Nikon D300S or D2Xs - Any owners? What think?

paulcamcas

paulcamcas

Messages
2,462
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
I've sold up my Canon gear to go Leica but I'm finding that to be a minefield fraught with uncertainty and expense. So my mind has turned to Nikon instead. I'm very much a generalist with a penchant for people shots.

I'm tempted to try a D300S with a couple of primes, what has been your experience? Or would a D2Xs be a good choice?
 
Last edited:
I love my D300s to bits and have been pleased with it but I really want to go full frame and considering you've thought about going to Leica no doubt you really want the absolute top quality that a full frame camera with primes will give over a crop sensor.

The D300s handles very nicely especially gripped, controls are fast and easily accessed too.
 
Yes, IQ and simplicity was my aim but wow, the cost is shocking. Agree about FF - my recently departed Canon was a 5D2 but unfortunately that needs L glass and lots of £££s. I was thinking that saving a bit on the dx body would give more money for lenses. And there's all those Nikon mf lenses out there too.
 
i have a d2xs and d300(not s) and a d200 and find them to all be very very good all rounders from glamour to landscape the nikon menus are a cinch to use once you have got used to them the 300/200 need to be gripped imo as for my hands they are a bit small and feel unballanced with heavy lenses if you dont need video look at a used d300 as its more upto date than the d2xs ....that being said the first camera i usually pick up is the d2 probably as i have had it longer and it just feels like an old friend
 
Thanks Grudie. How is the IQ of the D2Xs vs the D300? I don't need video but I do like the feel of a big pro camera.

Thanks also Chivers. The D300s certainly seems to need a grip.
 
Last edited:
paulcamcas said:
Thanks Grudie. How is the IQ of the D2Xs vs the D300? I don't need video but I do like the feel of a big pro camera.
Click to expand...

Check out Thom Hogan's reviews of the D300s and the D2xs - very concise, informative and balanced reviews that give good insight into two very good bodies. Of course, the D2 review is much older so that has to be taken into account but I'm sure (haven't skimmed it for a while) that the D300 review refers to previous models to help 'place' it in the hierarchy :). Also, remember that the D300 review pretty kuch tells all the story relating to the D300s, albeit without mention of the HD video function, the twin card slots and a few other tweaks. I think (don't quote me on this) that AF and sensor performance remains unchanged from the D300 to the D300s.

Going by the quote above about liking bigger camera bodies, the D300s will never beat the D2 series IMO. Without a grip the D300 is good but doesn't quite feel 'right' when you have big glass attached. With the grip fitted it stands taller than the D2, and although it has some controls on the grip, it's not perfect unless you have proper long fingers. I have big old hands and even I struggle with my mate's gripped D300 and I know my old gripped D200 was the same size, albeit without the additional controls on the grip.

The ergonomics of the D2 design is often touted as being the best there has been on modern DSLRs, although that's generally coming from Nikonites and not unbiased sources :) As an everyday tool to use yes, it's big and heavy (probably the same as your old 5D with grip) but it's a weight that helps you control big lenses and steady the yips when shooting at low shutter speeds. Controls and menus are brilliant and for £500 - £600 I still feel it's a great buy, although the D2x is effectively the same camera when you apply the firmware upgrade, albeit without the built-in high speed crop mask and a change to the look of the menu. Thom's review tells you more about that....

In realworld use, I find that correct exposure, as with any camera, will help you get more from the sensor; plenty of folk on TP pooh-pooh the D2x/xs as being rubbish above ISO400 - that's rot! I regularly use mine at ISOs 800 and Hi1 (1600 equivalent) and providing the exposure is good (and you use half-decent software like LR3) the images look great. Problems arise when you shoot at 1600/3200 and underexpose by two stops and try to recover it back.... it's a dangerous game to play with important shots because you just uncover too much noise in the shadows. But that's pretty much the case on the majority of 'normal' (not D3/1D/D700) cameras I feel.

In the studio the ISO 100 setting is perfect and as good as the 5D2; I think the D300 has a native base ISO of 200 so that's where the older camera has an advantage. Mine generally shoots on ISO200 or 400 outdoors and aside from +10 NR in LR3, images are good SOOC.

From what i've seen from the D300 with my own eyes and from reading reviews, the D300 sensor edges it at ISO800 and is better at high settings in terms of overall noise. AF is obviously more extensive with 51-points and the bigger screen is nice.

Both focus brilliantly with AF-D and AF-S lenses - there's no split really.
 
