A Pro's comments on the D300

[Rooz]

i had a very funny email this morning from a mate of mine who has been down at the F1 using my d300. he is currently a canon shooter with some very nice gear including a 1dMkIII and is switching to nikon. he borrowed my d300 to see if he could use it as a backup to his recently acquired d3. here are his very short comments after i emailed him and asked him for his thoughts...

"thanks man, yeah all went pretty good. no time to talk right now, gotta get he rest of these shots out. see you tonight. great AF as i expected and the screen is unbelievable. but in a nutshell...too fuckin slow, iso nowhere near good enough, DX FOV sucks i dont know how you live with it, (so does the sigma aswell just quietly...you need a better WA.). looks like it's 2xd3's."

i thought this was pretty funny really. we all get excited about new dslr's, especially the d300 in nikon land, and read alot about how this is a mini d3 and maybe forget what a pro's demands are. here i was half-expecting him to say "this is awesome ! who needs a D3 !" lmao

Pat shoots F1 & MotoGP for a living and travels the world doing it, (bastard). looks pretty obvious that for us as amateurs or even semi-pros the d300 is great but sometimes a wakeup call is needed to bring us down to earth and let us know in no uncertain terms that while the d300 may rock for us, it doesnt cut it with the big boys.

[K1W1]

If you want to save yourself the ebay commission charges I'll bid $50 for it right now and what's more I will meet you mate anywhere in Melbourne (even the airport) and hand the cash over TODAY so that you don't ever need to see the POS camera again!

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Another good topic Rooz, I'm glad you passed the comments along.

I read so many threads were the OP is going to be the next Ansell Adams after he spends his $1000. It's good to be reminded that the D300 may be all fine and dandy but it's only part way along the continuum between a P&S nasty and full pro gear.

Out of curiousity how do you activate your shutter for your bug shots? I've worked out how to focus much better by using LV and zooming but I can't then get away with timer release. While I'm asking, if you had your time again would you get the same tripod?

[VTEC_EATER]

"thanks man, yeah all went pretty good. no time to talk right now, gotta get he rest of these shots out. see you tonight. great AF as i expected and the screen is unbelievable. but in a nutshell...too fuckin slow, iso nowhere near good enough, DX FOV sucks i dont know how you live with it, (so does the sigma aswell just quietly...you need a better WA.). looks like it's 2xd3's."



It is always interesting to hear others opinions on the topic. I would have thought he would have liked the DX crop factor on his long lenses. It (DX crop) essentially adds a teleconverter to all his long telephotos without the added loss of light. Im not sure who WOULDNT want that in sports photography.

Of course, I never have been too impressed with the photos on MotoGP's website. Too fast of shutter speeds for my liking. They almost always freeze the tire rotation stopping all motion. They lose the feel of speed in their shots. Way too static in my opinion.

Oh well, different strokes for different folks.

[Grapedog]

If you want to save yourself the ebay commission charges I'll bid $50 for it right now !



I Bid: $51

[VTEC_EATER]

Shit, Ive already got one, but Ill throw in $60.

[jcon]

I think we're getting a little loose with the language guys.

[Rooz]

It is always interesting to hear others opinions on the topic. I would have thought he would have liked the DX crop factor on his long lenses. It (DX crop) essentially adds a teleconverter to all his long telephotos without the added loss of light. Im not sure who WOULDNT want that in sports photography.

Of course, I never have been too impressed with the photos on MotoGP's website. Too fast of shutter speeds for my liking. They almost always freeze the tire rotation stopping all motion. They lose the feel of speed in their shots. Way too static in my opinion.

Oh well, different strokes for different folks.

i think this is one of the big differences between us and them. we like to get creative, or think we do, but from their POV they are looking at what the customers, (esp sponsors), demand. they want super sharp and all sponsors clearly visible. thats where the money is. thats motorsport in a nutshell to a large degree. i've seen him take some of the most unbeleivable images, great silhouettes etc but he doesnt earn enuf from them to bother. its a business to these guys remember.

