Hello, After reading all the posts about a "~1 stop" improvement in noise (and equivalent sharpness) over the prior-generation cameras, I have to say I'm disappointed. Directly comparing a D40x against a D300, using the same lens, same lighting, etc., shooting RAW in both 12 and 14 bit modes, I'm just not seeing it. Comparisons were made using a Nikon 105 f/2.8 VR (macro) at a distance of about 25 feet in bright light at f/5.6, VR on, leading to a minimum shutter speed of 1/500. I was careful to match exposures between the two cameras, and obtained results that were within a fraction of a stop between each other. First, using 12 vs. 14 bit modes makes no visible difference whatsoever, even when enhancing shadows. To equal the noise performance of the D40x at ISO 100-200, I have to use exactly the same ISO in the D300. At the very best, there may be a 1/3 stop improvement, but that's mostly just wishful thinking. What is worse, the sharpness of the D300 is lower than that of the D40x. This includes both with and without resampling to make the file sizes the same. The difference is serious and cannot be recovered by post-processing. The only good news is that by ISO 400, the noise performance of the D300 does improve over the D40x. Needless to say, I'm disturbed and disappointed. I'm not a high-iso maniac. I shoot mostly in base ISO and seek the highest performance for landscapes, etc. The "base" ISO of the D300, at least as far as noise is concerned, is clearly 100, not 200, as there's a significant difference in noise between the two. The camera does handle well, and exposes nicely. I can live with Lo-1 if there were not rumblings of side-effects of using it (not clear to me yet). But having sharpness distinctly lower than a D40x - I'm crushed!