stedge wrote:
Experts will correct me if I am wrong, but I think the D2H/D2Hs are a bit better at high iso than the D2x because of the larger photosites. If you do not crop a lot, that is a way to get into a pro body with a crop sensor for very little money. And, frankly, with the demand one sees for D2H(s), you could always sell it for what you paid if some test shots didn\'t look right to you. I really like my D2Hs and will use it to 800, sometimes higher. But at Hi1-2 (whatever that equates to) it sucks compared to a D3. It seems better than my D200, though, at >800....
Pavel wrote:
....I have always found the focus tracking much better, and I mean much better with the D2xs. I think the stronger battery gives large lenses much more of a torqued feeling. When I shot motorsports, I found the D2xs far superior.
Johnny McClung wrote:
....but the D2X AF is really fast and acquires focus faster than the D300 in my experience. I think Nikon really need to release another pro DX cam. Something with the D300 sensor and the D2X body with updated AF. There is a gap there... many shooters want the DX crop, but the pro feel. This is why we go back and forth. For now, I will keep my D2X because it\'s just a pleasure to shoot with... something I could never say about the D300...
I agree with the above comments and would add that I really prefer the sensor layout of the CAM 2000 system for my shooting style. I do, however, see where the BIF specialists might find the greater central density of cross sensors found in the later CAM 3500 AF more effective for their work.
Nov 23, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Previous versions of Gaylon Holmes's message #7808866 « D300 VS D2X High ISO »
