2nd body d2x or d300? 1st body D2h

Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
1,334
Location
Naples, Fl
Here is my dilemma. I am a long time shooter of a D2H. I love it. AF speed, ergonomics, battery life, small files, nc 4.4 raw workflow.

I recently got a D2X in a bundle purchase. It had a dead battery syndrome and after 8 months of it sitting around unusable I finally sent it off for repair. They replaced the circuit board, and its back and in use. I used it on a recent vacation, and the camera feels good like the D2H etc and produces nice large files that I can use in capture 4.4 (I have cs3 but do nearly all processing in nc 4.4). But the files are so large, and slow, and the high iso is OK, but just Ok. The D2X actuations are in the upper 70K.

Well I've found a D300 that has less than 10K and seems to be an extremely good price - less than $900 (I know they will be dropping soon). This has got me thinking, should I switch out the D2X with the newer tech of the D300?

I think my D2H will still rule for most of my shooting (birds and sports) as i love the files size and quality so much. If I am going to have large files from a 12mp second body for other areas of interest (landscape) which should it be?

Should I keep the benefit of same battery, ergonomics, handling, and nc 4.4 processing with a D2X, or get the better LCD, greater dynamic range, better high iso of a D300? I think that if a higher mp camera is to replace my love of the D2H, the D300 might be a better contender for the additional qualities it brings. But the AF tracking has to be be as good as the D2H for sports and birds in flight.

I'd probably have been content with the D2X but this is intriguing me because I can buy the D300 for less than what I think I can sell the D2X.

So help me out.

BTW All the lenses I use are af-s; 18-70, 300 f4 and 400 f2.8 and 1.4x tc being for the majority of shots.

Cheers
wembley
 
M

Martin O

Guest
I was in the same dilemma when i should have a Dx body as second camera to my D3.
I bought the D2x because of the much better ergonomics and the much better view finder.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
1,334
Location
Naples, Fl
have you tried the d2x in crop mode for birds /sports etc?
granted its rubbish past iso 560, but at iso 100 i dont think there is a dslr that can beat it.
Simon:
Yes I used HSC quite a bit on vacation and also for a recent soccer match. I like that the files are only 6mp rather than 12mp so are quicker to work with.
One of the big pros of going to a D300 is useable images at high iso. Yes I can use images from the D2H and D2X at high iso too, but the significant improvement makes me think as a 2nd body I at least will have that improvement.

cheers
gavin
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
1,334
Location
Naples, Fl
I was in the same dilemma when i should have a Dx body as second camera to my D3.
I bought the D2x because of the much better ergonomics and the much better view finder.
Yes I think I'd have a d2x or d2h as a 2nd body for the d3 too. BUT, I don't have the high iso quality of a d3 and i think this is where the d300 will be better than a d2x as a 2nd body to a D2h particularly as the D2h and D2x are basically the same in regards to high iso capability.

cheers
gavin
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
1,334
Location
Naples, Fl
Less than $900 for a d300 used (less than 10k of shots) seems to be a very good price. Is it? I seem to have only found them selling used from $1050-$1250 range. That also seems to be the used D2X range in the last week on ebay.

cheers
wembley
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,507
If I am going to have large files from a 12mp second body for other areas of interest (landscape) which should it be?
For landscapes, I'd just keep the pro body D2x. It works great at ISO 100. I would only consider the D300 if you really need the higher ISO capability.

Good luck.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
1,334
Location
Naples, Fl
For landscapes, I'd just keep the pro body D2x. It works great at ISO 100. I would only consider the D300 if you really need the higher ISO capability.

Good luck.
True, I like the iso 100 images from the d2x. I think the higher iso advantages along with the abiltiy to print larger because of the 12mp puts the d300 ahead still.

Upon reflection I think ISO will be the main improvement I will be looking for over what I get from my d2h. I guess after ISO, AF speed (accuracy) is next to being important for me to be used shooting sports or birds in flight, so if the d300 AF is close to the D2X then I think that will be the route. I guess i see the d2x and d2h being basically the same except for the higher mp and lower native iso 100, and the d300 brings forth improved ISO performance and a hopefully similar AF performance.

cheers
wembley
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
379
Location
NYC
Get the D300 if you want the new technology, i am not sure if you need this but fps on the D300 is way more than the D2x.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
1,334
Location
Naples, Fl
Get the D300 if you want the new technology, i am not sure if you need this but fps on the D300 is way more than the D2x.
yes, fps is something I'd like to keep - I think it'd be hard to not hear the machine gun effect of the D2H. I don't think I'll add the grip, so d300 is 6fps and d2x is 5 (in crop mode is 7) so all seem very close to each other.

I can;t imagine I'd tell or feel the difference between 6 and 8fps.

cheers
wembley
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
379
Location
NYC
yes, fps is something I'd like to keep - I think it'd be hard to not hear the machine gun effect of the D2H. I don't think I'll add the grip, so d300 is 6fps and d2x is 5 (in crop mode is 7) so all seem very close to each other.

I can;t imagine I'd tell or feel the difference between 6 and 8fps.

cheers
wembley
maybe d300s? 7fps without grip :)
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
379
Location
NYC
wait how about this why don't you just try to get a d90 it cost less than both and has the same image quality, although the fps is 4.5.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
1,334
Location
Naples, Fl
wait how about this why don't you just try to get a d90 it cost less than both and has the same image quality, although the fps is 4.5.
but I don't think I'll be happy with the AFS capability after a D2h and d2x. Going from cam2000 to cam3500 with the D300 would be fine I'm sure, but going to cam1000 on the d90 might be an issue for me.

cheers
wembley
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
13
Location
NOVA
I wish Nikon would continue the trend of H models. I didn't see the need for them before but now with the plain models hitting 12mps, I'm changing my mind on H's.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom