Buying used: D300 or D2X?

<p>The D300 and D2X are about the same price second-hand. The D300 is newer, has a better LCD and you have the option of whether or not you want the extra battery pack or not. The D2X is tougher.</p>

<p>I already have a D200 and I think the battery pack and batteries are compatible with the D300.</p>

<p>Right now I'm in favour of the D300. Ideas?</p>

<p>Karim,<br>

I have the D300, and had the same considerations as you.  I ended with the D300 because of the somewhat better high-ISO capabilities, as well as the detachable battery pack.  I have not regretted one minute.<br>

 <br>

The D300 uses the EN-EL3e batteries which are the same as your D200.  However, the D300 uses the MB-D10 batterypack, which is not compatible with the D200.  The D300 and D700 uses the same battery pack.<br>

 </p>

<p>I also forgot: D300 is also a tough little guy, and with the MD-D10, is approx. the same weight as a D2X, as far as I remember. Heavy enough to punch yourself out of bad situations ;) ;)</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

I have the D300 and aim to finally be able to afford full frame with the D700 or the following model (maybeD800?) and then use it with the MB-D10.<br>

The D2x is classic and probably more "compact" than the combination with the battery pack. If I would buy it now then only to "have" it as she is still one of my first ladies!<br>

Going forward and aiming for better image quality I would try to get my hands on the D700 (maybe used). I thought the high-ISO capabilities on the D300 were good and they are comparing tot he D200 but it is nothing in comparisson with the D700.<br>

I hope that helped ; )<br>

Best Regards,<br>

<a href="http://www.markusvoetterphotography.com">Markus</a></p>

 

<p>Karim,</p>

<p>The D200 battery pack is not compatible with the D300. I'd never use battery pack compatibility as a factor in making such a decision.</p>

<p> The D300 is quite a robust body- I'd have no concerns as to it's durability. The D300 has a more advanced sensor and superior AF system to the D2x I can't see much of a contest - the D2x was a fabulous unit in it's day but has been superceed in the performance stakes by the D300. I'd stay in favour of the D300 if I were you.</p>

<p>D300 easy. Better AF, better high ISO, newer sensor technology, and the flexibility to take that battery pack off. No contest.</p>

<p>Both are very good cameras, D300 has less noise at higher iso settings and a faster frame rate, 8 with the mb-d10 option. D2X with the built in motor is a little more rugged.<br>

<a href="http://www.slopoki1.smugmug.com/">http://www.slopoki1.smugmug.com/</a></p>

<p>A lot of people considder the D2X a better camera, special for low isoos, caused by the build-in grip.</p>

 

<p>I am not sure there are indeed "a lot of people" consider the D2X a "better" camera. There is exactly one person who routinly recommends the D2X over the D300. There are a few people who prefer the D2X's ISO 100, which is only available on the D300 as Low 1. The base ISO for the D300 is 200.</p>

<p>Otherwise, this same question has been asked in photo.net quite a few times and the overwhelming majority recommend the D300. You can do a little search for those answers yourself. I still own both cameras and I have almost never used the D2X again ever since I bought the D300: 8 frames/sec, much better high ISO results, much improved LCD, flexability of the grip .... To me, it is a no brainer, but that is merely my opinion. The majority's recommendation is no more than merely a recommendation; it is your own opinion that really counts.</p>

<p>Incidentally, as it has been pointed out, the D300 uses the MB-D10 grip that is not compatible with the D200. The D300 and D700 use that same grip, though.</p>

<p>There are lots of D300 versus D2X threads. I will make my usual argument for the D2X. A year ago I bought a used D2X over a new D300 and have never regretted it. I have large hands so it is a better fit for me. A few will insist the viewfinders are the same but after comparing carefully I found the viewfinder of the D2X noticeably better for using my progressive eyeglasses. Of course the robust build is outstanding. Since 99% of my images are taken at ISO 100 I was also extremely relieved to read recent reviews that fall in favour of the D2X at low ISO settings. I know the D300 likely has the same feature but what really impressed me about the D2X is that when I change the aperture on my manual lenses it changes the aperture readout in the viewfinder and is linked to the light meter. It actually took me 8 months to realize this! I currently have 5 manual lenses and anticipate adding a few more. I think the D2X does allow for programming in more manual lenses than the D300. Yesterday I placed an order with keh.com for a Nikon TC-16A which will provide some autofocus capability with my manual lenses. I believe the D2X was the last body to support this converter without dismantling and rewiring the converter. I have no idea how long the batteries of the D300 last but the one I have for the D2X lasts for what seems forever! It had no problems at -20 Celcius this winter and in the height of my shooting season in summer with several thousand pictures per month it only needed recharging once or twice a month! An auto race week-end for me is likely 1000-1500 images with no recharging required, of course I am not using any autofocus motors either!</p>

<p>If high ISO is a frequent and necessary requirement for your shooting interests then the D300 may be the way to go.</p>

