Low-light D300 pics...

FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 end

Archive 2007 · Low-light D300 pics...

dj dunzie
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Low-light D300 pics...

Yeah, I know, I'm a turd for the title. Couldn't resist. Here's some low-light shots of my new D300 and comparison shots beside the D2H.

... and comparing physically to the D2H...

This image is copyrighted by the owner

My initial impressions of the camera's handling are:

- It's built better than the D200... especially with the grip attached. It feels more robust and metallic, and the new pad on the grip is a welcome addition. It's a heavy piece in combination with the grip, and feels much weightier than the D2 series. It's physically bigger too, as you can see in the photos. No surprise there - so was the D200 / MB-D200 combo. Dials seem to be upgraded in quality from the D200, like the shooting mode dial under the control tree which now has a metallic edging. Even the "feel" of the buttons has been improved despite the similar layout - like the card slot open switch and the flash popup button which now has a texture to it. Minor tweak, but nice.

- It feels like a D200 control wise though. I still definitely prefer the controls on the D2's, with the rear small LCD and button layout, but maybe I just need to get more comfortable with the D300.

- The LCD is terrific. I have to remind myself that it zooms in a LOT on images and it's not the LCD itself ressing out. It's big, but not a mind-blowing gain on the 2.5's of the D2's and D200... it's more about the resolution than the size. The LiveVIew is a neat idea, although for my shooting I'm not convinced it's going to be that big a deal in too many situations. Thankfully the VF is much improved on the D200.

- I am not with the apparent majority who prefer the one-button zoom in/out that the D300 shares with the D80 / D40 / etc... again, could just be inherent familiarity with the D2's and the D200.

- The grip is terrific for an add-on. While it still doesn't feel as finished and one-piece as the D2's, it now has the no-slip rubber base the D2's do, has a directional pad within easy reach, and as I said is much more robust and metallic. While small-hands users might not appreciate it, the right hand grip is much bigger and fits my hands beautifully, even better than the D2's.

- I only got a few "demo" mode shots in at the store at high ISO's, and didn't save any to a card, so I can't answer the inevitable questions on that yet, except to say that at ISO3200 and ISO6400 I was surprised by the sharp detail it was capturing at those settings, if only based on LCD playback. I'll know more soon.

- Besides the Multi-CAM3500 and the improved high ISO potential, I can't wait to use an EN-EL4a with this camera and enjoy the quicker shooting and longer battery life. Trouble is, the Nikon rep told my dealer the battery compartment attachment for the EN-EL4's was included with the grip. It ISN'T. Make sure you order a BL-3 with your MB-D10 if you plan on using the D2 batteries with this camera. I have no idea when mine's going to arrive now. Argh.

- Shutter sound is nice... much more like a D2's now. They've definitely given the impression that this unit is beefier to me. That's never a bad thing. Blackout seemed very quick in the store, and that's coming from a D2H user...

- There is a free Capture NX keycode and download information in the packaging. Nice. Except I paid full pop for my version just a few months ago... oh well.

That's about all I got at this point. I'll post more thoughts here when I have some images to compare to my other Nikons. Cheers.

Nov 26, 2007 at 10:53 PM

bellyface
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Low-light D300 pics...

funny thing to note on the mega-screen on these puppies, the rep giving the presentation asked the engineers if it was possible to watch a movie on the screens, since they were so nice, the engineers, obviously japanese were a little dumbfounded at the question and stumped the translator, but the engineers and translator were kind of at a loss for words... the rep was, "oh no never mind

" "just an idea"

How are you liking the focus with the screw driven lenses?

Nov 26, 2007 at 11:04 PM

r_o_b_s_o_n
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Low-light D300 pics...

D300?!?!

Are you serious?? wait...when did this happen?? there's a new Nikon?? Have they got any plans on replacing the D2H/X?? those cameras, while good performers are starting to show signs of age. Hope the wait isn't too long, would be REALLY exciting to see what they come up with...

Nov 26, 2007 at 11:09 PM

Zachs
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · Low-light D300 pics...