Last edited:
IMO unless you need the build quality, the newer tech of the D300 trumps the D2Xs. Better LCD, better high ISO, more AF points, AF adjust...better all round, apart from build, which it's still no slouch in.
 
the d300 has the edge but upto a3 with good glass you really would have to be a pixel peeper the d300 is better at higher iso the d2x(s) feel like a pro out of the box and have the advantace of a secondary lcd plus controls at the bottom the d300 really needs a grip for balance grays have a d2xs with 3k shutter actustions for 995 and a if i remember a cpl of d300`s for around 800 so with a grip for about 200 (nikon used) or 60ish for 3rd party and a battery there is not much in price ......d2xs are getting harder to get used now but the older d2x is quite easy to pick up on flea bay :-( or grays have had quite a few go thru the website ..........either one would do you for a good few years if you dont need to keepup with changing trends/have the highest megapixels i have not considered changing my setup for a long time but add to it d200+d2xs+d300 if you get my drift with good glass you will not go wrong with either of the 2 you mentioned
 
Thanks Grudie. It was the D2Xs at Grays I had my eye on. Very tempting.
 
I'm a D300s user for about a year now and I love it. Fantastic to use and the IQ is brilliant, I rarely use the video but when I do its also very good. High ISO is good although some people say it isn't. As Pat mentioned higher up as long as you expose well on most cameras NR can get help you get great shots at high ISO's so don't let that put you off ;) Gripped the D300s is quite weighty but feels good in the hand although I understand its not as nice as a pro body to handle. I have a dying urge to buy a D2x/xs and have been eyeing them up for ages! Will be interested to see what you do :)
 
I've had both the D2Xs and the D300. The D300 performs better..but the D2Xs handles better. Personally, I was willing to sacrifice some IQ to benefit from the better handling/build quality - especially when shooting all day.
 
Tricky old business this. Thanks Specialman, Cheng,WP-UK and Smudgie. I still have no clue :)
 
Last edited:
I had a couple of D300 bodies once - didn't like them at all - too small - and didn't feel right with the grip either. You can't beat a full size pro body. The D2Xs is still an excellent camera - as is the D2Hs - both do a wonderful job. Grays had a nice D2Xs with only 95 clicks on it recently. Only I know where it is now. ;)
 
Last edited:
Thanks Andrew. How were Grays to deal with? They seem to have very good stuff. Do they stand by their used product if there are problems?
 
They were very prompt and friendly - the camera arrived with a duff battery - a very old one - but they changed that without question. The only thing that niggled was I allowed myself to be sold a sub to Nikon Owner - nice mag but pricey and it gets you an 18 month warranty on SH kit. I've bought from them before - not the cheapest but they are nice to deal with. I'd certainly think hard about that D2Xs they have it it were me - you'll love it.
 
Last edited:
Its very interesting thread. If it helps, I was in Grays the other day for the first time - very good service btw, even though they didn't know me at all I got very well treated with great patience and allowed to play with everything... Price-wise, apart from a few things, they are competitive for new gear but pricey on 2nd hand - but only stock minty not-even-enjoyed stuff.

Anyway, I was looking at lenses on a D3S - a D2x(s) is much the same I believe. Afterwards, for comparison and second body thoughts, I then handled a D300s - nice...smaller body...but still feels ok, and controls felt that they came to hand easily. Then a D7000 - took all of about 20 seconds to go "yuck" and hand it back - just on ergonomics. Better sensor and spec, certainly, but body....

The OP asked about a D300s with Primes - I think that would be perfectly balanced. A heavy zoom such as the 70-200 etc, you'd start to want a bigger body, and if you always have a grip on a D300/700 it would make more sense to get the D2x/D3 instead...
 
Last edited:
D2Xs is a crop body. D3 was Nikon's first FF body.
 
This is very interesting indeed and all advice much appreciated. What if I threw a D700 into the mix?

And, if I did go for one of the croppers, which prime(s) to start with 50mm f/1.4G AF-S? 24mm f/2.8D AF? 85mm f/1.4 D or G? 135mm F2 DC?

My favourite lens on the 5D2 was the 135mm f2L so maybe the 85 + 24 on the crop Nikon?
 
For me the D700 comes into the same category as the D300 - half a camera. I know a lot of people love them - but I much prefer a full sized body. I did look at the D700 - but for a few hundred more - you could get a low shutter count D3 second hand - a much better camera I feel. The D2Xs and D3 compliment each other nicely. If you prefer the small bodies then a D300/D700 combo might work - it jusy wouldn't for me.

Which lens - will depend on what you shoot.
 
I've always found the pro bodies too big and heavy, but mainly too big. Years ago I used to lust after the D2X as one does for the top of the range, ;) but when I got to actually hold one in my hand, my mind changed completely. :eek: I wouldn't have had one if you gave it me.

