Used Nikon D2X versus Nikon D300

[alan w]

As you mention you mainly use MF lens's John, and manage fine with medium speed iso's, another plus point in favour of the d2x is its ability to turn your MF collection of ais lenses into screw drive af lenses {via the tc-16a}.

 

Much will depend on your specific area of photography {sport/wildlife etc}, as to whether band-focusing is suitable for your purpose {which is mainly only a consideration with long tele's, with this tc}.

 

I also own the ais 400mm/2.8 {and the 3.5}, and those particular lenses + tc-16a perform extremely well for my bird photography {using my D2h} with excellent quality IMO, but i can't be absolutely certain regarding quality on the higher resolution d2x if you were to pixel peep {i only 'suspect' it will give very decent results, as there is no noticable deterioration on my 4mp files at 100%}.

 

If you do get a d2x, it is definately worth a try {although possibly it is less practicle for sports versus bird photography}.

 

Alan

[ellis_vener_photography]

I wear glasses too ( graduated bifococals) , and having actually met Bjorn, I can say that his

glasses are thicker than mine so I think a lot depends on your specific prescription.

[niccoury]

Great topic post.

 

I'm looking at both cameras for my next purchase. I work day-to-day as a news photog

for a weekly paper.

 

I think I'm going to go with a D2X though. I need something that can handle daily

assignments in all shooting conditions.

 

Bjorn, interesting note on the glasses, I wear them too. It's not a problem I have

considered before, but will definitely keep in mind.

[eric_arnold]

i can appreciate bjorn's refusal to simply be swayed by new technology and consider each body on their relative merits and personal peeves. that's what we should all do, right? but there is little doubt the d300 does just about everything the d2x can do and adds some things it can't. that said, a d2x for under $1500 is still a value since it originally cost $5k as shun pointed out, just as the d300 is also a value at $1800, well, $2k with grip. in the end it shouldnt come down to money but how well the camera does what you want it to do, and more importantly, how it feels to you when you use it. that said, i'm not sure i'd spend that kind of money without getting a warranty to protect my investment.

[keith_b1]

<Note: I am assuming that the viewfinder construction of the D300 is similar if not

identical to the D200. >

 

I suspect the issue of glasses vs. viewing has also to do with whether one is

nearsighted(minus diopter spectacles giving the eye a wider angle of view, and causing

the finder image to subtend a smaller angle) or farsighted(plus diopter specs giving a

narrower angle of view, and slightly 'blowing up' the finder image), and the the degree of

correction needed. My glasses have a relatively thin+1.75 correction for infinity vision

and I could see the D200 finder OK, same as the D2Xs I replaced it with. I dumped the

D200 because the viewfinder ocular is made of plastic---unacceptable for my rough/dirty

field use.

[John Crowe]

Wow, I have created a great discussion. Thank-you all, so far. I'll chime in and add a few notes/points.

 

 

I have extremely poor eyesight without my progressive eyeglasses. It took me awhile to adjust how I look through the 10D viewfinder and what diopter setting to use, so I can appreciate Bjorn's comments about finders. I am going to see if I can view through a D2Xs in the next few days, hoping the viewfinder is similar to the D2X.

 

 

I can palm a basketball, so the size of the D2X may in fact be something that I will find quite positive.

 

 

I currently have one AF Nikon lens and four AIS or AI lenses with goals to add at least 3 more AIS and one more AF-S. So manual lenses will be in my future for a long time.

 

 

The high speed-tighter crop system is interesting because I am often force into using the 200/2 over the 400/2.8 due to light levels or tight surroundings, indoor competitive swim meets for instance. In the instances where I am not filling the finder with the 200/2 the tighter crop would allow me to shoot faster if required but perhaps equally importantly it would speed up post processing without losing any resolution from the sensor.

 

 

I have had great luck buying from both KEH and Adorama but I have also had great luck buying on eBay as well, and I am careful.

 

 

I am looking forward to better 400-800 ISO performance which I am sure the D2X will offer, but the superior performance of the D300 at extreme values of 1600 and higher is something I am unlikely to need.

 

 

My mind has not been made up completely and of course actually purchasing a used D2X will depend on the price and the condition of the particular unit, but I am glad I can seriously consider it a viable option. Tomorrow night I will see if my local Henry's has a D300 and D2Xs for comparison. It might be possible for me to see a D2X at a retailer here in Toronto, Canada and I have just sent an email with respect to that.

 

 

Thanks again, keep the info coming, and I will keep you posted.

[John Crowe]

Additionally, how many shutter actuations is the D2X rated for?

[mars790]

This was a tough stat to find . But this D3 review says that the D2Xs is rated at 150K

shutter actuations equal to the D300.

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D3/D3A6.HTM

 

Interesting to see that the D3 goes up to 300K as they replaced kevlar in some moving

parts with a lighter carbon fiber.

