Nikon D300 Preview

Finally!! I have been waiting for a 12mp Nikon in my price range forever. The new LCD screen sounds amazing as well.

Having read it carefully I think Bob's preview is pretty good and a fair overview of three roughly similar and similarly priced cameras with a few errors. Whether it will help photo.net readers make an informed purchase is a different matter. I am firm believer in not buying equipment on printed specs alone: you have to go in and handle the camera (or computers, lighting gear, tripods, etc.) and see how it feels, balances, works in your hands, when you are looking through the camera's viewfinder, and navigating through the menus

Here are some things I think need to be corrected in Bob's preview:

Active D-Lighting feature works (and in my brief experience with it this really does work) on both the shadow and highlight end of the exposure range.

Bob fails to point out that of the 51 AF focus sensors, 15 are cross sensor types and that, like the Nikon D3, the D300 uses information from the 3D color Matrix metering system to boost autofocus performance.

Yes the new LCDs on the D300 and D3 are major improvements. The viewing angle is much improved.

I think that with this new CMOS sensor, Nikon will give a big emprovement in ISO sensibility quality, by reducing the noise at high ISO values. A big step forward in digital photography. A lot of improvement by looking to the minor sister D200 that will continue to be a great product.

Thanks for the addition info Ellis. I'm no Nikon expert but I thought we should have something on the new camera as a focus for discussion. Discusions get lost and fragmented when conducted in a forum.

Your are right about handling and using a camera in order to make a informed decision about whether it's the right camera for you. However not everyone is in a position to do that and for now all most of us have are the numbers and the manufacturer's claims. I'm pretty sure the D300 will handle much like the D200 and the 40D will handle much like a 30D, so if you're not switching systems or buying your first DSLR you probably already have a good idea about the camera ergonomics.

I suspect Nikon users will upgrade to the D300 and Canon users will upgrade to the 40D and few, if any, will switch systems because of some feature the other has. These days most DSLRs are pretty damn good. Good enough for most users. Some may have slightly better AF or slightly better AE or a few more pixels, but most such features are icing on the cake. When it comes to the basic core functions of a camera we're past the days of marginal performance.

Great preview!

One thing i can't really understand --- why does Nikon have to use two different storage cards in their systems, Compact Flash card for D200/D300/D3 while SD card for D40/D50/D80?

does anybody know if D300 is available right now (29.08.2007) in hong kong and which price (and sure where exactly :-) ) thanks a lot !

does anybody know if D300 is available right now (29.08.2007) in hong kong and which price (and sure where exactly :-) ) ?

thanks a lot !

I've been contemplating to switch to Canon now after receiving the terrible, horrifying experience from Nikon service. (They refused to honor warranty, framed me for physically damaging the camera body, sent me back the camera without completely re-assembled it, waited 6 months for a lens repair, and the lens came back loose, etc.)

Since I already invested too much into Nikon lens, flash, accessories, I didn't really want to switch yet, but then, my D200 and my 18-200VR is half dead, I'm going to need to buy a new body and a main lens anyway. I was waiting for Nikon and Canon to come up with a new body and see what to do, and seems like D300 is a pretty good way to go. I hope it live up to the expectation. But at the same time, I don't want to deal with Nikon service anymore in my life time....

Well said Bob. I must admit the D300 and the 40D look like great cameras but my D200 is still a great camera, better than me. Maybe I'll pick up the D300 replacement in 3 years or at that time a discounted D300. I think the new Nikons will give some Canon users something to think about if they don't have a big investment in lenses. Like you said all three are great cameras, it's up to the user to capture great images.

Ellis, one comment on your remark about holding the camera before buying. I think this is only true if your considering several brands. When you have decided, for whatever reason, to buy a Nikon, in my opinion your budget is leading. If you have $1800 to spend on a new camera, the D3 is above your budget, and why should you consider the D80 in that case? So that leaves the D300.

I have my D200 for almost a year, I'm happy with the camera exept it's noise for ISO higher than 200, I wounder if this has been fixed in D300?

From what I have seen of the D300, the noise issue is a non-issue this time around. Beautiful images. ISO 6400 is certainly grainy, but not even as grainy as the ISO 1600 images I shot with my D200.

Way to go, Nikon. Teach Canon who's boss.

