D300s->D600 or D800 upgrade path??

stevevmaloney

New member
​I've been educating myself on the these two cameras the past week or so and I have to say, I'm torn. On the one hand I love keeping my cash but on the other, I'm become almost maniacal about picture sharpness, something I lack with the D300s. I'm not too put off by the huge file size of the D800. At least you can control your image size, the good news, is 36MP is there if you need it. But the D600 seems to have everything I need. Anyone out there gone the D300s to D600 route? Any thoughts? - - confused.
 

Watch72

Senior Member
Hi and a warm welcome to the forum.
Don't we all love sharp pictures. But getting it pin sharp could be due to technique as well as equipment.
D300s is DX and going to FX will give you more latitude in cropping and perhaps that helps in your quest.
You said it clearly, D600 has everything you need. It also has a higher ISO range - So why not?
D800 has more pixel and other features but it is also more expensive.
Whichever camera body your decide, do not forget to pair it with a good lens, it will definitely make you very happy.
 

stevevmaloney

New member
Thanks for your comment. I can't argue that clarity of image has as much to do with equipment as it does technique. My first DLSR purchase was the D200, paired with the Nikkor 17-55 2.8 ED lens which cost nearly as much as the body at the time. The quality of pictures from that combination didn't meet to my liking. So, when the D300s came out, I bought it. But still the sharpness just wasn't there. I queried Nikon about the situation and they asked that I send the lens back, which I did. The result has been "ok". I look at "snapshots" that my friends take with their Canon DLSR's (no tripod, group gatherings, nothings prepared or static, etc) and I'm blown away at the clarity. I've considered selling out to the grey lens crowd but I know that Nikon should do as well. Hence my quest and my last attempt at a high standard of results with Nikon products, probably my last.
 

Watch72

Senior Member
Don't give up just yet.
IMO the impact on sharpness comes mostly from the lens quality.
Sensor do play a part but I think we are seeing a crop of modern sensors that are very close.
Software, low pass filter, etc, all have its impact on the quality of image but I feel ultimately how the light focus on the sensor is most critical, hence the lens quality.
I use a D800E and I use prime lenses because I too, like my picture to be sharp.
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
I can't speak for the D600 since I have not used it yet. I do own the D800E also and love it a lot especially with my studio shots.

According to Thom Hogan, the D600 is much easier for handheld shots unlike the D800 which requires a more careful practice / technique when shooting without a tripod. In due time and a lot of practice, handholding a D800 has become much more manageable.

The only thing that would deter me from getting the D600 is the sensor oil spot issue. This is not a big deal if you know how to wet clean your camera sensor.
 

pedroj

Senior Member
Didn't like the sharpness from the D200/D300s...I Would check my technique if I were you got to be cheaper then buying another camera that you are not happy with....

How come you bought Nikon when your friends have canon...
 
Last edited:

Epoc

Senior Member
A D300s and the 17-55/2.8 should produce tack sharp images. Something doesn't sound right to me, especially if your buddy's Canon "snapshots" are leaving yours for dead.
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
We've had a D300 in our house since they were released and I've had a D300s for two years. If you're images are not sharp you are doing something wrong, as it produces sharp pictures in its sleep.

I also had a D600 for a while and now a D800, but still use the 300s. If you can't get sharp images with a 300s you'll be very disappointed with either of the others as you have less depth of field and enough pixels to show every little error in your technique.

I understand that Nikon applies less in camera sharpening by default than Canon so maybe this is what you are seeing. Are you shooting raw or jpg?

If you're having problems with something specific maybe that's a different issue.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I'm with the folks here who say lack of sharpness is something that's not a fault of the camera. It could be part technique, and it could be part image processing. I'd be curious as to see what "unsharp" is and hear how the image was processed. Knowing how to manipulate those sliders in Lightroom/Camera RAW can make an amazing difference in how you see your image.
 

JDFlood

Senior Member
I think you can't loose. Either is a great choice. I shoot a D800, and is the right choice for me. The future with higher Rez screens, 4K is here, 5K nearly and 10K on the drawing board... You 36mp choice now will have been a good one in ten years. Depending on your age that can be a couple seconds.


also, unless your technique is truly terrible, a photo taken with a D600 or D800 is going to be much better than a D300... Now if you pixel peep you may not be getting all you can, but it will be better. So many people have accidentally made it sound like your photos may get worse unless you improve your technique... That is not true. Same technique with better camera, better image, same camera, better technique... Better photo.

I second Backdoor's comments about sharpening..Sharpening makes a Hugh difference in perceived sharpness! Remember, unless you use a preset with sharpening in LR or PS... There is none, and no photo is going to look sharp without any, all in camera jpg creation programs use some to - alot.