When the D300 came out it seemed better than the D2X in every way, and cheaper too. The D2X has the pro body, but the D300 is not exactly light weight and flimsy. ;)

I have the grip, and If I'm doing loads of pics in Portrait orientation I'll use it, but I don't find it comfortable. The built grip of the D2X seemed more comfortable, but for the odd change in orientation it's not a big thing for me.

With such a difference in body design, holding the camera will make the choice. If you want purely features and image quality, then the D300(S), if that body is uncomfortable, and the D2X is, then that is the one. :shrug: From now on only the full frame (FX) pro range will have the pro style bodies, so if you want that on a crop camera, the D2X is it unless you use a smaller camera with a grip. :shrug:
 
awp said:
You may be right - but that's just a guess - and I hope you're wrong.
Click to expand...

i hope so too as eventually my d2xs will need replacing and i dont want to move to f/f hopefully nikon should be aware of how many older pro cameras will be reaching the end of their life and reward us with a new one :)
perhaps i should buy the d2xs in grays before the op does :) !!! just in case
 
Last edited:
Well I bought the one they had last week with just 95 clicks (actually 92 clicks). I use the D3 but I still need the crop bodies for longer reach. They are getting harder to find though - so good luck.
 
i have to say i'm loving my D2XS so far & i'm not planning on changing it anytime soon :D
i think only a move to a D3 or D3S would make a logical progression as the smaller bodies just feel wrong to me now :puke:
 
So why are Nikon ignoring us? Shame really.
 
awp said:
So why are Nikon ignoring us? Shame really.
Click to expand...

Are they? who knows...won't be able to tell until they finally release their next generation of cameras - the D300s is still limping on due to better build than the D7000 but its not a D1/2/3 style body even gripped.

Although the cynic might suggest that Nikon is quite happy for sports/nature pro's to use FF cameras instead of DX, as they then sell 50% longer glass at SillyMoney(tm)...

p.s.
I see a number of D2x and D2xs for sale - considerably more than there are D3 and D3s... now if i could find one for under £500...
 
you'd get an old one for that price - another thing I DO NOT WANT VIDEO! modern cams seem to insist you do.
 
Have patience - I'd been looking for over 6 months for a good D2Xs - and then one came up at a bad moment - as I'd just upgraded my computers - but I thought - what the hell - it won't come up again. I have seen brand new ones on debay - but not often.
 
as far as i'm aware the main thing that the more modern cameras have (apart from video which personally i don't want from my stills camera) is much better high ISO performance. it seems like nowadays everybody wants to take pictures of fast moving subjects, in the dark!

the D2X & XS models were cameras designed in a time when photographers understood that photography is all about capturing light, and not darkness.

give these cameras some good light & they're still as good as anything else out there. plus people still rave about the skintones (y)
 
MindofMel said:
so would one see difference in image quality between a d300 and a d2xs at ISO 800?

at what ISO does the d300's newer sensor/ Image quality kick in?
Click to expand...

I've seen comparisons that show at ISO 800 the D300 is better than the d2x(s). Conversly, at 100, the D2x is better.
However, that's not high iso nowadays - if you are shooting in the dark, forget both of them, and get a D3(s), D700, or D7000.
 
I can show you pics with 4mpx D2Hs at 1250ISO where you couldn't believe it wasn't a D300/D3.
 
awp said:
I can show you pics with 4mpx D2Hs at 1250ISO where you couldn't believe it wasn't a D300/D3.
Click to expand...

Plus one on a much lesser scale withthe D50 - pared with 85mm what a cracker. Gives superb images even at 1600.
 
awp said:
I can show you pics with 4mpx D2Hs at 1250ISO where you couldn't believe it wasn't a D300/D3.
Click to expand...

Andrew, that camera of yours never ceases to amaze me at those higher ISOs, even to the point that I keep looking around for a cheapo battered one to just have as a play thing.

Also, you know better than anyone my feeling about the cessation of gripped DX bodies - we've talked many a time about it - and although the D3 and its successors appeal to me, especially the video function for doing web featurettes at work, the cost is just a massive hindrance, especially when I'm more than happy with what DX provides on my current bodies.

Speaking generally about the higher ISOs on the D2x, the point made earlier about them 'liking' light (as opposed to darkness) is bang on; expose correctly or do a bit of overexposure and you're fine at those high ISO numbers but underexpose and unless you go over images with a fine-toothed comb in powerful software, you can be left wanting. I'm not talking about a third stop of underexposure - a stop or even a stop and a half is manageable - but really push the sensor (two stops underexposure or more) and it can struggle. Don't know how the D300s figures in that scenario.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top