Today, after a few days doing practice, I reread some review of D300.
Of course kudos to whoever, not being paid, reviews such a complex camera on internet. I’m just reviewing their reviews.
I’ve read a lot of magazine review also, but without doubts the ones on internet are better.
Anyway, here are my thoughts.
Very good review, simple and effective, with clear pictures to show the difference. A problem is that it compares only jpeg shoots and not raw ones. I think that whoever is willing to spend such a sum over a camera will easily know how to use raw to get the best out of it. Anyway jpeg setting of D300 are almost magical.
About his “blunders”:
1) I don’t use AutoISO, unless untill will produce an AutoISO sensible to the actual zoom used and not only to the shutter speed.
2) I agree with Nikon here. No point in having Continuous mode with build in flash
3-4-5-6-7) ok, but very very minor. I do have slightly bigger complaints about D300. Probably I’ll post them soon.
As usual for DPReview is incredibly informative. If you are looking for a specific detail, you can find there. A lot of comparation pictures and all the usual stuff we’re used t find there. Not sure if it can really help you to decide… too much information and details. Maybe it lacks a more “human friendly” section on impression of use.
About the conclusions, I fully agree with either pros and cons. Expecially on articificial light the performance are not better than those of mine 4 years old D70. My solution? Always use Raw in difficult light and fix the WhiteBalance later.
Very good review with also an inusual point of view, with the current prices what’s better, D300 or D2x? They can be “differently targeted” camera, but if the price is more or less the same… who cares?
All in all gives it has seemed to me the most “sincere” review on D300. The final drawbacks are a bit disappointing though, they’re more limits of current techonology than D300 specific problems.
If it ain't broken don't fix it 