I had been contemplating upgrading from my D70 to a D200 but this will likely make me wait for the D300 instead. While I've been impressed with the D200, the additional speed, better finder and D-lighting seems to be worth the price difference to me. Guess I'll be waiting a little longer, but will be anxiously looking forward to this camera's release. Looks like a nice step up.

I wonder if it still meters with manual lenses? When is Nikon going to introduce 100 ISO or even 50 for that matter?

D300 does 100 by way of the extended sensitivities. (100-6400)

If I was heavily invested in one system or the other (Nikon or Canon) I would know which way to go. However, having only one film body and two lenses for one of the systems (which I could easily get rid of to one of my friends, if I needed to swap over) I don't fully know which direction to go. I do plan on making some money soon with this prospective camera. I do know I am looking at the "semi-pro" models.

D200 users, how many of you are upgrading to a D300? the difference in MP (10% difference- you might only see this at prints 20 x 30 or larger) is pretty much negligable when taking into pixel pitch and size. 5fps upto 8fps, OK so this is beneficial to those shooting action, however, I have to say 5 fps has been enough for me when needed. It just means a little more foresight and preparation (reading, predicting subject behaviour- I find it more fun and challenging than shredding through at 8fps.

Can someone clarify, but the difference between 12bit and 14 bit processing is in context marginal and with the current printing services neither here nor there?

I suppose my point is don't rush out and upgrade your 20d/30d to a 40d or d200 to a d2x or d300..just yet, hold back and invest in the best glass available as this is the main limiting factor at 10 MP + on cropped sensors. Just think 15 to 18 months down the line the new incarnations of these bodies will hit the market, again with marginal improvements(?).

I am sure many will disagree with me, but let me ask you this - when has your camera gone out and taken an outstanding image for you?

Now where is my Credit card?

I fancy that new D3!

I have had a D200 for about two years. The noise is horrible. Once you cross into ISO 400 or higher it is very noticeable. The rubberized covering is pealing off. The camera runs like a rock. The noise is the worst problem. I hope the D300 really does address this. IF Nikon does not fix it on this pass, I am history and will go with Canon...despite a significant investment in Nikon. I don't know about you, but I cannot afford a 1500-18800 dollar purchase every two years. Nikon..please get it right this time. :-)

Tom

Tom mate, what are you talking about! By all accounts the D200 still holds it's weight up to around ISO 800. in some instances outperforms more expensive models... Still have your rant, if it makes you feel better..

I agree that one needn't rush out to upgrade to the D300 from the (D200) unless there are some features one can't do without. I think my trusty D70 gives excellent results, even though I use a Nikon D200 nowadays. Upgrading to a D3 is perhaps more sense if you can justify the money. The live view is indeed a good feature and the dust redution feature should be pretty useful, especially if you change your lens often. With the advent of live view a flippable lcd is the next logical step so that one can take pictures from odd angles (e.g. overhead or ground level) without excessive contortion or soiling your clothes. The acid test is of course picture quality and noise which one cant tell just yet.

Rant? I thought I was being pretty mild. Not to go to crazy..but I have taken great pics with the D200...but the noise is an issue...above 400 is a fact...you can see the noise...oh wel...no big deal in the larger view of life.

I beg to differ on the issue of noise on the D200. I have taken photos up to ISO 3200, and I was pleased with my results. Up to ISO 800 noise is not an issue while at 1600 up to 3200 noise can be seen but still gets you a usable picture. If you're expecting ISO 1600 to look like ISO 100 then you will be disappointed. The new models, I expect, offer quite an improvement on this especially the D3 with it's much larger photosites, but that's at a premium of over $4000 above my D200. I do however drool about the new LCD and the live view with auto focus(not like the canon gimic of the 40D).

I put my name on a list while rumors were still flying - and before the D300 was even announced. (some rumors were pretty darn accurate - and some were more than rumors)

I am looking forward to a smaller light weight 12 meg camera with 14 bit and less noise than my old D2x - AND with a 100% viewfinder. I suspect we will see an increase in DR as well as a decrease in noise. The sensor cleaning, 3" viewer, etc are also nice features.

Thanks Bob (and Ellis for his contribution). This camera will likely surpass the enormously popular D200 in terms of sales.

This contest between Canon, Nikon, Sony, and others is sure fun to watch! We all win.