RE: DX, he's more referring to the wide angle here. zoom isnt a big deal to these guys. they are using 400/ 600mm pro glass. no need for a crop to come into play here. i've spoken to him abiut this before actually, cos i prefer the length i get with the crop. his answer is pretty simple though..."you dont need more crop, you need a bigger lens." easy to say for someone in his position. lol

[Rooz]

Out of curiousity how do you activate your shutter for your bug shots? I've worked out how to focus much better by using LV and zooming but I can't then get away with timer release. While I'm asking, if you had your time again would you get the same tripod?

i use the wireless remote now. i love the tripod, but for macro work the head i have is crap. far too much movement in the ball joint and lack of precision movement.

tough to use LV for bugs though unless they dont move. some will comply but most don;t.

[VTEC_EATER]

I think we're getting a little loose with the language guys.

Ill admit, Ive been drinking...

Rooz, I understand what you mean. When you have a client, you have to provide them with the photos that they want. And if that means shelving your creative ambitions, then so be it, I guess. I suppose it does make their jobs that much easier though. I mean, shooting at 1/800 vs 1/80 is certainly easier.

I'm not sure exactly what focal lengths those guys need at those Moto GP tracks, but the only track I can compare those to is Road America (4.048 miles long (this is actually slightly longer than most Moto GP tracks)). While I have not personally shot photos there, the photographers with whom I have spoken with have said the words 400/2.8 and 2x teleconverter in the same sentence. And these are guys running 1D mkIIn's. Whats the crop on that camera??? 1.3X? So whats that focal length... 1040/5.6??? Great googly moogly!!!

[p.du.v]

A great 'down to earth' post there Rooz!

I've heard the "The D300 is just a D3 with a crop sensor" thing too many times now.. Man, the D300 is one beeeast of a camera, but we do need a reality check now and then eh? Heh.

And yeah, on the crop thing, I purposely went the D300 line for the added length. I plan to be doing some travel/photojournalistic stuff this year, as well as some surfing shoots and the like.
To me, I reckon having the extra 50% on a lens just makes so much more sense. Small lenses for more discrete situations, with the added length via crop etc.

Bah, but as has been wisely said, different stroke for different folks essentially.

By the way, where can I see his F1 shots? I just looove the F1! heh.

[achuang]

The reason for wanting the full frame or 1.3x crop is that the larger sensor gives a smaller DOF which means better separation between subject and background when using larger apertures and not panning (obviously it doesn't matter what aperture in panning as the background is blurred anyway).

[erichlund]

Just like anything else, there are different kinds of pros. Not all pros need a D3. Those that do will be disappointed with anything less.

[Rooz]

a very accurate summary.

[tcadwall]

I missed it if someone already pointed this out, but Thom Hogan now has the D300 review posted (http://www.bythom.com/nikond300review.htm). One more pro's opinion... And as already mentioned, he is one that shoots a different style than Rooz' friend.... And he seems to really like it... I really like his writing. Here is one more good example.

[Screenclutter]

Wouldn't pros with a large array of expensive Nikon stuff would probably have a D300 as well? It would be like this guys car trunk:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html

[erichlund]

Bjorn is...unusual. I greatly respect his opinion, and he's been around forever, but his actual photography is not my cup of tea. It's well done, but I'm just not into all that infra-red/ultra-violet stuff.

However, he does know the equipment.

[Rooz]

would you buy a 2nd hand lens off him ? lol

[Tony_V]

would you buy a 2nd hand lens off him ? lol

That's funny...

The original post made me laugh too. I was out shooting pics of my horses on Saturday. I had my had my new 70-200mm F2.8 VR lens out and the D80 in continuous focus mode and was complaining I couldn't get shots off fast enough. I was thinking "boy I need a D300". And then I read this. I guess it's all relative to what your use to...

Tony

[erichlund]

Yes, in an instant. Because I would expect him to put together something that works as good as or better than new. This is a guy that takes lenses apart, rechips them for his own use, then puts them back together. He's been doing it for years.

What a lot of us don't understand is that our gear is a lot tougher than we think. Sure, it may not withstand a drop to concrete, but a few external scratches and rubs are nothing. Pros need equipment that can take some abuse. Nikon makes cameras and lenses that are up to the abuse pros will throw at them.