D300 vs. D2x

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by termina3, Dec 19, 2007.

  1. termina3 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #1
    Hey guys,

    I've got a little holiday decision making to do: new D300 or used D2x? Originally I was considering the D200 vs. the D300… but realistically the used D2x's have dropped to around $1200–I think $400 is worth the up from a semi- to fully-pro body.

    On the other hand, there's the D300… well, I think y'all can sense the logic there. I can't possibly afford a D3, but at $1800 the D300 is within reach. The question is: is it worth the $600 vs. the D2x?

    I shoot fast-paced sports and portraits (for the newspaper) during the school year, and landscape over the summer (I go backpacking a lot).

    What would you do? What should I do?

    Thanks! -T
     
  2. Doylem macrumors 68040

    Doylem

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Location:
    Wherever I hang my hat...
    #2
    Dunno... but, hell, what a nice problem to have... :)
     
  3. yeroen macrumors 6502a

    yeroen

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Location:
    Cambridge, MA
    #3
    I'm having the same ongoing internal debate. New D300 or used D2Xs?

    I really want to upgrade from my D70 (I rented a D200, and my AIS lenses work so much better on a body that'll meter with them and a viewfinder that I can focus in).

    If I have any epiphanies regarding this, I'll let you know.
     
  4. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #4
    Well I'm still shooting with a D70, so ... :)

    I'd go with the D300, unless there's something specific on the D2x that you need and the D300 doesn't have. The sensor is newer, so the high-ISO noise performance should be better; the autofocus is better; and the body is significantly lighter and smaller.
     
  5. pdpfilms macrumors 68020

    pdpfilms

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Location:
    Vermontana
    #5
    I'd totally go with the used D2x. Totally.;)

    (I'm selling it to cover the cost of picking up a D300, in fact.)
     
  6. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #6
    The D2xs are $1200 now? I saw some guy in the marketplace selling it for $2099 BIN.
     
  7. Butthead macrumors 6502

    Butthead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #7
    LOL, I only read the 1st part of your post (must have been that color=white part that threw me off, LMAO in seeing the rest of it!

    I totally agree :p . OP go read all about both on dpreview. I think just in doing that you should be able to convince yourself of which would do you best.
     
  8. adamzx3 macrumors regular

    adamzx3

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    #8
    Personally I would hold off on the D2X....its old tech. It was prime in its day, but is very long in the tooth, I mean it was released in 2004!. Now if it was a D2Xs than maybe. The D300 has the latest technological advancements and will likely outperform the D2x in many ways.

    The D300 with the grip will be faster (remeber the D2X has to crop to get 8fps)

    D300 has a newer 51 point autofocus and D2x has 11.

    Both have the virtually the same size CMOS Sensor (within .1mm)

    D300 can be carried as is or the grip can be added if needed.

    Also the D2X will be used for several years and will need more frequent maintenance and an overhaul soon.

    I don't see any reason to go with the D2X.

    I got started with the D80 and wished I had sprung the extra $500 for the D200, get as much camera as you can afford.

    Too bad the Canon Eos 1D Mark III isn't a bit cheaper....10FPS would be golden for sports. :D
     
  9. adamzx3 macrumors regular

    adamzx3

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    #9
    LOL I never saw that, totally invisible on my monitor unless you drag and highlight it :p

    2nd on dpreview thats what I glanced at to drill down the specs, also checkout fullsize sample pics at high iso's.
     
  10. pdpfilms macrumors 68020

    pdpfilms

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Location:
    Vermontana
    #10
    Yeah, I decided that the smaller, faster, less noise-y, more accurate auto-focusing, cheaper D300 was a better bet to grab than to hold on to the D2x.

    There are still many that claim the D2x has a more film-like tonal reproduction and grain structure. It's also weather sealed on all seams and ports, whereas the D300 is only partially sealed. Also, the D2x is going to be less expensive than a D300 with a grip + extra batteries, so that's another factor to consider if you're needing super long battery life.

