Thread: No PRO level DX camera from Nikon, why?

If you were trying to interpret what the Op was asking, then say you are doing that because what you interpreted was not what he asked initially. Such small misinterpretations (as peviously stated), will have new readers actually believing "your" interpretation as fact. Meaning or indicating that the D300 is not a pro model. This was and is my only point. Too many times this happens here already. I have already directly answered...

he was looking for DX in a D3 body. It's the third post down. I wish I had caught it because it certainly clarifies his true interest. I think that he initially just mistated what he was actually looking for and got a lot of feedback on whether the D300 is a pro level body, gear versus skills, etc. Popular Photography may or may not be right with its tests but they didn't identify any silent improvements on the D300s noise levels. I...

& feel that using the grip w/ D300/D700 is a MUST when using long/heavy glass. Currently, all I can speak for in that arena is the 80-200 2.8, although it's no weight slouch for it's overall 'short' length compared to the 70-200. If I'm shooting that lens, the grip is on the body & usually mounted to the monopod. Only if I know I can nail @ least 1/160 + sec will I hand hold. I'd love to move up to the...

See Marianne's recent data on focus performance (in this post: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=33660055), to see why some of us might like D3 focusing performance (as illustrated in that post) with a top of the line DX sensor in a top-of-the-line body with built in grip. That would make one awesome camera for day-time sports where you need zoom and reach (I shoot a lot of daytime soccer).

Equipment does matter and my F1 vs. Honda Civic was a bit extreme. You seem very skilled as a driver, but I'm fairly certain; however, that I could be beat around the Ring in a Corvette ZR1 vs a professional Ring 'taxi driver loaded with 3 passengers in an M5. Just like I'm certain that if you were using my D2h and I were using your D3 and we were both shooting an autocross (in good light) with the same lens, your results would...

Exactly. The D### series camera never focus as fast as the D# series. Photo Pete wrote: > Anyone who says D300 with add on grip is good enough is really missing the point... it isn't. > -- > Have Fun > Photo Pete

jfriend00 wrote: > RicAllan wrote: > > Related to another post here... to the best of my knowledge, even though the earlier Dn series cameras were DX, no "PRO" lense has ever been released in the DX line... so why would any future "PRO" bodies be produced as such. (That is not to impugn the quality DX format cameras.... just to point out something that may not have been evident before the D3...

Mel wrote: > > Have you owned a D300? > -- Yes I have owned a D300. I sold it and kept my D2x for reasons I've stated earlier in this thread. Also, the image quality at low ISO was superior from the D2x than from the D300 (this is widely acknowledged by others too, including reputable sources such as Thom Hogan) The D300 had advantages, including better quality at higher ISO (about half a stop in good light and just...

It is indeed one sweet camera but another Nikon contradiction is that the D300 does not count as one of your bodies for NPS membership. nikhgan wrote: > > Yah, Nikon is really contradicting itself here. > > In many places, they claim D300, D700 are professional cameras, but on their "Extended Service Coverage" page, the D300/D700 are not pro cameras. > > So basically, only the D# (eg, D1,...

No, Its not the same. The question is: why is different not better...or why is it worse? The D300 body is no slouch. The quality of the camera's build is able to stand up to much of abuse pro cameras take. The ability to add or detach the grip can be very convenient and makes it very flexible. It handles low light ok, but not as well as the full frame D3S. But we all know that the size of the pixels has a lot to do with that. Why is...