Nikon D300 mini-review

I meant to write this review in a timely fashion after getting the camera when it was still reasonably new and the review may have been of more use to all camera buyers. However, time is not been on my side recently, so here is a belated Nikon D300 DSLR review, with a slight bias towards landscape photography, comparing to the Nikon D2x and an overview of 14 bit RAW files. I’m sorry there are no comparison photographs as web images simply just don’t show the subtle differences between the D300 and the D2x.

Why?

I bought the D300 for two reasons. Firstly as a backup body for my Nikon D2x. The D2x is built like a tank, but after three years of sand, seawater and sunshine it does give occasional cause for concern, for example, when the battery cover corroded onto the body making it difficult to change the battery in the field. (I’ve solved this with a little Teflon dry lube from my bike on all exposed metal parts. Sure to invalidate my warranty, but the camera still works and there is less salt build up and corrosion.) So a backup body seemed like a good idea. Secondly, my Panasonic LX2 which I used as my grab shot camera just doesn’t work quickly enough or produce image quality that I am happy with. The smaller (than a D2x) body of the D300 with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens was meant to replace the Panasonic compact. In practice what has happened is I still carry the smaller and lighter compact for family/fun shots, but the D300 is used on photographic trips when I really need the higher image quality. A DSLR is just not a compact and is too heavy to carry everywhere.

Why the D300? I have a reasonable investment in Nikon equipment and I like their exceptionally intuitive user interface (buttons/dials/menus), so I wanted to stay with Nikon (and the new 24mm tilt/shift lens sounds very nice), and the environmental sealing and good build quality of the D300 are important to me as I spend a lot of time in the sea and/or the ‘weather’. The new innovations like liveview and a larger screen were neither here nor there in my buying decision.

D300 vs D2x

12MP vs 12MP! £3200 vs £1300! Old tech vs new tech! I was intrigued as to how the image quality would compare and I’m not dissapointed. But neither am I impressed. Using both Adobe camera raw and Capture NX, to my eye and with my subject matter the D2x still resolves a bit more detail, a bit more micro-contrast. But, the RAW file from the D300 has a certain something that I can’t quite put a finger on, a little more contrast, a bit more snap, crackle and pop that makes a scene really sing. Neither of these things make the blind bit of difference after ten minutes in Photoshop, D2x images can we twinked, D300 RAW files sharpen really well. A print on the wall is fab from either camera with masses of detail and subtle tones, only I can be blamed for a bad photograph!

14bit RAW

What’s it all about then? Like most reviewers I’m a little perplexed, but I did find differences between 12bit and 14bit and I would agree with most other reviewers who recommend using it for future RAW converters and displays that may make better use of the extra info.

Taking any old exposure and adding or subtracting 3EV in the RAW converter showed no discernible difference in the quality of the image.

However, when I looked closely at shadows or highlights there was a smoother transition through the tones in 14bit. This isn’t apparent in all images, but if there are a lot of tones expected in the shadows or highlights, for example charcoal on a burned tree, then there are differences. At first I thought 12bit actually showed more detail, then thinking about it I realised that due to less data in the shadows subtle tonal transitions are forced into step changes of tone. With 14bit, tones and details are a little smoother.

I reckon if you have the option to save 14bit RAW, then go with it.

Other stuff, grins’n’groans

1. The one thing that really bugs me about this camera is they have slightly changed the sequence of button presses to delete all images that makes it slightly slower than the D2x.
2. I also really miss the portrait grip when shooting handheld. Sure I could buy the extra battery pack, but give it a try on a tripod with a medium to large lens. Major wobbles! No thanks, I’ll do without.
3. I think once you are spoiled by a pro body with their improved usability from extra space for buttons and extra displays, you are spoiled for life. Other little features like the built in viewfinder curtain help improve exposure accuracy. Camera’s like the D3 and 1DsmkIII are designed for the busy pro who can’t miss a shot and for my use I will happily pay the extra money for that usability. Landscape photography certainly isn’t fast like say sports or photojournalism, but if you have to think about your camera, you are not thinking about your subject, you are distracted and you will miss things. As a backup the D300 is perfect, but when my D2x goes to the great junkyard in the sky it will be replaced by a D3 or similar.
4. The D300 viewfinder is big and bright. As is the 3” screen. Both are very worthwhile.
5. Liveview is pretty pointless unless you have a manual focus lens, or until Nikon makes the screen a flip out and swivel design so you can use the camera at waist heigh or above your head.
6. AutoISO is really useful. I didn’t think it would be any use, but for grab shots, it has proved itself a few times.

Capture NX

I tried Capture NX when it first came out and couldn’t really see any compelling reasons to introduce any more software into my digital workflow which is now very simple with just Lightroom and Photoshop. The control points are certainly clever, but nothing that can’t be done in Photoshop with some simple masks and curves etc. However, when trying to get the best out of the D300 to compare images with the D2x I decided to give the bundled (well done Nikon) version another try. And I’m glad I did. You need to try it for yourself to see if you like the results, but to my eye there is a lot more detail revealed in any RAW file and shadows/highlights are handled a little better with smoother transitions compared to the slightly painterly results from ACR. Not a huge difference, but good enough to make me want to spend the extra time using it to convert portfolio grade images rather than in ACR. Worth a try.

Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM lens

On paper and in online reviews this lens scored well. It’s effectively a standard lens on a reduced frame DSLR and is a really useful focal length to carry. It’s compact, good build quality, it’s SO bright it’s untrue, and the bokeh is ever so lovely and creamy. On the D300 and the D2x it’s good, but it doesn’t capture anywhere near the detail of high end Nikon zooms/primes and the barrel distortion is going to need work in Photoshop. I don’t normally care about these things, but they are very obvious on this lens. And Sigma needs to go to usability school. Everytime I use a Sigma lens they seem awkward - lens caps and shades don’t quite click into place without looking, just little things that distract and detract. It’s an OK lens, but unless cost is your primary factor, stick to Nikon branded lenses.

Conclusion

Solid, sealed and quality build with great image quality and ease of use. A worthy back up body or upgrade if you have an older DSLR. I don’t think it will tempt the Canon camp, but that’s OK, it’s plugged an obvious gap in the Nikon lineup. Bundled CaptureNX is also a star. A worthwhile piece of kit in any landscape photographers bag, but if you can afford the D3 or a closeout D2x they may be worth the extra money depending on your criteria.

Do I sound a little underwhelmed? Well I kind of am in the way you are when you buy something that performs exactly as you want and expect. The D300 just works, it doesn’t give any cause for concern, it’s ever so easy to use and it produces great image quality. I just forget I’m using it and get on with making photographs, so in considered conclusion, a great camera.

Sample RAW files can be downloaded at www.rawsamples.ch or at raw.fotosite.pl.

I also found the following reviews helpful at dpreview and at Scott Kelby.

Comments (0)