 

Sounds like you're leaning towards the D2Xs and maybe that will be better for you. Good

luck John and find a mint one which will serve you well for a long time.

[tonybeach]

"I am looking forward to better 400-800 ISO performance which I am sure the D2X will offer..."

 

> This is where the D300 will start to outshine the D2x. Thom Hogan once told me that the D200 had the better IQ over the D2x above ISO 400; but my D300 has even better ISO 400 than my D200 cameras, by ISO 800 the difference is close to a full stop.

[eric_arnold]

john,

i think its ok to get a used D2X and you will enjoy it as long as you don't make the mistake of directly comparing it to a D300. once you pick that camera up, it's over. for sports shooting, 8 fps at 12 MP (w/grip) would seem more advantageous than 8 fps at 6.8 mp, but if that's not an issue for you, go for it.

 

one thing to keep in mind, though, is that the nikon engineers integrated many of the D2X innovations into the D300, which is kinda like the love child of the d200 and D2X. plus the d300 has live view, amazing LCD, upgraded AF system, etc.

 

fyi, bill claff at nikonians did a dynamic range/ISO test and the D2x, being one of the oldest D-series bodies, was behind every single newer model at comperable ISOs across the entire range. so... at this point, the only thing the d2x really has over the D300 is build. But if you really really want one, and the price is right for you, by all means help finance another photographer's new body. as always, to each their own.

[John Crowe]

I checked out Scott Kelby's thoughts and I will check Nikonians too.

 

 

Funny I always look upon buying used equipment as letting someone else finance my purchase. For instance my 10D. Someone else paid about $1500 CDN + taxes for it new and then appeared not to use it for it's first year or two, at which time I came along and bought it for $700 CDN with NO taxes!

 

 

I'll be checking out a D2X this weekend in person to see what it's like.

[John Crowe]

I just handled the Nikon D200, D2X, and D300 in that order. I mounted my 200/2 on them for comparison. I do like the rubber grips of the Nikons. The D2X though, just "feels" right to me. The grip and size were perfect for my hands and my perception of the weight was much less than I thought it would be. The viewfinder of the D2X seemed brighter and with my glasses I had no problems with the view. While I could see all of the finder of the D300 I did notice the extra effort involved and having a "cramped" feeling to the view. All in all the D2X just seemed a better fit.

 

 

When I do get a Nikon the most difficult thing for me, after using Canon for 25 years, will be putting the lens on backwards! I've already gotten used to focusing backwards so hopefully it won't take to long.

[dlegaspi]

I am in the same boat as you are and I chose a used D2X.

 

Bjorn hit the nail on the head: your decision should be based on features that are

important TO YOU, and not what's important to everyone else.

 

The new features like the the faster AF, higher ISO and Live View does not really appeal to

me (although it's hard to ignore its sweet LCD display).

 

I haven't held a D300 personally, but since this is pretty much a "newer" D200 (a camera I

own for almost three years), I can attest that the handling of the D2X is heads-and-

shoulders above the D200...especially with huge, heavy lenses like the 70-200VR. And

HANDLING is very important to me.

 

That said, just like buying anything used, one should be very careful buying a used D2X. I

wouldn't touch Scott K.'s used D2Xs with a ten-foot pole since I know that it's been his

workhorse. Fortunately these days, a huge percentage of high-end electronics owners are

rich amateurs...and with patience you can find a used D2X that's well taken care of at the

right price.

 

As for warts? Well, the LCD's colors and angle of view is horrible (improved with the

D2Xs)...and the AWB sucks in mixed lighting.

[ShunCheung]

I am afraid that it is not a good practice to make extensive comments on a camera that one hasn't seen/used.

 

There is currently (Mid January, 2008) a thread in DPReview forums on prices for used D2X. Apparently it has dropped to around $1500 on eBay. At KEH, it is between $1500 to $2000, depending on condition. Essentially a used D2X costs similar to or a bit less than a new D300, not including the MB-D10 vertical grip.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&thread=26413442

[dlegaspi]

"I am afraid that it is not a good practice to make extensive comments on a camera that one hasn't seen/used."

 

I'm guessing that is directed at me? With all due respect, I only comments about the D300's handling...based on specs is pretty much like the D200, so it's not inaccurate to say that the D2x is better in handling...well, again, that is my OPINION.

 

As for the other new features, whether I've seen them personally or not, it wouldn't have affected my decision to choose the D2x. I still don't need them...but that does NOT mean those features are worthless. I know some of those features appeal to some or even most users, but they don't appeal to me...which was the point I was trying to make.

[John Crowe]

I took a few quick shots with the 10D and the D2X in the store and the one definitive statement that I can make is that the D2X white balance blows away the 10D!

 

 

My resolution tests were inconclusive since I did not take the time to set the cameras up properly.

