According to them there's no real improvement in image quality over the D300 ! Same everything just video.
1st D300S Review(31 posts) (11 voices)
hey theres a glaring mistake in the review; they state: 'The D300S is the first Nikon to allow you to configure Active D-Lighting', forgetting that you can do that in the D90 (and maybe others?)
If the review was true then it should be quite a quick camera.
I find it weird that the reviewers called the D300S cheap over and over again. The D90 is even cheaper and there's no reference to it.
Had a look at the Japanese review with the sample images comparing the D300 and the D300S. IQ is very similar but at high ISO the D300S does have a small(very small) edge. but its so small that its probably not significant. As I see it the differences to consider are.
1) Tiny improvement in High ISO performance.
2) Significant 51 autofocus improvement - Great for sports shooters. Probably better CPU and Firmware. That could explain the extra FPS.
3) Extra ADL setting - Great for Wedding photographers.
4) Extra Memory slot - Great for Wedding Photographers - for security.
5) Oh yes .. almost forgot.. Video.. ;-)
and its Cheap ! ;-)
Heartyfisher can you post the link to the review you read please?
I was going to buy the D300 for the ability to meter with manual AIS lenses and the new PC lenses, now I'll get the D300s. The D300 isn't readily available anymore and the extra memory slot alone is worth something.
I'm already extremely happy with my D90's image quality, so anything that makes it better is frosting on the cake for me.
NSXType-R - as for the camera You get it has a really reasonable price, I wouldn't mind if You could buy it for even less, but still Nikon made a good decision of not jumping with the price, as with some other cameras in the past
Adamz, I think the D300s is only $100 more expensive than the D300 right?
In a way, I don't think the new features are worth $100, but who knows? I don't need a pro body.
I see it in a sense where the D70 was upgraded when it went to the D80. I don't remember that far back, but I don't think it was all the changes were all that extensive. Once we get past the D300s, the next body that comes up it probably will be significantly better, like the D90 is to the D80.
As a wedding tog one of things that interests me with the D300s is the quiet shutter mode. I've seen very little said about it though. Does anyone know if it's any good?? I'm wondering if it will allow me to shoot through the service without winding up the priest!
Hey Ryan I linked to the actual shutter sound in a previous post. Not totally silent.
Nice pictures on your website. I'd love to hear more about your thoughts on stuff around here.
Thanks NikoDoby - that's really kind of you. I read Nikon Rumours most days and am always keen on what's coming....
To be honest my big decision at the moment is D3x or wait. I love my 700's but sometimes the ability to crop heavy is nice and with all those extra pixels I could really be brutal with my cropping. That's the thing with weddings - a perfect opportunity may present itself but getting the framing spot on is hit and miss - even assuming you have the ideal lens on the camera in the first place.
Perhaps the rumoured D700x is worth the wait? In the meantime (after upsetting a vicar on Saturday) I'll go check out your link to the D300s shutter noise.
Anytime Ryan !!! I'd definitely hold off on a D3X at least until we know more about the D700 replacement or upgrade. In the meantime perhaps you can rent one and see how the D3X fits for you.
And definitely don't upset anymore vicar's Ryan ... you want them on your side ;^)
Hi Niko , Here you go .. http://www.1001noisycameras.com/2009/08/nikon-d300s-sample-pictures-and-review-from-japan.html
Ryan .. Maybe next time don't use a 12-24 and stand further back ?? and that bowl of water is not for washing your hands in.. 8-) .. Nice photos BTW.
What's the bowl for? Drinking basin for birds? How thoughtful of them :)
i think this is a no-brainer for anyone that wants to upgrade from a D90/D200 simply because. . .well, the D300 has been phased out, no?
I think the extra $100 (vs. D300) is worth it for the following reasons alone:
1. Dual CF/SD slot - more storage, RAID backup, etc. PERFECT for the field. And those of us with tons of SD cards from previous non-CF dslrs.
2. Updated AF to work with specific lenses (apparently Nikon optimized the AF for their specific lenses? confirm this someone?)
3. Faster AF - if you have ever used a D300 before, it takes "a few seconds" to read the scene and "highlight" what it considers are AF points (under the auto-AF setting, 3D AF or whatever). . .this is VERY important for even photography!
4. Better button layout - I hate the AF selection dial on the current D200/D300 - new one with a little button in the middle is MUCH WELCOMED!
I'm still mastering my D200, so it's not worth an upgrade for me, BUT, a good mid-cycle enhancement. . .
Has anybody quantified how much faster the AF is? All I ever see is that its faster. Is it noticeable?
What I gather is that its only when it is in the FULL 51 point autofocus mode that the D300 slows down. If you are in any of the other modes its quick. What I gather is there are 2 aspects of this slowness. First is that on initial startup in that 51 point mode, it takes a second or so before the autofoucs locks on. Secondly, the point chosen for autofucus moves about following the "action" in a "squishy" way .. ie there is a slight delay in selecting the point as it tries to work out the point to choose. For really fast action photographers this mode is probably not usable. They would simply have to change to some other mode to keep up with the action I am sure thats what most have been doing. Or just accept that they need the D3 or D700 which has no such problem keeping up with the action.( good excuse to get the High ISO sensor too!). The D300S reviews say that its now just as snappy as the D700. For my kind of photography .. There is really no difference.. I don't shoot sports and if I did I would just use a different auto focus mode. ( no big deal really! )
I agree with you heartyfisher except that I think the D300 focus is pretty good as is but I'm sure it's been tweaked in the D300S. It would be nice if it's "D700 fast".
Have you tried using any of canon's AF systems? I really don't like them. I was very disappointed (or actually relieved) that the 5DmkII didn't improve much over the 5Dmk1 in regards to auto focus. Even the lower end canon models are "sluggish" when compared to the Nikon equivalent. At least that's been my experience. The only canon AF I enjoyed was the 1DmkIIn.
So with that in mind I think the D300S should be just fine.
Guys, sooner or later we all gonna see how quiet and snappy it is. Actually, can't wait to see it in my own hands.
I actually am looking forward to see the D3000 and D300s review on DPreview, I'd like to see how much picture quality might have been improved from their predecessors.
By the way, is the D300s usable with SD cards only?
Also, I am intrigued by their usage of the 16-85 as the kit lens. It really is that good huh? I think they made a mistake there, at 85mm I think it should be 4.5, not 5.6.
NSX the D300S has one SD slot and one CF slot.
Then that's quite awesome. I can use my 8 gig SDHC card and not need to worry about running out and getting a Compact Flash immediately. :D
I think Nikon is just preparing photographers for the switch over to SD/SDHC only slots in their next generation DXXX camera.
I certainly understand SD/SDHC is smaller, but I don't think it will replace compact flash. Too many pros have invested in compact flash, abandoning the pros would be a mistake. Making it their choice (although taking up some extra space with the extra slot) is a good idea.
Besides, compact flash is more stable, no?
I had a drawer full of iomega zip disk once and they were THE standard back in the day. Then little thumb drives ruined the party :^)
Adapt to the new tech or go home with your atari.
You must log in to post.