    They're pretty comparable cameras... I really don't think you'll get any definitive answer here. But here's another vote for spending your next weekend on DPreview.com reading up on all the comparisons. Best of luck.
     
  11. Clix Pix macrumors demi-goddess

    Clix Pix

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    8 miles from the Apple Store at Tysons (VA)
    #11
    Being fortunate enough to use all of them -- D200, D2Xs, D300 and D3, I can say that there are a lot of good reasons to go right for the D300, but there are also a lot of good reasons to pick up a used D2X/s somewhere. I doubt that you'd find any for less than $2000, though -- don't know where you got that figure of $1200.00. I suspect you may be seriously and quickly disillusioned if you think you can pick a D2X/s up that cheaply....

    The D300 feels a lot like my D200 -- but oh, so much better and faster! Without the grip it's a bit lighter and smaller, which can be handy at times. With the grip it is close in weight to the D2X/s and the D3. While some of the features and functions of the D300 now seem to be on a parallel with or even exceed the D2X/s, there is still a distinct difference in the body and build. Once you get accustomed to handling a pro body, other cameras just do not feel the same. The D3 and the D2Xs feel more similar to each other than the D300 and the D2Xs, regardless of specific new features and functions.

    One great thing about the D300 is that it will use the EN-EL4a batteries in the grip, which then increases the fps that you can shoot -- a valuable asset in shooting sports or any sort of action. You would need to buy the optional battery chamber, an EN-EL4a battery and charger in order to utilize this. On the other hand you can still do pretty fast shooting with two EN-EL 3 batteries, too......

    Even though I have the D300 and the D3 I am still going to hang on to my D2Xs for a while, as there are definitely features of this camera which fall in between the D3 and the D300, and it's still a darned good photographic tool. Some have mentioned that they still prefer the color in the D2X/s to the D3 or the D300; I haven't decided about that one way or another.

    Probably the thing to do is to assess what you're really looking for and what you really need in a camera. If it's high speed, the ability to reach higher ISO without noise (or with very little noise), if it's a larger LCD screen.....then go with the new D300. If you really aren't planning to shoot at high ISO, if you aren't intending to use this for high-speed action photography (sports, wildlife, birding), go with the D2X/s. You mention shooting sports and action during the school year; for that the D300 probably would be your better bet, especially if you need to reach high ISO at times at night games or in dingy gyms. The 51-point AF system is amazing and definitely is excellent for shooting sports.

    Why not go to a local camera shop and handle both cameras, see which feels best in your hands? Look at DPreview and other photography sites online and read comparisons between the D300 and the D200, the D300 and the D2X/s....

    Good luck with your decision!
     
  12. termina3 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #12
    First off, thanks everyone for the speedy (as always) replies! I was in need of opinions and reasoning, and everyone's more than provided (but I don't' want to exclude any future notes or observations to you non-posting viewers).

    You're right. After I did some real research (actually looking in-depth at eBay), I agree with your number of ~$2000. Probably $2500 for one in great condition.
     
  13. termina3 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #13
    As am I–however, I've gotten chronic "CHA" errors over the past few months, recently so bad that I can't even shoot. The D70 left for the shop yesterday… hopefully I'll have it back by mid-January. I really need a camera in the meantime though (not that this is fueling my/my parents purchasing decision).
     
  14. taylorwilsdon macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #14
    D2x isn't even in the ballpark of $1200, so I assume that might change your opinions. Its basically old pro tech vs. new semi-pro tech.

    Honestly? You can probably get better pictures out of the d300, but they will both take phenomenal shots.

    If you're used to the d70, the d2x might be too big for you too. It sounds to me like the d300 might be the best upgrade path, and its a darn nice camera.
     
  15. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #15
    I don't see why anyone would go for the D2x right now, maybe except weather sealing and possibly battery life.
     
  16. termina3 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #16
    OK: the result.

