DPReview finally reviews D300...

[erichlund]

For those of you still interested, the DPReview D300 Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond300/)is finally up. A quote from the last line of the conclusion:

"There's simply no better semi-professional digital SLR on the market."

[griptape]

If it were in the same price bracket as the 40D, I'd drop my current Canon system no problem. But $700 more to switch? Yes, it's better, but not "I could buy a 30D as a backup and a 40D" better. Still a great camera though.

[erichlund]

Now that I've put in my little jab, I would like to add, you really have to look hard to find differences between the images in all the cameras used. There are some deviations, but I think we have come to the point where you can buy a system based on what the system gives you and not worry so much about which camera will have the best image quality. They are all good, even those Olympus cameras (I think the smaller sensor still struggles a little bit at the extremes, but overall, they perform very well).

If you want a smaller, lighter load, the Olympus is a good choice. If you want in body IS, Sony or Olympus will serve. If you want ready availability and the largest lens selections, Nikon or Canon are still the market leaders, and that's not going to change. The only reason I haven't mentioned Pentax is they were not compared in this particular review, but they have competitive models as well.

The choice between Canon and Nikon still revolves around whether you want the superior build and handling of the Nikon or the deeper lens selection of the Canon. Neither choice is wrong, it is merely preference.

[erichlund]

If it were in the same price bracket as the 40D, I'd drop my current Canon system no problem. But $700 more to switch? Yes, it's better, but not "I could buy a 30D as a backup and a 40D" better. Still a great camera though.

What I was basically saying in my previous post is: "Why switch?" You're choice was valid when you made it and still is. If you despise the way the camera handles, then you have a valid reason. If you absolutely decide you need the contrast detect live view, then you have a valid reason. If you suddenly develop a shaky hand, then you should consider an in body IS system. But, what you have is a great system. The Nikon is a great system, but it's just another system. Each has system strengths and weaknesses, but it's no longer really about which is better, but which is the better fit, for you.

[Rooz]

an unremarkable review of a remarkable camera.

[erichlund]

Why do you say unremarkable? Did you expect him to use all new forms of testing? They did all the same tests they always do, evaluated each category objectively, and placed the D300 on the top of the heap, including in image quality. That has NEVER happened before.

Perhaps it's the fact that you have used the camera so much that from your perspective, he has nothing exciting to say. If this review had come out in December,
before you had such great familiarity with the camera, would you perhaps seen that in nearly every comparable way, the D300 at least edged out the competition? Would you have noticed that the three things he listed as negatives were mostly because he had to find something?

Admittedly, the review doesn't really do more than confirm what we already know, but considering the goings on at DPReview, I can understand the lateness. Still, in terms of directly comparing reviews from DPReview, this review is a watershed in Nikon progress. I think that is very clearly stated, if you manage to keep your head above the waterline amongst the huge volume of data.