Please compare the screw-drive... At this point, thats the only thing nobody has mentioned and seeing that lens on there is killing me! haha

Nov 26, 2007 at 11:28 PM

James Markus
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · Low-light D300 pics...

Zachs wrote:
Please compare the screw-drive... At this point, thats the only thing nobody has mentioned and seeing that lens on there is killing me! haha

I did mention it - perhaps you missed it. It is as fast as my D2x.

Nov 27, 2007 at 12:11 AM

dj dunzie
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · Low-light D300 pics...

Zachs wrote:
Please compare the screw-drive... At this point, thats the only thing nobody has mentioned and seeing that lens on there is killing me! haha

OK I did so... I compared with three different screw-drivers (50mm and 85mm and 10.5mm) using (1) dark settings in dimly-lit rooms, (2) moving objects (cars going by on the highway), and (3) near-far low-light tests for infinity focus hunting speed.

Here's what I find...

(1) In dark settings the D300 has an unfair edge in the AF assist light so I disabled it. It's still better in low-light accuracy than my D2H! This blows me away - I never would have predicted this since the D2H is pretty well fantastic in low light. But if I pick a very low contrast subject (brown on black) on low light it is better able to find it. Amazing. Both are better than the D70s by a fair margin.

(2) It's really too hard to give an edge to which is quicker at AF-C tracking a car with a screw-drive lens, but I will say the D300 drives the lenses much smoother. It's almost liquid-assisted somehow, and less noisy. The 85mm f1.8 is not a quiet focusser, but it's definitely noisier on the D2H and D70s. Both were able to track continuously, and the D70s had some real difficulty here as might be expected. When I go from single-point to a dynamic area (set at 11 points by the way to be fair) I still believe the D300 is better with the 85mm than is the D2H.

(3) The D300 seemed to drive the lens in hunting situations faster from full-lock to full-lock! I honestly believe the motor is quicker than my D2H's, and again - I really did not expect this. Again, this is only based on a 20-minute test and anyone who knows me knows I'm a HUGE proponent of the Multi-CAM2000 system. It's early, but I'm thinking the Multi-CAM3500 in the D300 might actually be better in many ways.

I'll have to do some sports work to say I'd actually claim 3500 is better than 2000, but at this point I'm definitely impressed. If it can out-do my D2H, it will KILL the D200 for AF performance. I won't commit to it just after a 20-minute test, because I LOVE my D2H for sports and action for the AF performance alone, and it's the reason I got rid of the D200.

Nov 27, 2007 at 12:22 AM

dj dunzie
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Low-light D300 pics...

... I've just completed some basic ambient lighting high ISO tests against my D2H and D70s (unfortunately no longer have the D200 to compare to), and I'll go on record now saying the D300 is 2 full stops cleaner and more detailed than the D70s, and even more on the D2H when shooting jpgs. I know from personal experience the D2H is a stop or so better in raw captures vs. its own jpg's, and it's basically on par or ever so slightly better with the D70s. So a 2-stop gain for me... nice. ISO3200 is extremely good.

I don't want to bother with 100% crop posts right now, but I'll get to it.

ISO800

D70s

D2H

D300

ISO1600

D70s

D2H

D300

ISO3200

D2H

D300

ISO6400

D300

These were all shot in a dim room (ambient light) in aperture priority, matrix metering, and it's clear that the D2H underexposed compared to the others. Also, it's funny that the D2H WB got it a bit wrong here, with the XBOX looking a lot "creamier". I'll have to redo a similar test using full manual next time to try to even things out... even still the D300 is a full 2 stops better than the D2H and D70s IMHO.

Nov 27, 2007 at 01:06 AM

James Markus
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Low-light D300 pics...

quote: "The 85mm f1.8 is not a quiet focusser, but it's definitely noisier on the D2H and D70s."

I actually found the 85mm f1.8 noisier on the D300 versus the D2x, but the speed seemed the same.

I do agree that focus accuracy is better on the D300 than any camera I have ever used.

I want to ask you about the "Battery compartment attachment" - What exactly is it? does it fit in the existing battery compartment and replace the original battery, or does it wire the batteries in series?

