Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
Out of Production DSLRs
D300/D300s
This is a D300 :)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="rocketman122" data-source="post: 231466" data-attributes="member: 14443"><p>I did my sisters wedding with the D300. then, I thought the IQ was great. today I know that its crap (for my eyes). dont get offended. its only my opinion. there are many who use the D300 for weddings. I have very high standards and I always want the best equipment and I know that DX sensors is not it. there is just a huge amount of smear and chroma noise from iso 2000. to all who say otherwise, if you havent shot with a FF, you should at least try a few pics. </p><p></p><p>I just did my comeback a few months back. and my friend who is a pro took me under his wings as I came from the F5 film world. actually I photographed his weddings years back and he says it was me who pushed him into it. anyways I told him what I was planning to buy. DX gear obviously. he said NO WAY, I WONT LET YOU. I said, why its good enough. he explained the many reasons why. he explained the dynamic range, dx looks muddy, ff is nice and bright. the texture of the skin is amazing. even the sensor is different. IMO the dx sensor is nikon and the FF is sony and you can see the IQ difference right in the screen. </p><p></p><p>I was shooting the wedding with him the whole afternoon and he kept showing me pictures, and I could not understand why it looked like crap and muddy in the D300 (sorry again, this just me and my eyes) I also was a lab printer in the past so my eyes are very sensitive to color casts. over and over I kept seeing the pictures and I was so frustrated. I kept asking how the hell your pictures look so amazing in this D300 doesnt look anything close to yours and we were shooting comparison shots with the same exposures. </p><p></p><p>he gave me his beat up D3 and BAM! just like that it was just amazing. the detail and gradients from bright to dark was just amazing. I knew I was home. I knew I must go FF. I sold my 17-55, I sold my 12-24. I sold everything I didnt need to move to FF. I was in your place. the D300 is great, but for pro work, FF leaves it behind. I even made a preorder for a D7000. when it would come in stock I was going to buy it. thank god he stopped me. the sony FF sensor is like nothing else. Im sorry to be harsh but this is from someone coming from DX. I was there. I didnt believe FF would be better. my mindset was, why the hell spend more. I was shooting film at iso 800 then and with the d300 I can shoot iso 2000. what, that isnt enough? and FF is not only about the ISO. the images look like something else. the amount of detail inside is just amazing. its a different league, pictures look so much different. </p><p></p><p>see this video. about 2 minutes in he talks about how things look bright with the FF and its true but they look so alive. not muted and boring. im not saying the D300 is boring, im saying the images are very boring compared to FF images. sorry to harsh guys. not trying to make you feel bad. but those who are pros should not be shooting DX. </p><p></p><p><a href="http://nikonrumors.com/2013/08/12/we-are-spoiled-nikon-d70-vs-d600-iso-comparison.aspx/" target="_blank">We are spoiled: Nikon D70 vs. D600 ISO comparison | Nikon Rumors</a> </p><p></p><p>today I was shooting a bar mitzvah. towards the end of it, it got dark and thank god for the FF sensor. I was shooting friends of the parents before they left and was using a bit of flash bounced behind me at iso 6400 and I still got some great ambient light with the flash. you cant do that with dx. DX for pros then was great but with the prices of D600, there's no reason a pro shouldnt buy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rocketman122, post: 231466, member: 14443"] I did my sisters wedding with the D300. then, I thought the IQ was great. today I know that its crap (for my eyes). dont get offended. its only my opinion. there are many who use the D300 for weddings. I have very high standards and I always want the best equipment and I know that DX sensors is not it. there is just a huge amount of smear and chroma noise from iso 2000. to all who say otherwise, if you havent shot with a FF, you should at least try a few pics. I just did my comeback a few months back. and my friend who is a pro took me under his wings as I came from the F5 film world. actually I photographed his weddings years back and he says it was me who pushed him into it. anyways I told him what I was planning to buy. DX gear obviously. he said NO WAY, I WONT LET YOU. I said, why its good enough. he explained the many reasons why. he explained the dynamic range, dx looks muddy, ff is nice and bright. the texture of the skin is amazing. even the sensor is different. IMO the dx sensor is nikon and the FF is sony and you can see the IQ difference right in the screen. I was shooting the wedding with him the whole afternoon and he kept showing me pictures, and I could not understand why it looked like crap and muddy in the D300 (sorry again, this just me and my eyes) I also was a lab printer in the past so my eyes are very sensitive to color casts. over and over I kept seeing the pictures and I was so frustrated. I kept asking how the hell your pictures look so amazing in this D300 doesnt look anything close to yours and we were shooting comparison shots with the same exposures. he gave me his beat up D3 and BAM! just like that it was just amazing. the detail and gradients from bright to dark was just amazing. I knew I was home. I knew I must go FF. I sold my 17-55, I sold my 12-24. I sold everything I didnt need to move to FF. I was in your place. the D300 is great, but for pro work, FF leaves it behind. I even made a preorder for a D7000. when it would come in stock I was going to buy it. thank god he stopped me. the sony FF sensor is like nothing else. Im sorry to be harsh but this is from someone coming from DX. I was there. I didnt believe FF would be better. my mindset was, why the hell spend more. I was shooting film at iso 800 then and with the d300 I can shoot iso 2000. what, that isnt enough? and FF is not only about the ISO. the images look like something else. the amount of detail inside is just amazing. its a different league, pictures look so much different. see this video. about 2 minutes in he talks about how things look bright with the FF and its true but they look so alive. not muted and boring. im not saying the D300 is boring, im saying the images are very boring compared to FF images. sorry to harsh guys. not trying to make you feel bad. but those who are pros should not be shooting DX. [url=http://nikonrumors.com/2013/08/12/we-are-spoiled-nikon-d70-vs-d600-iso-comparison.aspx/]We are spoiled: Nikon D70 vs. D600 ISO comparison | Nikon Rumors[/url] today I was shooting a bar mitzvah. towards the end of it, it got dark and thank god for the FF sensor. I was shooting friends of the parents before they left and was using a bit of flash bounced behind me at iso 6400 and I still got some great ambient light with the flash. you cant do that with dx. DX for pros then was great but with the prices of D600, there's no reason a pro shouldnt buy. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
Out of Production DSLRs
D300/D300s
This is a D300 :)
Top
