Hi
Thanks for the name drop
if I could weigh in a bit here... there's some good advice and some not so good (in my experience and that's all I can draw from).
Is there a Canon/ Nikon look? In my experience yes
there definitely is - BUT only if you are leaving the camera to process your shots and not really doing anything in PP, as someone else mentioned if you shoot raw its very possible to tweak them so they look the same.
Is the D300 holding you back? Maybe... but only if your issue is with focus accuracy, ISO noise and/or cropping potential.
A few people commented you weren't comparing apples to apples with the 5D3 comparison - here's a couple of 40D shots with a Sigma 100-400 f4 (apples to apples)
The D300 was released in about 2007, if memory serves, so you'd have to draw a comparison with the Canon 40D and I doubt you'd notice any difference in IQ from both.
2 by
Jonny Henchman, on Flickr
Tom Kristensen - Audi Sport Team Joest by
Jonny Henchman, on Flickr
As a few others mentioned, the biggest benefits I found when upgrading from the 40D to the FF 5D3 were much much better Focus accuracy, better noise management and improved detail resolution (night and day compared to the 40D).
Do Canon have an advantage when it comes to focus accuracy? They do in my experience (5D3 vs D800) - a mate of mine shoots with a d800 and the 300mm f2.8 where as I use a 5D3 and a 400mm
f5.6 (not a 2.8 as someone else said and way way cheaper than the nikon 300)
It probably should be noted that this issue looks to me like miscalibration of the equipment rather than all out focus accuracy thing - his shots generally look a little soft, this could come down to lots of factors to be fair and you could probably argue it to the end of time (higher pixel density, focus accuracy, tc quality, optical quality blah blah blah)... he also has little use for PP so his image will be closer to in camera than mine, but it's an interesting comparison none the less. This is not an issue isolated just to my friend though, I see numerous examples of this phenomenon on Flickr.
D800 + 300 f2.8 + Nikon 1.4x
5D3 + 400mm f5.6 + Sigma 1.4x
I shoot raw - I have to process images, there is no option or everything looks flat - the 5D3 jpegs all suffer from base level processing that cannot be avoided and this reduces sharpness.
That said there are plenty of Nikon shooters out there that consistently deliver great images - so there is more to this story. What I can say is that I would much prefer to have my equipment in comparison to that of my friend, the IQ is better and focus is more accurate.
TBH the processing of the first set is not to my taste, the shadows look to have been lifted quite a lot giving an almost HDR look.
HOW VERY DARE YOU! YOU SHOULD CALIBRATE YOUR MONITOR - haha only kidding, it's all subjective, I process to give the look I want and generally it seems to go down well
What would I recommend you do? Well, I certainly wouldn't recommend switching systems without trying new equipment from your current supplier. You would probably see a similar jump moving to one of the new Nikon FF, just as I did going from the 40D to the 5D iii... that's not to say it will make you a better photographer but it will help you take sharp photos more consistently (thats all) - looking at your shots, as I think I suggested in your post for crit - shooting position will help your images more than any other factor..... too much grey, not the most interesting angles (not to say they are bad - just cutting to the chase on how to improve).
As everyone has said, better glass will also help - but a new body will give you the biggest bang for your buck given the age of your current equipment, people aren't wrong that glass makes a big difference... some of my other friends use mid level camera equipment with my L 70-200 ii and their bodies cannot make the most of it. Motorsport really really really really benefits from fast accurate focus (yes you can manual - but lets face it, it's just not as reliable), you need a body capable of doing the lens justice.
And try this tutorial with my included raw file - you'll get a better idea of what im doing in process and the IQ out of camera - you can ignore the second part which is about manipulation
Motorsport Processing Guide
A note to the people say avoid cropping There is no choice, you are hugely reach limited at Silverstone (600mm on FF is still not enough to fill the frame at a lot of spots, especially with bikes) - it's not feasible to recommend a £5000+ lens to get closer to the subject, a decent body with a helpful resolution of 20MP+ is much more cost effective if you are on a budget with the option of a crop, you are hindered by the 12.3 mp res of the D300, this is a fact... MP do matter for this sort of stuff, there is no question! I'd much rather spend money on a body that I can use for everything than a giant lens I can only use for a few specific things - most of us cannot warrant the investment on something so niche.
Technical review (in my opinion) of a couple of your shots
Bautista2 by
Mark P, on Flickr
Sharp for the most part - some motion blur in rider - would be corrected by upping the SS slightly. Noise/grain - would be improved with upgrade to FF. Fine detail - would be improved with more resolution. IQ would benefit from better glass some aberrations present. Bottom line - if this was shot in raw, used a slightly faster SS and processed sensitively, gains would be very marginal from an upgrade
at this image size.
Marc by
Mark P, on Flickr
Sharp - no improvement in this respect from upgrade. Angle - not helping the image. Colours - look washed out - easily fixed with minimal processing. Upgrade would provide a bigger, less noisey image with more detail - but at this size
gains would be marginal
jorge3 by
Mark P, on Flickr
Not in focus - just a question technique and focus accuracy.
Having looked through your images in more detail, I can say your biggest technical obstacle is a lack of resolution which is forcing you to operate at maximum crop - all my images are slightly downsampled but FF definitely provides a cleaner image at 100% view. Your lens's shortcomings may well become more apparent on bodies operating with higher resolutions but if you are happy with images of this size it appears to be working fine as it is. A longer better quality lens will get you closer and fill the frame more, but you will still be restricted by the MP count of your body... filling the frame is not always what you want either, often its better to include more of the background and still have fine detail in the subject - A higher MP FF option will give you much more flexibility in that sense.