I'm not so sure Tom is all that far off wrt noise issues. It largely depends on what you are making images for. If it's for salon night down at the community centre then even noise from a D70 is acceptable.

But if you are trying to get your images approved by professional magazine photo editors or stock inspectors - well, then noise issues are a major concern.

IMO Nikon makes fantastic physical cameras - better and more user-friendly than Canon. But the Sony sensors they have used so far suck donkey gonads - well they do in comparison to the seemingly noise-free Canon sensors.

In a way I've already moved away from Nikon with a Fuji S3 and I'd happily get an S5 if it was on the "Getty list". Even with questions around "interpolation" and the write speed of a drunk turtle, the "old" S3 kills anything Nikon has produced in terms of sensor noise.

Now very late to the full frame party the D3 will probably prove to be an entirely different beast altogher. Is it true that's a non-Sony/Nikon only FF sensor (yay)?

I like the look of the D300, but can't help thinking a D300 with a FF sensor would have been (much!) better.

Watch this space in 6 months for so after the initial rush to buy the D3?

For day to day photography and the majority of subjects I think you will find that Canon and Nikon perform closer to each other than everybody makes out, in my experience the 20d/30d show more aliasing than their direct Nikon counterparts. This is however virtually impossible to distinguish to the naked eye until you get to very big enlargements.

For those really worried about noise issues, simple solution is to get a FF DSLR. Again, to reiterate, if you are shooting at high ISO you are still better investing in super fast lenses than bodies. At least these will outlive any current DSLR.

Hey, sure - there is not much difference between them. I'm convinced the average user can't even see noise anyway because you actually need to point it out to most people.

But professional image reviewers and editors can - and rejections due to noise cost both time and money.

Canon users have access to good camera bodies at affordable prices and absolutely great FF bodies like the now "old" 5D. Nikon still does not have an answer to 5D quality and affordability.

As good as the D300 will no doubt prove to be from a camera perspective - why do I still get the feeling there is a good chance it will have more noise than my aging S3?

IMO somewhere along the line Nikon went wrong trying to rely on someone else making good sensors for their great cameras. Hopefully the D3 is the start of great things to come. (Like fire Sony's arse and start making your own sensors which can compete with Canon.)

Could someone explain how you get ISO 100 on the D300? I've been waiting for quite a while to purchase a "prosumer" camera like Canon or Nikon at a reasonable price tag. But I don't feel comfortable with the ISO settings at a 200 ISO minimum. That makes me worry about noise (grain).

THANKS!

Could someone explain how you get ISO 100 on the D300? I've been waiting for quite a while to purchase a "prosumer" camera like Canon or Nikon at a reasonable price tag. But I don't feel comfortable with the ISO settings at a 200 ISO minimum. That makes me worry about noise (grain).

THANKS!

Yeah sure, ISO 100 is achieved in the D300s extended sensitivities.. probably marked as Lo in viewfinder and rear LCD. I thought Nikon may have got down to ISO 50 on the D300, always a nice option for longer exposures...

Apparently pushing a Canon 5D to an extended 50 ISO actually increases noise from it's standard 100 ISO.

If this is true then it may be found that pushing a D300 down to 100 ISO may have a similar result.

I haven't seen much of a difference in noise levels from ISO 100-200 on the D200. Still, I shoot at ISO 100 as well when I don't need the extra speed...force of habit I guess. It will be interesting to see whether the CMOS sensor will reduce noise in any way at the higher ISO settings. --Andrew Andrew Prokos Photography

I have had my D200 for one year now and shoot 100 99% of the time. I would say that noise can never be low enough no matter who makes the camera, CCD or CMOS... I will get a D300 after the dust settles (along with the price) if the noise is lower. All of the other changes (12MP included) are just icing on the cake. Although I will also be SO happy to have 51 AF spots since I use a tripod 99% of the time...

the new cmos sensor in the d300 plus the high sensitivity enhancements should solve the noise problems most people face with the d200.

Nikon finally understood that cmos was the way to go !

Two samples of D300 are available here: http://www.nikon-image.com/jpn/products/camera/slr/digital/d300/sample.htm

At 200 ISO and in perfect studio lighting conditions the camera's noise performance looks exceptional. At 100% I can't see any noise in the dark areas at all. Then again, I can't see any noise at 200% or 400% either - just pixels in the end - no noisy bits.

