If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
I had my mind set on the 40D mostly based on comparison pictures next to the
D200 on various websites. Then I started thinking perhaps I could manage, financially, getting the D300. What I mostly do is sports but because I currently don't have any lenses and no brand specific photo equipment I really don't care if I get a Canon or a Nikon. My priorities are that I need to be able to shoot sports at a fast frame rate and to be able to control the shutter speed my self. From what I have read this seems to be a bit easier on the D300 but I could be wrong. I would also like to be able to go down to a 100 ISO. Why isn't that a standard with these SLR's? One more thing, I like the software that comes with the 40D. That I can hook it up to the computer and control it and see what's in front of the camera on my computer monitors. It's something I would also like. This does not seem to be an option with the D300. Please help me make a desicion. Kevin |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
On Jan 4, 8:05 am, "Kevin" wrote:
I had my mind set on the 40D mostly based on comparison pictures next to the D200 on various websites. Then I started thinking perhaps I could manage, financially, getting the D300. What I mostly do is sports but because I currently don't have any lenses and no brand specific photo equipment I really don't care if I get a Canon or a Nikon. My priorities are that I need to be able to shoot sports at a fast frame rate and to be able to control the shutter speed my self. From what I have read this seems to be a bit easier on the D300 but I could be wrong. I would also like to be able to go down to a 100 ISO. Why isn't that a standard with these SLR's? One more thing, I like the software that comes with the 40D. That I can hook it up to the computer and control it and see what's in front of the camera on my computer monitors. It's something I would also like. This does not seem to be an option with the D300. Please help me make a desicion. Kevin All DSLR's are going to have: Shutter mode: You pick the shutter speed, the camera picks the aperture... Aperture mode: You set the aperture, the camera picks the shutter speed... Manual mode: You pick both the shutter speed and the aperture... The 40D's ISO range is 100 to 1600, expandable to 3200 Looks like the D200's ISO is the same 100 to 1600, expandable to 3200 The D300's ISO is 200 to 3200 and is expandable to 100 and 6400.. so the D300 does have an ISO 100... as for fast frame rates... 40D - 6.5 fps D200 - 5 fps D300 - 6 fps, 8 fps with optional battery pack as far as taking pictures with your camera hooked up to your computer... sounds cool... but will you actually ever use it... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
"Kevin" wrote in message ... I had my mind set on the 40D mostly based on comparison pictures next to the D200 on various websites. Then I started thinking perhaps I could manage, financially, getting the D300. What I mostly do is sports but because I currently don't have any lenses and no brand specific photo equipment I really don't care if I get a Canon or a Nikon. My priorities are that I need to be able to shoot sports at a fast frame rate and to be able to control the shutter speed my self. From what I have read this seems to be a bit easier on the D300 but I could be wrong. I would also like to be able to go down to a 100 ISO. Why isn't that a standard with these SLR's? One more thing, I like the software that comes with the 40D. That I can hook it up to the computer and control it and see what's in front of the camera on my computer monitors. It's something I would also like. This does not seem to be an option with the D300. Please help me make a desicion. The best thing to do, is to download both manuals and compare. It's not a secret that I'm a big Nikon fan, but all for a reason. I bought my D300 even without having to hold one in my hands. Some things are just good, you know, like buying a new Mercedes Benz; you just know it's not going to drive like crap ;-) Like sports, I like shooting wildlife (although I haven't really gotten to much) and the focus system of the Nikon is very, very good, specially for action. It has many different modes to choose from. And, like someone else stated: with the grip you get up to 8 fps. Not a sportsman that can get away from you. I got my grip as a package from Cameta at Amazon, with a cleaning kit and reloadable AA batteries, which are enough for about 600 pictures and the top speed. What really makes the camera shine are the easy controls, the 3" VGA screen (excellent for pre or after view), 12.3 MP, if you need some cropping, it's very nice to have more than 20% extra, the front AND rear dial makes adjustment a snap. Also you can modify just about anything. Another important advantage it has over the 40D: fine tuning of focus on different lenses. Only the D300, D3 and the $8,000.