the advent of usenet??



Actually, I've not seen much of a discrepancy of numbers between
Nikonians and Canonistas since Nikon made some nice releases.

And Mac flamewars have really died down since it's now a generally
accepted opinion that the Mac platform as well as hardware and aesthetic
appeal is superior in all ways but cost per Mb.

 

They still ruled in 99 ... there were some interesting threads back in
those days. Back before spam and trolls started to ruin things.

Ok, I can't argue there.

 

According to some reviews (DPreview) it's more than a slight
improvement.

I've had mine several weeks now and to say I like it doesn't do it
justice. It's much like shooting with my old F4S, but more versatile
and not as heavy. Solid though.

My only complaint is the new NEFs require a different plugin than the
older NEFs, I haven't figured out how to do a bulk conversion in Nikon
Capture, and my version of Photoshop (CS) is no longer supported.
Looks like time to upgrade.


Roger (K8RI)

 

That's refreshing to hear.

Strangely enough I haven't held one yet. I'll have to play with one and see
how it feels. The scary thought is I might like the D300 and buy it on the
spot for a D3 backup.

Yes, it's very irritating. I never liked the feel of Nikon's earlier
version of Capture NX. Oddly enough I did like the old Capture 4 for the
way it handled D200, D2x(s) files. It won't work with D300 and D3 files.
Capture 4 is very quick and streamlined for basic and batch processing of
files that didn't need sever manipulation. I'll have to compare the latest
Capture NX to CS3 and see if I can force myself to get used to it. From
what I read, Capture NX handles and processes the RAW files better with
little effort.






Rita

 

Roger-

In the mean time you could use Adobe's free DNG converter to batch those
NEFs and then take them into CS. Or take a free trial of CS3 and
Lightroom- each with 30 days, and both handle the newer Nikon formatted
NEFs.

Nice to see you again!

 

You should give Capture One 4 a try. I think it's the best overall
converter (although I'm still testing it obsessively, so my opinion
may change). Quite fast, too. I found NX is good, but its user
interface is awkward almost to the point of unusability (it's ok for
3-4 shots, but try to convert 20 in one sitting- argh!). And if you
make the mistake of switching NR to "better quality" mode, forget it.