Nov 27, 2007 at 01:14 AM

wjlapier
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · Low-light D300 pics...

That was the review I was hoping for. Thanx alot. I like the way the grip looks on the D300. Users of the D200 complained about fit and finish. You mentioned finish. How does the grip fit with the D300? The best fit I can remember was the F100 and it's grip and the Canon XT with it's grip ( the better of the two ).

Looks like a great camera--my wife didn't flinch too much when I mentioned the D3 was about $5000--could be a good thing. But the D300 seems the logical step for me. Look for my D200 in the BS forum soon.

Nov 27, 2007 at 01:43 AM

dj dunzie
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · Low-light D300 pics...

The grip feels much improved over the MB-D200, although I still prefer the solid 1-piece body in the D2's. I couldn't afford the D3 right now, so I have to live with a removable grip that will likely never come off just as my MB-D200 didn't. Still, this one is metal and it feels it when you hold the camera. The new d-pad is an excellent touch, as is the rubber base which the MB-D200 didn't have. It locks into the camera body much the same way as the D200's did, with a base screw that locks into the tripod mount hole. Beyond that, there's a pin-connector that grips into the base, and no long L-piece that fits into the battery chamber as it did in the D200. IE/ there's no need to remove the battery compartment door to fit the new grip. The offset of this is though that you can't use two batteries in the grip... instead the new grip holds only 1 battery, and will fit the standard battery, or the included tray for AA's, or an optional EN-EL4a. The good news is that I know the battery life on the EN-EL4a's is far superior to the EN-EL3e's, so that should help not being able to use 2. You can still keep one battery inside the camera (I'll keep the stock battery in there) and tell the camera via a menu selection in which order you want it to use the batteries (I'll go with the EN-EL4a first...)

Man, though, if you don't get a flinch for the D3's price tag and you don't need the extra DX reach for your preferred photography, I'd definitely be putting a downstroke on a D3! That thing is completely revolutionary... and boy do I love spending other people's money!

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:13 AM

dj dunzie
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · Low-light D300 pics...

Okay... my last post of the day... sleepy here even with the new toys...

Some high ISO 100% crops... shot at F8, aperture priority, ambient light, tripod mounted and timer used, with a crop taken from a dark noise-typical area...

The original scene (ISO800 shots):

D70s

D2H

D300

... and the 100% crops...

ISO800:
------------

D70s

D2H

D300

ISO1600:
--------------

D70s

D2H

D300

ISO3200:
--------------

D2H

D300

ISO6400:
-------------

D300

No post processing outside of resizing / cropping. The D300 ISO6400 shot cleans up with a simple pass of Noiseware like I wouldn't have believed... very usable. Here is the D300 at ISO3200 and ISO6400 resized for web, no post...

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:32 AM

patricksmith04
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · Low-light D300 pics...

I have some questions as I wait for my D300 and grip.

1.When using the EN-EL4a in the grip do you still need a normal battery in the D300 (EN-EL3e)? Or does it not matter?

2. Is there still a percentage battery life gauge in the meniu much like the D200 had? Does this work with the grip and EN-EL4a?

Thanks!

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:44 AM

dj dunzie
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · Low-light D300 pics...

Hi Patrick... you made a liar out of me... that wasn't my last post apparently.

1. No, you don't need to keep one in the camera... one in the grip is fine.
2. Yes, there's a very similar battery charge (%) / shots taken-remaining guage, and includes the D2-series' battery life indicator (scale of 1-4)... very nice.

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:55 AM

R. Francois
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Low-light D300 pics...

hmm.. hmmmzz... while not looking very scientific, you are in some way the first to be able to show me something of the D300 which looks convincing to me

Looks pretty cool hm? the detail on that last 3200 shot looks pretty good. Heck it looks even better taht iso1600 on my D40, which happen to be my best hi iso cam at the moment

. now go out and shoot a bad lit dark alley or a dark corner in a pub. What i want to know if i will be able to shoot in a (normally lit) restaurant without flash. or maybe a (normally lit) pub.

Nov 27, 2007 at 07:27 AM

Quack
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Low-light D300 pics...

dammit!!!! i must resist upgrading.

