D2x versus D300 [Archive] - Talk Photography

fracster

14-11-2008, 15:05

Am I mad for thinking of purchasing a D2x over another 300?

Other than the price difference,what would be the other notable differences between the two,especially with regards to A/F?.....(the size and weight differences don`t bother me at all.)

People who have had both or still have both, your opinions would be much valued...:)

TIA

whitey

14-11-2008, 15:08

i am having the same thoughts at present so will watch this closely

Flash In The Pan

14-11-2008, 15:08

Just to confuse matters (as is my usual wont) if it's to be an second body what about an S5 Pro? Maybe not fast enough AF if it's for wildlife but nice for landscape work....

fracster

14-11-2008, 15:10

Just to confuse matters (as is my usual wont) if it's to be an second body what about an S5 Pro? Maybe not fast enough AF if it's for wildlife but nice for landscape work....

TBH Flash,my man, I keep the 200 for landscape, this would purely be for wildlife.

I do like the images from the S5 pro, but my wallet is not full at the moment........:)

Flash In The Pan

14-11-2008, 15:16

TBH Flash,my man, I keep the 200 for landscape, this would purely be for wildlife.

I do like the images from the S5 pro, but my wallet is not full at the moment........:)

You could have swapped straight from a used D200 to a new S5Pro a week or so back.....that's what I did - cost about a tenner to change :thumbs:

Remember the D2X is quite an old camera, if you must have a D2 then an Xs would be a better buy.

Here's a thread (http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/607804) elsewhere on exactly this topic....

fracster

14-11-2008, 15:22

Thanks for the link Flash, good read........:thumbs:

Monkey

14-11-2008, 16:12

personally id say the D300 is a much more technically advanced camera.

I know Ken rockwell can talk alot of ****, but this bit from his website i think is spot on

The Nikon D300 is the world's best amateur camera. Forget the old D2Xs, which sells used for about the same price today. The D2Xs is 2004 technology that predates the D200!

The Nikon D300 is far more revolutionary than its specifications suggest. It completely obsoletes everything that came before it, and especially sends the D200 and D2Xs to the dumpsters of digital history.

His words not mine

Flash In The Pan

14-11-2008, 16:37

That sounds good until you see his review of the 18-200mm

It's a miracle! I bought mine in November 2005 and love it. It's replaced an entire bag of lenses....... my 18-200mm VR is more than just a new lens. It's changed the way I live and make photos......the 18-200mm VR just became the world's best portrait lens........

:shrug:

puddleduck

14-11-2008, 16:48

Well for low ISO I much prefer the D2X for the D300.

If you want to keep below ISO200, the D2X has a lot to offer.

DiddyDave

14-11-2008, 16:49

I have the D2Xs and D300 - the latter for it's higher ISO use only

Rest of the time, it's the D2Xs I use still - if it could only take a decent shot at ISO 3200 I'd say it was perfect

But then they did that with the D3 didn't they! WHich would require a whole new set of lenses too - hence, the D300 won

DD

Monkey

14-11-2008, 17:19

That sounds good until you see his review of the 18-200mm

:shrug:

Unless you want sharp pictures, less distortion, and speed then its an excellent lens

fracster

14-11-2008, 21:18

Thanks Dave ,Puddle,Monkey type geezer and Flashybabes...........Keep it coming.

Monkey

14-11-2008, 22:54

i suppose there is arguments for either camera.

But based on what you do id say D300 all the way.

I cant think of anything on the D2x, thats not on the D200 you have that would be a benefit.

The D300 is by far the best camera ive ever owned.. When i sold the D200 i really hoped i wasnt spending £500 on an upgrade i would regret, and im so glad i did it now.

puddleduck

15-11-2008, 05:23

The D300 is by far the best camera ive ever owned..

How many cameras have you owned, and have you used the D2X?

I cant think of anything on the D2x, thats not on the D200 you have that would be a benefit.

This makes me think you've never used a D2X.... how about bigger and brighter viewfinder, amazing battery life, "+" autofocus points distributed at "rule of third" points, Nikon's best base ISO performance (better than even the D200), high speed crop mode (surprisingly useful if you shoot wildlife), some might argue the built in grip is an advantage too as a D2X is smaller than a D200 + grip, very strong in-body motor for non AF-S lens.

There are probably more..

BRASH

15-11-2008, 07:16

Dipstick, instead of spending all that money on that foreign muck. Send it to me, I could get a loada mealie puddins for that. Yum, yum. Good morning:D

I know sod all about Nikon, apart from Canon is better.;)

fracster

15-11-2008, 13:20

Cheers Brian, most helpful........:D

sprog

15-11-2008, 17:22

Would the D300 pass the Jay Kay headbutt test?...

wack61

15-11-2008, 17:43

Would the D300 pass the Jay Kay headbutt test?...

It'd make a good weapon to knock the **** out with

kalibre

15-11-2008, 18:48

Would the D300 pass the Jay Kay headbutt test?...

Dropped my D300 in Hong Kong and my 18-200 shot off in various pieces, but not a scratch on the body and everything still works hunky dory. That'll be that magnesium type stuff.....

(P.S Wouldn't recommend trying it though....)