JD
 
Last edited:

Geoffc

Senior Member
I do wonder if resolution and sharpness are being confused here. I own and use both the D300s and D800 and I know which I think is the easiest to get perceived sharp pictures from. The very fact that I sometimes choose the 300s should say something as I'm a stickler for sharpness and I wouldn't use something that was below standard before I even started. If I have good light and don't need more than 12mp I'm happy with the 300s and the files are nice and small by comparison. In fact using my FX glass on a DX body yields excellent results.
 

JDFlood

Senior Member
I find a direct correlation between sharpness and resolution, however, you use different levels of sharpening to get there. Higher resolution photos require more sharpening (as in move the sliders further) or conversely lower resolution can tolerate less before becoming oversharpened. I'm not sure what your comparing exactly, but if your D300 stuff looks sharper than your D800, I would have a good look at your workflow... One does not get a better camera for it to perform less well. My D800 also bests my D700 in both.

Also, the higher resution captures much better the nuance of subtitle lighting and atmospheric conditions.
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
I find a direct correlation between sharpness and resolution, however, you use different levels of sharpening to get there. Higher resolution photos require more sharpening (as in move the sliders further) or conversely lower resolution can tolerate less before becoming oversharpened. I'm not sure what your comparing exactly, but if your D300 stuff looks sharper than your D800, I would have a good look at your workflow... One does not get a better camera for it to perform less well. My D800 also bests my D700 in both.

Also, the higher resution captures much better the nuance of subtitle lighting and atmospheric conditions.

I didn't say the D300 was sharper, I said it was sharp such that I would happily use it in certain scenarios rather than automatically pick up the D800. As the 300 is very sharp I haven't particularly noticed that the 800 is sharper. Obviously if you end up cropping a like for like image the 800 has more resolution (pixels) to go at but that's a different thing.

I got the 800 for resolution when I need it and better ISO when I need it, sharpness was not even a consideration.

I'm happy with my workflow as I get sharp images off all my cameras.

Thom Hogan covered this whole thing in an article which I can't seem to find at the moment where he said that the 12mp cameras lured us into a strange sense of perceived sharpness as it was a bit of a sweet spot.
 

JDFlood

Senior Member
Oh, I see where you are coming from. I look at the photo intrinsically not at a small output size. That's why I said, " I'm not sure what your comparing exactly." I am sure I have read Thom's article. If you have a prescribed low Rez output, then the difference may not be obvious. I process and view on 30" monitors and process thousands of photos a month... So i am flipping threw lots, and viewing at lots of resolutions. when i open up lower rez shots, it is obvious quickly. And at pretty much any size and crops the D800 photos are sharper.

I never tend to look at a photo in terms of a specific output, but in their entirety. Output is a rapid changing target. I suspect I will be moving to 32" 4k or 5k monitors by the end of year and higher in not much longer, so how I view now and in the future, the difference is visible. JD
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
Oh I see where you are coming from now as well. I'm making the mistake of looking at the image as it presents itself in its native resolution, whereas I should be looking at them at pixel level on a monitor that's probably bigger than anyone else on this forum uses to realise the shortcomings.

I process several images a month myself and its quickly obvious to me that the D300 images are acceptably sharp and large enough for many people, any other limitations aside. If it was making sharp images for the last five years it won't stop because the D800 has been released. In fact with FX lenses the DX body is more likely to produce edge to edge sharpness.

Lets just be honest here. Both cameras take great pictures and they both have a useful role to play. Neither is perfect at everything. I just don't feel the need to shout about the D800 just because I happen to have one. My initial thoughts when I got the D800 was that it was not actually producing as good a result when used in the same manner as my previous cameras.
 

JDFlood

Senior Member
Geoffc, I really don't know how to respond to that. I'm sorry I ruffled your feathers. I am not flaunting my D800, although I am really enthusiastic about its capabilities, and would not consider going back to a D300 or D700 for that matter. I have been moving into the digital world over the last five years. I've had large monitors for 5 years, stopped printing years ago, display on iPads and LCD panels, etc (although large panels are not required to assess photos at many resolutions and recognise the relationship between pixles and resolution). While I am a little ahead of the curve, I doubt so much as I should be accused of being an elitist, maybe an enthusiast though. I suspect a large number of folks with D800 have similar equipment. This is a forum where many people use advanced cameras and equipment, the whole idea is to exchange ideas and perspectives. You are clearly portraying a very traditional / conservative, thrifty point of view of photography. But there is another side, and I seriously doubt I am alone in embracing it, where technology is the basis for all display, where photos scale on all devices, and are shared. If you use a D800 in a D300 environment, then you are going to be asking why, but once you are in this new world, the restrictions of your output go away, all the rules of the game change. We are going through and incredible exciting time, I for one love and have embraced it. I appreciate your valuing in the old technology, but realise there is another world out there, that it lies directly ahead of you and most of the people in these forums. One of the lessons I would like to communicate, is don't think about how you do stuff today, as it will be completely turned over in the next few years. JD
 
Top