[musubi1000]

Since this post had originally mentioned MF lenses I thought it to be a good point to mention that the D300 stored up to 9 lenses that you could pre-program into the camera to recall at a moments notice.

 

Bjorn said that the D2X could store more lenses but after checking this I still can't find anything on how to recall different lenses aside from reprograming it in. Can someone shed some light on this?

 

I can see how there may be some in favor of one method over another but I find this particularly opinionated.

[arj nelson]

So far this post has been really intriguing to me as I am currently in the market for a new camera. I have been eyeing up the new D300 as a possible candidate, as the AF in low light is super fast and the high fps are just a couple of features which are very useful for me as I shoot a lot of sport and nature photographs.

 

I was just curious as to other peoples opinions about other possible cameras which will suit my need.

 

Cheers

[ShunCheung]

<I>AF in low light is super fast and the high fps are just a couple of features which are very useful for me as I shoot a lot of sport and nature photographs.</I>

<P>

At least among Nikon cameras, your best choice is the D3. If the D3 is too expensive, the 2nd choice would be the D300.

[ellis_vener_photography]

The D300 handles in a number ofways that are diferent from the D200

 

Externally

 

 

The biggest difference and a real advance over the D2X is the larger and higher resolution LCD.

 

This also facilitates better navigating through the menus, which have also been revised.

 

And the control buttons to the left of the LCD have been reassigned in what feels like to me as a workign photographer, a more logical order.

 

Internally

 

The AF accuracy and speed have been improved on over the D200 and the D2X /D2Xs

 

The dynamic range has been greatly improved over the D2X and ISO performance over ISO 400 is much improved as well.

 

If you want larger and heavier add the grip.

[John Crowe]

I received my used D2X yesterday and first impressions of this camera are incredible. Excellent viewfinder for manual focusing, and the focus assist is very nice! Image quality blows away my Canon 10D 6 MP DSLR. My 50/1.4 AIS at close focusing only showed the D2X to be slightly better but once I mounted the 400/2.8 AIS and started focusing at close to 100 feet the D2X image quality truly stood out. I like the size and how it handles. I bought mine from a private seller with 80,000 actuations, so fairly high, but you would never know from looking at the body. Cost was about $1300 USD and I was able to buy it locally to save on the taxes. I took delivery of a used Kodak SLRn last week, again at a very good price, and it too has lived up to expectations. Now I can very effectively cover from 14mm landscapes to 400mm sports.

 

 

Thank-you all for your help and information, John Crowe.

[andy_smothers]

Interesting thread here for certain.... :)

 

My D2X has 164,785 shutter clicks and going. I wouldn't imagine a D200/D300 to keep up with that nor the rugged situations that my unit has gone through over the last couple years. I have friends on SS that have D2X bodies in the 300K+ range and still on the original shutter mechanism. These are tanks, sure they are heavy and big, but do we all want trailer queens that we only take out once every year for a birthday party or do we want a solid professional DSLR unit? Who cares if you need decent strength and a strong arm/back to operate --- if you aren't suited for the location, then maybe you need to rethink your objectives. It is apples and oranges. Sure I can get solid performance from Compact SUV for a year maybe 2 when subjected to professional level of wear/tear but if you want to subject that SRV to offroad abuse, extreme weather from around the world and you absolutely, positively need to get in, get that shot and get home. (regardless if you drop your D2X from a chopper during a dustoff --- dont ask but it worked perfectly --- then you need a pro camera) --- It is not marketing, but plain reality.

 

That being said, I would love to have a new D3 or D300 to compare firsthand. My D2Hs and D2x get plenty of attention along with my multiple *insert shun here* Fuji S2 units (for portraits) ---

 

So, I vote highly for the D2x if the price is right...totally depending on your planned utilization, budget and needs.

 

HTH,

Andy

[discordianist1]

<p>Sorry to bring up ancient post. But I'm having a similar dilemma. My trusty workhorse D80 finally broke down after bit over 60K actuations. So I'm having a under 1K budget and I'm looking for a next Nikon body. Options as far as I can tell are new D90, used D300 or used D2X.<br>

What's the situation now? Would you consider D2X after all these years of development? Of course D3 series will kick it's but and D300s and D300 are newer technology with plenty of improvements in various areas. But what I'm looking here is good image quality (available from all of these), durability and longevity. Which of those cameras are going to last the longest? Does D300 shutter take over 100K actuations? If not then I don't even consider it since shutter replacement costs real money.<br>

So which one of these bodies are going to last as long as my still kicking F2? :)</p>

[mike_ziebell]

<p>I recently purchased a used D2x and I have to say I'm in love so far. Although my pal advises me to pick up a D300 which I'm going to look at later today, I just don't know. I still have my D200 which I'll be selling, but for the most part I'm enjoying shooting the D2x.</p>