Nov 27, 2007 at 03:39 PM

gugs
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · Low-light D300 pics...

very impressive.... makes me wonder if I really need the D3. I need an ISO improvement on my D200 for certain assignments and I really could use a better AF... all this makes me think the D300+grip could be a better choice than the D3 (price/performance ratio)

Guy

Nov 27, 2007 at 03:49 PM

Zachs
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Low-light D300 pics...

wow...i can't believe they stuffed that powerful motor in the D300 body. I take back everything I said! And that color accuracy on the Xbox is incredible. It really seems like the D300 is on par with my S5 as far as noise goes, but at only 100bucks more and look at how much more you get! Even more so, you get the Nikon colors. mehhhh haha

Thanks for letting us know about the motor...that part has really had me wondering.

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:02 PM

j.curtis
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · Low-light D300 pics...

Sorry folks, but DJ's results are terrible. Of course the D300 looks better, its exposed better then the other two. We know how underexposing tends to exaggerate the noise.

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:10 PM

Pavel
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · Low-light D300 pics...

Those pictures look like there is a good amount of noise removal in camera on the D300 - can you disable it and shoot the same frame again on full manual so that the D300 shots are not exposed brighter?

It is interesting to me that even despite the fact that you dialed in +1/3 on the D2h and none on the D300, the D300 still metered much brighter at 1/2 versus 1/3 second.
That makes me a bit concerned .... I don't care which machine meters "better" but that two meter so differently bothers me. Coming from the world of Canon that was a pain. Basically you had to learn the metering of each body. So far the D2h, the D70 and the D200's I've had have been identical and I've been very impressed with the consistency and the reliability of the nikon line.

Keep the samples coming. Any chance for larger shots. At those sizes .... it makes me aware that even the old stuff is more than perfect enough.

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:13 PM

dj dunzie
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · Low-light D300 pics...

I look at it a different way fellas. The D300 seems to expose brighter overall on matrix metering, but it's not blowing the highlights. I think it does a better job quite frankly at maintaining the brights yet getting the shadows with detail, and for some reason the D2H needs the +1/3 EV to get the same histogram spread.

My D100 underexposed consistently by 1/3, and I regularly dialed in a +1/3 comp. I leave the D70s at neutral, and usually go 0 or +1/3 on the D2H. I might have my first Nikon that I drop -1/3, but given that it isn't blowing the highlights and instead boosting the shadows somehow, maybe I'll just leave it.

Mr. Curtis, with due respect, I don't by that underexposing in and of itself "exaggerates noise". Underexposing and then fixing in post does. These are straight from camera. The scene itself is not badly underexposed - I invite you to open the ISO800 files yourself and check the histograms - they're nicely spread out on all three cameras. The difference is that the D300 definitely has more apparent DR, and picks up the details in the shadow areas a lot better. That to me is not a fault of the camera, but a bonus.

However, I'll try to redo another test in full manual and post up the results.

Nov 27, 2007 at 04:44 PM

Pavel
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #21 · Low-light D300 pics...

I frankly don't care which way is the way you prefer .... my concern is using multiple bodies.
So if we take your word for it that this latest ...(and why is it always that people are desperate to tag any new product as superior at least for the first few months rather than objectively?)
is somehow magically overexposing the dark scenes but knows how to back off in bright scenes (I've always wanted a camera that reads my mind - glad its here) so nothing gets clipped - horay! But it is still a problem if it meters differenty than other bodies.

Funny, but the scene looks to be low light. The other two bodies seemed to capture it that way. The D300 caught it 2/3 of a stop brighter. How come?

OH ... and you are flat out mistaken about underexposure not causing noise in and of itself. The way a sensor captures data with little information in the lower quartertones means there is little detail there and much noise. Bumping the exposure up makes it stand out even more - but because it is there in the first place.

I've had Canon and Olympus systems aside from Nikon. I used to love how the Olympus folks would take pictures of a white cat on snow, overeposed two stops and show everyone who would listen "hey ... its all just Canon and Nikon hype! I don't see any noise in my iso 1600 shots! Olympus rocks!"
Yeah. except one only uses iso 1600 when there is little light. A dark room should to be exposed correctly take a lesson from the same exposure tips that the Dark cat in a coal mine heeds. It should look like a dark room. And then the noise hits you ... and always in the shadows.