- Canon have that, at least not the 40D. I played with it, but I didn't seem to need it; even with the cheap 18-55 kitlens, the pictures are razor sharp and the color rendition, even in just standard mode, is fantastic. Two liveview modes which even show the difference in white balance and picture control. Also pointed out befo the Nikon CLS is unsurpassed. I have three external flashes and I can basically do anything I want. The light metering is spot on and very reliable. Maybe it's a bit more money, but really, you'll have long forgotten about the money after you start shooting. Here are some examples I took, before even understanding everything about the focus system. (this is not very well explained in the 450 page manual) http://atlantic-diesel.com/ http://best-of-photos.com/ But of course: it's your choice. Just go to a camera store, pick them up and shoot some samples. Feel what it does for you. -- Sosumi |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
On Jan 4, 1:03*pm, "Sosumi" wrote:
you know, like buying a new Mercedes Benz; you just know it's not going to drive like crap ;-) If you want a real ride take BMW or Audi, never Mercedes Benz. The same in dslr photography: if you want to take valuable and safisfactory photos take Canon, not Nikon. http://atlantic-diesel.com/http://best-of-photos.com/ Very well composed photographs, congratulations. But quality produced with this lens is really, really crap. Sorry. With Canon optics you could gain much better results. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
suddengunfire wrote:
On Jan 4, 1:03 pm, "Sosumi" wrote: you know, like buying a new Mercedes Benz; you just know it's not going to drive like crap ;-) If you want a real ride take BMW or Audi, never Mercedes Benz. The same in dslr photography: if you want to take valuable and safisfactory photos take Canon, not Nikon. http://atlantic-diesel.com/http://best-of-photos.com/ Very well composed photographs, congratulations. But quality produced with this lens is really, really crap. Sorry. With Canon optics you could gain much better results. Your taste in cars sucks... Your opinion on cameras is... subjective. P. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
"suddengunfire" wrote in message ... On Jan 4, 1:03 pm, "Sosumi" wrote: you know, like buying a new Mercedes Benz; you just know it's not going to drive like crap ;-) If you want a real ride take BMW or Audi, never Mercedes Benz. The same in dslr photography: if you want to take valuable and safisfactory photos take Canon, not Nikon. http://atlantic-diesel.com/http://best-of-photos.com/ Very well composed photographs, congratulations. But quality produced with this lens is really, really crap. Sorry. With Canon optics you could gain much better results. Thanks, but if you mean the 18-55 Canon kitlens: it's just about the worst available! -- Sosumi |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
A pretend photographter who does sports but does not own any camera or
lenses can pretend to buy anything. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
Kevin wrote:
I would also like to be able to go down to a 100 ISO. Why isn't that a standard with these SLR's? Why should the camera makers willfully degrade the sensitivity of their sensors? If you want longer exposures, use a ND filter! If you worry about noise, you do not understand. Stop worrying. -Wolfgang |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
Because major manufacturers are sales and marketing driven maybe? Remember
what 'ISO' actually means. BTW, I worry about noise, and I do understand. "Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message ... I would also like to be able to go down to a 100 ISO. Why isn't that a standard with these SLR's? Why should the camera makers willfully degrade the sensitivity of their sensors? If you want longer exposures, use a ND filter! If you worry about noise, you do not understand. Stop worrying. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Now I'm confused again - 40D - D300
OK Wolfgang.
Thanks for your advice. I have actually decided to follow your advice and am not going to worry about it. After all they know this stuff infinitely better than I do. K Why should the camera makers willfully degrade the sensitivity of their sensors? If you want longer exposures, use a ND filter! If you worry about noise, you do not understand. Stop worrying. -Wolfgang |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Still confused about RAW & TIF | Richard DeLuca | Digital Photography | 80 | December 17th 06 01:14 AM |
72 ppi? - Im confused. | Crash Gordon | Digital Photography | 11 | December 18th 05 06:11 PM |
Confused over lenses | MalaChi | 35mm Photo Equipment | 10 | May 5th 05 09:31 PM |
confused | Pete D | Digital Photography | 6 | January 30th 05 04:00 AM |
Confused | Hoyt Weathers | Digital Photography | 8 | October 28th 04 12:47 PM |