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.
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.