So ... despite the mild difficulty in standardizing test (and I'm grateful for this one) lets make it standardized. Same exposure, same noise removal. That way we really see the measure of improvement. Some of us would like to know about the body, warts and all - rather than worship blindly at the god of new.
Suppose (and I know its heretical) that the D300, tested in exactly the same way as the poor old D200 showed only a half stop better noise characteristics? I mean after all the pixel sizes are smaller, so it stands to reason that gains are now in software - would the Nikon sky fall? It ain't a contest. We don't have to take questioning as some kind of insult or betrayal.

Btw .... I would swear that I'm now in the canon forum. We used to say around here that others were making too much a deal about noise - rather than getting out to shoot Heck ... I din't want to say it ... but the shots I've seen so far at 1600 and above strike me as looking strongly like the 20D look. Say it ain't so! We used to call it plasticy. But I won't say that ..... I know the sky would fall then.

Nov 27, 2007 at 05:09 PM

Avi B
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #22 · Low-light D300 pics...

Also, if you could please, disable the D-Lighting. Perhaps show us a high ISO shot with D-Lighting enabled, and one with it disabled. I betcha that's why it looks like there's more apparent DR.

Also, noise can be improved at the gain (prior to coming into the sensor) by using lower noise amplifiers or other signal conditioning mechanisms. It's not all in the DSP, though I'd say most of it is there (maybe 80%?). So let's turn off D-lighting and all NR and see what the sensor sees.

Although I'm not going to get a D300, it'd be good to know this information. And I must say thanks for the amount of time you've already put into it DJ

Nov 27, 2007 at 05:16 PM

Kerry Pierce
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #23 · Low-light D300 pics...

Thanks for posting your thoughts and the photos, DJ.

It's really tough making "identical" exposures on 3 different cams and then posting them. You're a braver man than I.

Nov 27, 2007 at 05:50 PM

Kerry Pierce
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #24 · Low-light D300 pics...

Pavel wrote:
But it is still a problem if it meters differenty than other bodies.

Funny, but the scene looks to be low light. The other two bodies seemed to capture it that way. The D300 caught it 2/3 of a stop brighter. How come?

Suppose (and I know its heretical) that the D300, tested in exactly the same way as the poor old D200 showed only a half stop better noise characteristics? I mean after all the pixel sizes are smaller, so it stands to reason that gains are now in software - would the Nikon sky fall? It ain't a contest. We don't have to take questioning as some kind of insult or betrayal.

Btw .... I would swear that I'm now in the canon forum. We used to say around here that others were making too much a deal about noise - rather than getting out to shoot Heck ... I din't want to say it ... but the shots I've seen so far at 1600 and above strike me as looking strongly like the 20D look. Say it ain't so! We used to call it plasticy. But I won't say that ..... I know the sky would fall then.

FWIW, what I've been seeing from d300 users on dpr is that the metering is different on the d300. It no longer "underexposes" the way most nikons have done in the past, plus preliminary indications seem to show that the sensor is more sensitive than the ISO rating. So, I'd guess that you're not going to like the d300 metering different than your d2h unless you want to use the fine tune feature to adjust the meter to give you the same behavior.

As for looking like canon shots, well, that's what people have wanted isn't it? I seem to recall that anyone posting high ISO shots that made them happy, being greeted with catcalls and being told that they're stupid if they think canon isn't better.

The biggest complaints have been about canon "superiority" in noise and then "underexposures". People wished for that and apparently now have gotten their wish on both counts. There is an old saying about being careful what you wish for, IIRC.

Nov 27, 2007 at 06:02 PM

Zachs
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #25 · Low-light D300 pics...

It will be nice in a few months after all the hoopla dies down and we can get back to: "what full frame lens" this and "what should I buy" that. lol

All I know is that all the BS will slow down and then sky rocket when the D3 comes out...le sigh.

Nov 27, 2007 at 06:06 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end