<p>P.S. I would be the "one" that Shun referred too. I have been doing chores around the house while typing this and missed Shun's post. Have a great day, all!</p>

<p>They are different cameras, made for somewhat different purposes, and yet you gave us no idea what you want to do with the camera? Can't make any recommendation because I have nothing to go on.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p>It would appear that John Crowe has never owned a D300, or used it extensively. I would put much more value in Shun Cheung's opinion. Shun owns both and has considerable experience shooting each one. I just don't see how John Crowe can recommend the D2X over the D300 without having had considerable personal experience with each.</p>

<p>well, i can recommend the D300 over the D2X having never shot a D2X. the key sentence in john's post is: "i shoot at iso 100 99% of the time." if that describes your shooting style, and you like the built-in grip, go for the D2X. othewrwise, go for the D300.</p>

<p>I don't get why there's even a debate. The D300 is way newer, the AF is way better, the LCD is way better, the processing is way newer, it has more dynamic range.</p>

<p>Sorry, I can't see where there is anything to gain by getting a D2X unless you need to drive nails with it or bang it around like crazy.</p>

<p>I have both, and I'd say D300, for basically the reasons people are saying.<br>

To clarify a few things from Mr. Crowe's post: D300 displays f/stop from manual focus lenses as well. And D300 programming of manual lenses is more flexible than the D2x. First, you can enter multiple lenses of the same focal length (I have both a 35/2 and a 35/2.8 T/S and I can enter both, which is nice). Second, on the D2x if you have say, a 50 and a 135, you have to scroll through all the intermediate focal lengths to get between them (55,58,70,80,85,86,100,105). On the newer bodies you just scroll through the one's you have inputted.</p>

<p>j</p>

<p>I don't have extensive experience with the D300, but I had chances to try my friend's D2X before buying one for myself.<br>

I absolutely love the D2X at 100 ISO. I might say I bought the D2X for the ISO 100 alone. Judging from numerous samples on the web, I find the D300 color is too red. At least if I someday buy a D300, I won't use its default color setting, or I would shoot RAW and tweak the color later.<br>

However, I think I and John Crowe belong to a minority group who prefer the D2X. I think for most people the D300 is a better all-around camera. But still, if you have a chance, give the D2X a try before you decide.</p>

 

<p>Got them both, it's the D300 hands down (ouch, the D2X was $4500)!</p>

<p>D300 is regarded as a D2X killer - new technology and smaller body :)</p>

<p>Agree with Peter Hamm. Cant understand why you would want to compare these two camera's and even consider the D2x. It is yesterday's technology !</p>

<p>I would choose the D2x purely on reasons of image quality at base iso's. I have the D300 and D700 but there is something on the clarity of pictures from the old D2x that I ust cannot match with the newer cameras. Not that I regret having it replaced by the D300 (much more useable), but in several ocasions I just miss the D2x files. Try them both yourself before you make choice if you can.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have the D300 and D700 but there is something on the clarity of pictures from the old D2x that I ust cannot match with the newer cameras.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to. I too have my own D300 and D700, and the D2X that I haven't used in well over a year. In the last two weeks I have been testing a D3X and I used two different D3's from Nikon USA. All of those cameras are fine at their base ISO. There is nothing from the D2X's base ISO that I miss on the D300.</p>

<p>He said, she said. Sheesh. OK, here's a comprehensive comparison from a premier source. You cannot get much more OCD than this, to a good end, but it covers <em>everything.</em> If you really want ISO 100, say to slow shutter speed for a water falls, one could get a one stop neutral density filter for the D300, still have a <em>lot</em> of $ leftover. One wants the D2x's color profiles instead of the D300's or ones that one could contour on one's own -- beyond my patience for in camera tinkering, but it can be done? Then, one can simply download from Nikon the three, free, D2x optional Picture Controls for the camera (and for Capture NX2 if shooting in raw) that produce results that emulate the corresponding "Color mode" settings for the D2X and D2XS for modes 1,2, and 3. It became a no brainer for me. The D2x is much bigger though, and does have a bigger battery. A style statement? I suppose the price comes down if the D2x is used.<br /> http://www.bythom.com/nikond300review.htm</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thom Hogan said he slightly prefers the D2X over any 12 Mp camera from Nikon (@his D3x review). I was torn between the D2X and D300, but reading what Thom Hogan, Iliah Borg (dpreview), and some others said about the D2x performance at 100 iso made me decide to go for it.<br>

Believe it or not, this photo is one of the reason for me to choose the D2X (among many other photos).There is some thing very special about it. I could not tell whether it's the micro contrast, color separation, or whatever. I just like it very much:<br>

http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/nikond2x_samples/originals/dsc_0330.jpg</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I think I'll go for the D300, bargain D2X pending. But I'm glad I asked. There is no such thing as a simple answer.</p>

<p>You'll love the D300. I know I do.</p>