Used D300 or used D2Xs

Photobby

They look to be very close to the same price, I know the D300 is way newer, but True pro DX camera vs a pro-am DX? Assuming wear is similar on both (I would think the D2Xs would have a way better build)...

thegridrunner

Well, the D300 has a better sensor, it is faster, it is lighter, it has a 1.3 stop greater dynamic range, better signal to noise ratio, better tonal range. Other than that, they are pretty similar.

Photobby

thegridrunner wrote:

Well, the D300 has a better sensor, it is faster, it is lighter, it has a 1.3 stop greater dynamic range, better signal to noise ratio, better tonal range. Other than that, they are pretty similar.

! you pitch a very convincing argument!

kini62

Some say the D2X has better low ISO IQ (100-400) and that it focuses faster even though it has the older 11pt scheme.

Gene

Mitchell

kini62 wrote:

Some say the D2X has better low ISO IQ (100-400) and that it focuses faster even though it has the older 11pt scheme.

Gene

I would agree. It really depends on what you want to use the camera for.

Many (myself included) feel the D2X at ISO 400 or below renders portaits (particularly skin tones) much better than the D300 or even the D3 and D700. The D2X is still a wonderful studio camera.

The focus issue is interesting. I think it truly depends on what lens you are driving with each body. For smaller lenses, the D300 AF system is slightly faster than the D2X. For larger lenses (300mm, f2.8, et al) the stronger AF motor in the D2X outperforms the D300.

YMMV.

thegridrunner

Here is a side by side comparison of raw image data.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/295|0/(appareil2)/227|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon

D300 wins out in virtually all categories.