    I'm in the process of ordering a D300 + MB-D10 grip, fastest shipping available–hopefully it'll arrive Saturday or Monday. I was hoping to pick it up tonight, but no reputable shops have it! (Local shop had 2 this morning… they were gone by noon!)
     
  17. uberfoto macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    #17
    Good choice.

    The D300 has a better signal to noise ratio from what I have seen. When pushing the files, the D2Xs starts to show a lot of noise in the shadow areas while the D300 holds its blacks and subject details well. The range of usable ISO performance is worth it alone.

    FWIW, Pictureline here in SLC, UT has D300's in stock and you can order directly off of their website pictureline.com. This store rocks, the people are even cooler, and they stock things most stores don't. These guys usually stock things like the 200-400VR. They usually always come through on backorder items too. The salesmen don't work off of commission so they never pressure you into buying things and they don't have things like memberships and what-not to sell you either. Much of the staff are/were professional photographers so they tend to know what they are talking about and it's beautiful inside if you ever get a chance to visit.
    (I am in no way affiliated with Pictureline... even though it may sound that way.) ;)
     
  18. termina3 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #18
    Thanks for the suggestion, but I've already ordered from BH Photo. The thing is stuck in Lubbock, TX until tomorrow... the wait's killing me!
     
  19. thats nice macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    #19
    D300 buddy!

    Scott Kelby sold two D2X/s and a D200 for a D300, he was going to get the D3 and obviously is of a standard that would actually get a lot out of it, but he opted for the D300 for the price and power/performance.

    Personally I'm just waiting for a second hand D300 to come along and and i'll upgrade from my D70.
     
  20. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #20
    I made the same price/performance mistake on the D200 vs. D2x comparison. It took a month for me to trade up. While I *may* end up with a D300, I'm almost certain to end up with a D3 unless I'm not ready by the time next year's flagship arrives...
     
  21. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #21
    I'm curious what wizardry you do with your D2x that isn't possible on a D200 or D300 since it appears that you may be "settling" for a D300 as though it's a common-folk camera. ;)

    /runs like hell
     
  22. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #22
    Shoot for a few days, then change the battery :p

    It's a huge difference in the field, though the batteries are heavier. I had the D200 + spare battery for about five or six weeks, and I experienced "out of battery" several times when going out to photograph (picture the frustrated photographer sitting in an idling vehicle charging via inverter.) I've had my D2x about two years now and I've experienced two batteries dead a single time in that period (and it wasn't on a trip to shoot or I'd have had all the batteries with me.)

    Other than that, it's an ergonomic difference that you either feel or don't. If you don't, you get to save a lot of money on your camera bodies.

    The D3 equation winner for me is that I may actually be able to get acceptable pre-dawn wildlife shots- that extra stop or so will make a difference in salable shots. The usual ergonomic and "battery without buying a grip" issues will be nice- it all depends on what the next flagship is going to look like. I really do like the new AF module, and I might end up with a D300 while I'm trying to ROI whatever next year's pro body is- depends on how big the D3 bug bites me and how many prints I can sell.

    My percentage of salable images and sales per image have only slightly risen with time (mostly due to photographer adapting) from the S2 to the D200 to the D2x. Image-wise I'm sure I'd get the same level of sales with a D70s as with a D3 or D300. The D3 and D300 offer a better platform for birds in flight and more shooting time at either end of the day when wildlife is most active- that's where the difference lies. In the studio, or general fine art they won't make much difference other than in pure shooting opportunity. I'd have fun with a D300, but I think that the D3 would make more sense in keeping the D2x as a backup/alternate body because there's a bigger difference between it and the D2x than there is between the D300 and D2x.

    I'd settle for the much more common D300 if I had to though ;)
     
  23. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #23
    Yes but all things considering what is attached to the back of my D300 is not exactly "settling". ;)
     
  24. Plymouthbreezer macrumors 601

    Plymouthbreezer

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts

Share This Page