Support Head-Fi.org by
starting all of your
Amazon.com shopping by
clicking here.
____________________________________________________________________
Today's Featured Head-Fi Blog: Jude's Blog
____________________________________________________________________
Please help
support Head-Fi by becoming a Contributing Member
CLICK
HERE -- Contributing Members, thank you
for your generous support! --
But you know that you can get a new D2Xs for AUS$ 4400 if you really want it so bad.
There is absolutely NO reason to get a D2X. The D300 is better in every way - faster shooting, live preview, sensor cleaning, more AF points, the works. And it's much cheaper.
__________________ Home: Chaintech AV-710, Sony SCD-CE595 -> Yamaha RX-V559 Receiver ->Grado RS-1 #863, B&W 685 Grado Pad Inventory:Bowls (90%), Flats (10%) Headphile C-Pads Ported Flat (0%) Portable: 160GB iPod Classic -> Koss KSC-75, Etymotic ER-6i Loaned off to others: Sennheiser HD-280 Team "Sennheiser Users Who Have Seen The Light" Head-Fi Feedback
Ken Rockwell has been posting tests on the D3 and D300 on his site, and although they're great, the D200 is still in the same ballpark. It has to get very dark and you have to blow up the image very big to see a difference. If you can afford a D300, go for it. But the difference between a D80 and either a D200 or D300 is much greater than the difference between a D200 and a D300.
See ya
Steve
First of all, images from D80 is very close (if not indistinguishable) to what D200 produces. And D40, although cheap, paired with decent lens, can produce images as good as its older brother D80.
If D200 is in the same ballpark as D300, and it's been said that D300's image quality is similar to D3, so all in all:
There is absolutely NO reason to get a D2X. The D300 is better in every way - faster shooting, live preview, sensor cleaning, more AF points, the works. And it's much cheaper.
Well, there is some reason, but in general, if I got to choose a free camera between the two, I'd have a hard time deciding. D2Xs is REALLY solid camera, I know D300 can take vertical grip, but there's just something about D2Xs construction. (but then again, if you don't like large cams, this is not a concern).
If I read correctly, D2Xs still have better battery life than D300. But then it's really hard to pass the ISO performance of newer DSLRs. But again, we're only talking about specs here. Can't wait for someone to do a full, proper review/comparison of D3/D300/D2Xs/D200.
Headphoneus Supremus: Founder of the Head-Fi Pay-to-Post Program.
MAJOR 56K WARNING! Finally got the D300 out for some test shooting @ DisneyLand and CA Adventure
Messed up the shot with Cinderella's Castle with Walt Disney and Mickey Mouse. Should have spot metered the castle to prevent blowing out the lights. Live and learn I guess.
Amazingly, all but a couple of shots used ambient light hours after the sun went down, and at ISO varying from 200-3200.
Headphoneus Supremus: Founder of the Head-Fi Pay-to-Post Program.
Originally Posted by dj_mocok
Which one is the 3200 one?
Quite a few now that I'm going back over them in Capture NX:
Roller coaster blurred (CA Adventure 001), The lake shot with the ferris wheel roller coaster and other rides (CA Adventure 002), The second lake shot (CA Adventure 008), the second shot of the roller coaster going thru Mickey's ears (CA Adventure 010), the Hollywood Tower Hotel shot (CA Adventure 018), the Adventure Land shot (DisneyLand 005), Cinderella's Castle with Reflection (DisneyLand007).
__________________
"...If anyone thinks he knows something, he has not yet learned it as he ought to know it."