Is this too good to be true? The images do seem to be just a little soft - so maybe there is some minor processing going on in there to reduce noise a fraction.

Whatever! Those look like great results from a jpeg fine setting on a 12mp APS sized sensor. If someone said these were images from the new D3, or swapped out the exif from a 5D, I'd believe them.

It's probably due to the controlled studio environment (f14 & f16) but they actually look more convincing than some of the 200 ISO D3 samples located on the next page here:

http://www.nikon-image.com/jpn/products/camera/slr/digital/d3/sample.htm

The good news is that they have a range of image ISOs here - not just 200. That 6400 iso looks like it will be a revelation for the news guys.

I don't know what you guys think but I'd have prefered to see at least one image at about f8 to try and get a better handle on overall D3 image clarity.

Obviously they have chosen scenarios where noise it typically a problem and maybe they chose low DOF to show how the D3 will handle that blurrly noise which tends to occur in out-of-focus areas of an image.

But it would be nice to see what the D3 can do on a level surface at full gallop.

IMO - Both look good. If the D300 can keep noise levels stock-usable at 400 to 800 iso, I'd be happy to buy one.

Great comments....now that I've heard it all...I'm headin over to eBay to get me a D2Xs in November...coz I seriously think that when the D300 and D3 hit the market, the price for the D2Xs will go down...any opinion?
-Naveen

This camera is going to be awesome. To get the most use out of it the quickest, I recommend getting the training videos from Elite Video that will be coming out in October. They have videos on lots of different cameras that have really helped me in the past. Check it out www.elitevideo.com

Hey kiddos, can't we all just chill out and have a good time talking about the awesomeness of this new camera? No matter your opinion on it, it is a majical feat of electronic engineering, a spectacle that would impress even the aliens. I mean, really... a live view SLR that takes HD video. I don't think I would ever want to do anything else. The wife would get lonely and go looking, and I don't think I'd mind. The incredibleness of this fine craft is overwhelming. SOOO.... if it doesn't please you to the nth degree, GO AWAY! Deal with it. Go get an old nikkormat manual camera and try taking video... but for the rest of us, it's pretty fackin cool.

When doing Canon vs Nikon comparison, for example 40D vs D300, it's worth looking deeper than the published specs and feature lists. There are some significant differences that can be discovered only after trying both units or at least reading into paper manuals and/or menus. I spotted several such things:

1) ability to save and recall custom sets of primary shooting parameters (WB, ISO, Exposure, Focus mode, Focus Area, Metering mode etc.);

2) double bracketing (WB x Exposure);

3) semi- or fully automatic modes (scene modes);

4) country of assembly.

Anybody found anything else?

If you are worried about noise, then step up to the FX D3. With Nikon's new, large sensor, there is no excuse to complain about noise with a weenie sized sensor . . . Start saving . . .

I found that the biggest noise issue I have is when shooting in RAW and exposures below 1/30.

Recently I used the Canon 400D (XTi for the Americans), and it gave HORRIBLE, and I mean HORRIBLE noise. It was unusable. It was ugly, it was horrid.

And even more, some of the darker shades (the ones that are not 100% back) were interpolating and had horrible CA.

I tried shooting some long exposures using a Nikon D50 (and the D70/s and the D80), and I found that they performed much better in terms of noise. Even with noise reduction on, the Nikon images were sharper and cleaner.

At ISOs higher that 400 I have never come across an issue with noise. With the D50, I shot a studio photo at ISO 200, and blew it up to 36 by 29 inches, and it was pretty sharp with NO NOISE, even when done with a crummy kit lens.

I think Nikon have got it right when it comes to noise and what not. And hopefully these (D300 and D3) additions will give Canon a run for their money.

Should be interesting to see how the events transpire. I know I put my camera-buying desires on hold once they announced these two babies. Not a fan of Canon.

personally I dont see the advance over a full frame allternative.

Now that's noisy! ISO 3200, no wonder

I was at PDNs Photo Expo today and got the chance to see sports photographer Dave Black review the D3, where he showed off images shot in the worst of lighting conditions using ISO 3200 and 6400 and relying only on available light. Drumroll...absolutely NO noise. Nothing. Image after image, in low-lit gymnasiums, basketball courts, night time football games, the works. He even shot wake surfers (kind of like water skiing) showing off their tricks, AFTER sundown and with no flash. It was unbelievable.

If the D300 borrows some tech from the D3, and with the CMOS ff sensor, I pray this is one feature that is adopted. As a wedding photographer, I cannot tolerate even moderate noise from the D200 (it starts getting annoying after 640).

yes rubber coating on my d200 started peeling off after 18 months. in exactly same place as my old f90 did. never mind full frame sensors nikon needs to put some r&d into adhesives! didnt stop some thief in northern spain making off with my full kit laptop & all

after 30 years with Nikon, I am ready to switch to Canon. I was very disappointed with the D200. noisy, poor autofocus and short battery life. The price difference between the D3 and the D300 is bizarre, and its their way of saying the 300 is inferior. Nikon 18-200 vr was a very poor lens i found, and again the step up pricing difference to quality is enormous. I find Nikon's competition to Canon similar to Apple's competition with the PC. Canon gives more bang for the buck, with better service and customer care

I've been shooting with D 50 with nice results all the way to 1600, but then again I'm not a pro, bought 18-200 in April, have to send it for AF not working on the 4th of this month and haven't seen it back, now I now why. I guess Nikon dwell so much on customer loyalty than excellent quality/ service, let me think twice to upgrade !

To Nick David's comment about HD video from the D300 - the HD that is spec'd is for still photo output to a HD video monitor or HD TV. The D300 doesn't take motion-video as I understand it.

What about the wireless control, does it work? I have not been able to get my WT3 to work with my D200 and MS Vista. (and I have used the latest software patches). Nikon support for issues such as this is extremely poor. How I love my old Nikon F2 purchased in the early 1970's and still going well despite over 100,000 exposures. I wonder if my D200 will last 30 years and 100,000 exposures - I doubt it will last 6 years before it becomes to expensive to fix and parts are not available.

I must admit that I'm committed to Nikon, not least because of the amount of kit I've acquired over the last 40 years, of which I was pro for 20 or so - mainly amateur now. Been using D200 for over a year and it's met all my needs. Mainly use 100 or 200 iso with old 300F4AF - no relevant noise for A3 prints. Also use an ancient 500 Reflex at 800 iso, which needs work in CaptureNX before printing. The 18-200 is a little soft compared to the 'old' lenses, but software makes it acceptable. Overall, I think the D200 is a great camera - but I'll buy the D300 for the CMOS and AF/tracking - these days most of my work is aviation and those features will be a big improvement, I think. Have to confess, though, that when things get really awkward I still reach for the old FG and Weston5! Never got on with Canon - always felt fragile to me!

I must admit that I'm committed to Nikon, not least because of the amount of kit I've acquired over the last 40 years, of which I was pro for 20 or so - mainly amateur now. Been using D200 for over a year and it's met all my needs. Mainly use 100 or 200 iso with old 300F4AF - no relevant noise for A3 prints. Also use an ancient 500 Reflex at 800 iso, which needs work in CaptureNX before printing. The 18-200 is a little soft compared to the 'old' lenses, but software makes it acceptable. Overall, I think the D200 is a great camera - but I'll buy the D300 for the CMOS and AF/tracking - these days most of my work is aviation and those features will be a big improvement, I think. Have to confess, though, that when things get really awkward I still reach for the old FG and Weston5! Never got on with Canon - always felt fragile to me!

My first DSLR was the D80, which I bought only a year ago. My first year in photography has been pretty successful - so I thought I would get a D300 as a present to myself. I will keep my lenses and just sell the D80 body.

I was getting horribly frustrated with my 30D and the lack of color and depth that came out of the camera in every mode. I was tired of all the photoshop and the crappy ergonomics. I've always felt Nikon lenses and ergo was a million times better but couldn't do the noise...after seeing the release for the d300 and d3, I took a risk that the high iso ratings meant they would be better on noise in the 800-1600 range and sold the 30D and over $2000 worth of lenses and purchased a few nikkors and an F100 (basically to get the highest value for the 30D before the market flooded after the release of the 40D).

Now seeing what the d300 can do, I'm not disappointed...I can't wait for this one to come out.

any video reviews on the d300....?

The comments about noise and Nikon is somewhat confusing to me in every review of Canon and Nikon by Pop Photo they call the Nikon the better of the two rating noise. Are their tests bogus? I own a D200 and shoot a lot of low light, I get noise but then remember film? I used to shoot Fujipress 1600 and at rated speed it was grainier than my D200 at 1600. Get over it guys the manufacturers are doing a great job. Things have gotten better phenomenally fast. These cameras are all damn good. Now get out there and take some great photos. We get so hung up on gear but it is mostly about us. And listen I've shot Nikon for decades but once I just had to sell the lot and buy Canon. It cost me a bundle to get back into Nikon. If you shoot Canon my advice would be to stay there and the same for the Nikon guys. These are good machines. Thanks, GreggB

Noise is grain, i remember film iso 400 , 800 At least now you can run the file through noise ninja

I heard at Helix in Chicago last weekend that Nikon is going to debut a "Full Frame" D300 shortly after the D300 comes out. I was told to wait on the purchase of the D300 for a full frame version.

Also, Nikon is going to bring out a 21=22 meg camera to compete with Canon's 1Ds Mark III Next year at $1000.00 less than Canon's.

Comments please...

For me the D300 and their new full frame flag ship came too late as I made the move over to Canon about eighteen months ago; a move I have no regrets of doing. It will be interesting to see if Nikon have finally awoken from their coma and to see if they will start giving Canon some real competition once again; this will only help us the consumer.

If you want to know what can be done with just a D50, go to my site. Noise is not much of a problem with me.

Cheers!

Has anyone heard anymore about a 'full frame' D300? Is that just a rumor?

Mike

I just brought the Canon 40D and I had the 10D before which I enjoyed taking with me for a trip. I don't have time to test the 40D yet but I like the rugged body and large LCD, and they are "Made in Japan". I may tempt to buy the Nikon D300 for I belive Nikon has made a lots of improvements or changes in this camera, especially 51 focue points, better LCD display (922000 pixels compared to D40 230000 pixels, WOW), Active D-Lighting, etc

Wow. Thats all I can truly say without blinking. This camera is a monster powerhouse that is built like tank and has as many features as one could possibly need. The image quality is superior - I can shoot up to 3200 ISO without any significant noise issues. Colors flow beautifully as well.

This is NOT an noobie SLR camera - it has a steep learning curve attached to it. You need a lot of patience and skill to get all the setting working perfectly. However - saying that it is the nature of this beast... so do your homework. Here is a little help: Nikon D300 video reviews

Just wished the price could come down a little...

I've had my D300 for a week now and all I can say is "INCREDIBLE" ! This is one heck of a camera, the feature list is one gigantic "WOW". The learning curve as Junce has stated is a little steep but if your coming up from say a D70-,80 or D200 it's not that bad since the menu system is pretty much on the same lines with just a LOT more added to it, but after 7 days of toying with it and reading the 400+ page manual (which is MUCH better then Nikon's manuals of past) things start falling into place pretty quickly. Images are sharp & full of color and even the Auto white balance setting is right on the money. The focus system is incredible but takes some getting used to finding out which level to choose from for certain situations. Low light shooting at ISO 1200-3200 is spot on with little to no noise. Shutter speed is blazing even without the additional battery grip. It's built like a tank and once in your hand you know you have a quality built product in your mitts. Overall I'm VERY happy with it even though the price is a bit steep. If your upgrading from a D70-D80 or even D200 your stepping into a whole new monster that is sure to please !

I have a D300 on the way as I speak (currently used a D100. Earlier I considered the D200 and Canon and Pentax digitals. Although the D300 is a little spendy, I'm glad I waited for it, if the reviews I have read are accurate. And pricewise, in 1968 I spent somewhere between $300 and $400 for a Nikon Ftn, which would be in the same range as the D300 in today's dollars, I think

Used Canon film cameras for 30 years and they were great. With digital, started with Nikon and will stay there. Am getting my new D300 next week. Canon's 40D does not compare. A friend who had a Nikon D200, sold it, bought a new D300 and a week later bought the D3. The photos from both just blow you away. As for service..my experience with Canon over 30 years was they were worse than bad. Need a repair on my Nikon digital. Called Nikon in Calif. and they told me they would turn it around in 7 days of it arriving. They did..for me, their service is vastly better than Canon.